Theological Science: The Nature of Things and Their Positive and Negative Qualities, III
Yesterday, I became 79 years old. Thus, in a year, I will have lived for eight decades. 
Since my health is good, I expect to teach on this website as long as I live.
Today I want to continue my discussion about the human developments of negatives that make people unhealthy. So, if you have a Bible, turn to Matthew, Ch/. 10, verse 34. There, Jesus Christ says, ’Think not that I am come to end peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a sword.’ In my book, I conclude that Jesus’ basic teachings are about (1) our changing minds, (2) the kingdom of God that can be found only in our minds, and (3) the common sense we develop by our minds. I conclude that the sword Jesus used a tool that divides our thoughts into different pairs of opposites. In verse 35, this dividing sword distinguishes father from son, daughter from mother, and daughter from mother-in-law. These opposing thoughts are known today as excluded middle opposites (or either/or opposites).
However, in the remaining verses of Chapter 10, Jesus also tells us that the dividing sword in our mind cannot distinguish God from man with excluded middle opposites. In my book, I say that God and man cannot be distinguished by using the logic of excluded middle opposites. Jesus tells us that God and man can be distinguished only with included middle opposites. In my book, I teach ‘included middle opposites’ as opposites that coexist. The concept of coexisting opposites is also known as ‘both/and’ opposites.
So, in the New Testament, Jesus used the dividing sword of his mind to teach us that coexisting opposites can be identified by our minds. But, on this website and in their reviews of my book on Amazon.com, some logicians have argued against man’s use of coexisting opposites, saying that I write with non sequiturs. My response is that these logicians are filling their minds with false negatives, are developing psychological problems, and are becoming unhealthy.
Since my health is good, I expect to teach on this website as long as I live.Today I want to continue my discussion about the human developments of negatives that make people unhealthy. So, if you have a Bible, turn to Matthew, Ch/. 10, verse 34. There, Jesus Christ says, ’Think not that I am come to end peace on earth. I came not to send peace, but a sword.’ In my book, I conclude that Jesus’ basic teachings are about (1) our changing minds, (2) the kingdom of God that can be found only in our minds, and (3) the common sense we develop by our minds. I conclude that the sword Jesus used a tool that divides our thoughts into different pairs of opposites. In verse 35, this dividing sword distinguishes father from son, daughter from mother, and daughter from mother-in-law. These opposing thoughts are known today as excluded middle opposites (or either/or opposites).
However, in the remaining verses of Chapter 10, Jesus also tells us that the dividing sword in our mind cannot distinguish God from man with excluded middle opposites. In my book, I say that God and man cannot be distinguished by using the logic of excluded middle opposites. Jesus tells us that God and man can be distinguished only with included middle opposites. In my book, I teach ‘included middle opposites’ as opposites that coexist. The concept of coexisting opposites is also known as ‘both/and’ opposites.
So, in the New Testament, Jesus used the dividing sword of his mind to teach us that coexisting opposites can be identified by our minds. But, on this website and in their reviews of my book on Amazon.com, some logicians have argued against man’s use of coexisting opposites, saying that I write with non sequiturs. My response is that these logicians are filling their minds with false negatives, are developing psychological problems, and are becoming unhealthy.
posted by George Shollenberger @ 10:31 AM
4 Comments:
At 2:36 PM,
Anonymous said…
Congrads on being 79.
At 2:49 PM,
Anonymous said…
Saying the word "Sword" in the Roman era was like saying the word "Bomb" in an airport today. It's no doubt the words of a terrorist when Jesus is talking about turning brother against brother and tearing families apart. It's no doubt that it is evil when Jesus was talking about "dying to oneself" and living life as a suicide mission.... a lot of Christians were "persecuted" and "martyred" for their revolutionary or heretical beliefs in the early Roman times. A lot of that had to do with disrespecting the polytheistic gods of Roman mythology by claiming that Jesus did something similar to their myths and by going even further and claiming that Jesus really lived but that the Greek, Roman, and Egyptian Gods didn't really exist....well, in my opinion, there was a lot of dishonesty involved by the Catholic Church in covering up the Pagan roots of the legend of Jesus Christ. Perhaps the Gnostics would have been more realistic, although more unsatisfying for their unruly claims of Jesus being symbolic and on the same level as all the other Roman and Egyptian gods and godesses.
At 6:16 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
response to quantum-flux.
Thanks for the birthday message.
Your words, in the other comment, express many truths that I would buy. I believe that many religions know that they have been misleading many people for a long time because they were unaware of the continuous flow of new ideas that enter and leave the human mind. However, casting a scripture into concrete and saying that this scripture is the only knowledge of God is a major religious error.
But this error is not the reason to become an atheist when the founders of the USA stated that the USA is a nation under God. Atheists do not realize that their actions against God are equivalent to tossing the US founding documents away.
George
At 11:08 PM,
Anonymous said…
Well, I've heard the rhetoric before, but I believe that morality comes from the forces of nature.
"Give me morality and freedom or give me death!" .... that statement is more of an inevitability than it is a death wish. If society acts immoral, then society naturally will be destroyed and anarchy will ensue.
How, then, can morality be defined apart from God? Well, it comes out of the natural laws of supply and demand. I don't want my neighbor to steal from me, and my neighbor doesn't want me to steal from him (or cheat, murder, or rape). This is why we need law enforcement and why people are willing to pay their taxes to get what they are demanding.
People can agree on an ecconomic system, but the systems that don't work result in their own destruction while the systems that do work result in ecconomic prosperity. This is why we don't use grains of sand (too plentiful and therefore less valuable) or diamonds (too rare and therefore more expensive) to buy our everyday things. In fact, people who would trade a fish taco for a rare diamond wouldn't last very long, and neither would the people on the other end of that deal either. If the trade is unfair, then it leads to people fighting each other and mutual strife, whereas if the trade is fair it leads to the mutual trust being shared among people that societies require for survival.
(although, there are likely more elements to that laisses fair philosophy which I haven't thought of or considered just yet)
....Oh, I know, the founders believed in the wisdom of the masses. If the masses decide that God is not responsible for a planet going around a sun, but instead it is the forces of gravitation, then that must be a step in the right direction. I believe you would have to go back through history to ancient origins just to see how foolish we all once were, and then trace that forward through time until today and beyond. If there are no foolish setbacks, such as establishing religions as the official dogmas that govern us or establishing complete loyalty to the government or any such establishments, then there will be no forseeable reasons for our cultural demise. In a sense, I believe atheism to be a step in the right direction for the masses. Anything that reduces dogmatic thinking and encourages skepticism of the established beliefs has the potential of discovery, and that is true in religion as well as in sciences.
Now, christians and other religions view gay marriage and stem cell research as immoral, and mainly because it says so in a book that they claim as divine. We'll let San Francisco be our test subject though. If crime goes up in San Fransisco, and it is directly linked to the allowance of gay marriage, or if people turn into salt, then that proves the Bible is true (or it could be coincidence). However, I have my doubts about the "wisdom" of the bible, for I see it as unwise, or at least untested in modern times. At the very least, and if it is true, then our testing the limits of such dogma should keep God honest or may end up proving God as dishonest once again.
Post a Comment
<< Home