devayan..


Quote:


I said the sun would cool down and turn into a red gaint in about six billion years

But George asked if we are going to live forever on an eternal earth and I said no

But your point is taken as far as us mere mortal that time span is as good as eternal to us

I have two brothere and their families living in Ausie, one in Sydney and the other in Bribane

Alan

Heck!! I keep making keystroke errors My eyes are stll adjusting

Alan

Quote:


I've been thinking about this a little for a while now. Clearly one needs to define one's terms!

'Literal' used to mean to me something that could be defined in physical terms or in physical reality. I guess I think it is a characteristic of C1.

Do I think that Jesus (as he appeared 2000 years ago) wll literally return in the physical and the lions will play with the lambs?

Probably not.

But then I am left with the problem of defining (for myself if for no one else) what is symbolic and what that means. For instance, when I read a poem that resonates with me, and I know the symbolism is not meant to be taken literally, then what is happening? What is Reality?

And are there...things...that are literally true even though not expressed physically?

I think you mean to say that 'literal' means that it is real (whatever real means). Did anyone ever refer to the afterlife as merely symbolic?

___________________________

One thing related to this that tickles my mind is noticing how spiritual truths can be taken different ways....each person thinks they have the 'literal' meaning.

This morning as I moived through the tv channels, one caught my ear. An eveangelical type minister was quoting New Testament verses and commenting on them.  It struck me that what he was saying was pretty close in essence to what some things in The Secret say, and to some things that Eckard Tolle writes. Yet from the results, I would guess that each group interprets the same thing slightly differently. This illustrates some of the problem of defining what 'literal' means.

_______________________

I like the symbolic level but I don't know why.

I also like Blake:

Little lamb, who made thee?
Dost thou know who made thee,
Gave thee life, and bade thee feed
By the stream and o’er the mead;
Gave thee clothing of delight,
Softest clothing, wooly, bright;
Gave thee such a tender voice,
Making all the vales rejoice?
Little lamb, who made thee?
Dost thou know who made thee?

Little lamb, I’ll tell thee;
Little lamb, I’ll tell thee:
He is called by thy name,
For He calls Himself a lamb,
He is meek, and He is mild,
He became a little child;
I a child, and thee a Lamb,
We are called by His Name.
Little lamb, God bless thee!
Little lamb, God bless thee!

Quote Lucy: "For instance, when I read a poem that resonates with me, and I know the symbolism is not meant to be taken literally, then what is happening? What is Reality?"
It's just that our means of perception aren't working as some modern models are suggesting, that everything comes in bit for bit and then these bits are connected. It's more like whole packages, like Monroe's rotes, so that we know precisely a whole situation, without being able to tell about the details.
We are context-sensitive. When we hear about lions and lambs within a context, we know for example it means peace on earth.
There is this thing called "Nonverbal communication". That's something one becomes familiar with when meditating in the TMI- and Bruce Moen-style. You don't know what you communicated in words, but still you know it- only it takes some effort to express it in words afterwards, and never the wording is totally correct. I guess we all do this nonverbal thing, but in it's pure form it is so different from our verbal thinking/communicating, that it can be scary sometimes, as it is a bit like loosing structure and control.

Spooky