Notices
Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Jesus and Science of World’s Reality

  1. #1 Jesus and Science of World’s Reality 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Hello all,

    I guess most people in the world are not supposed to see Jesus related to any branch of science, including the one of the World’s Reality.

    Please let us start with what the word science could mean practically. In brief, it is about the natural rules that define how the word/universe is made and runs. An inventor discovers one or more of these rules. And a scientist/inventor usually applies some of the discovered rules to achieve new projects/goals.

    I have heard since I was a kid (I am 71 now) that Jesus came to save humans. It seems that all Christian Churches and Denominations around the world have agreed that Salvation (thru Jesus) is based on faith; much like Jews, Muslims and Pagans are also supposed seeing their salvation (after death, in the afterlife)... though not thru Jesus.

    I guess most of you heard, once in the least, what is called ‘The Original Sin’. In the far past, Pagans and Jews were used seeing a serious natural weakness in one’s body as due to sinning. In other words, they used believing that the weak (or handicapped) person had to be a sinner or inherited the sins of some of his ancestors and deserves, therefore, the wrath of gods/goddesses (Pagans) or God (Jews). But this belief is over now for good; at least among real scientists, mainly doctors in medicine.

    So, if there is an ‘Original Sin’ it has to be a ‘Natural Weakness’ that every human baby is born with.
    Could you guess it? Well, no one can deny that every human baby is born with a total ignorance of himself (his own existence) and the world as it is in real. By the way, I guess the greatest real weakness in a mature person is being ignorant of what he is supposed to know and do.

    Thinking scientifically (logically), if Jesus came to save me, for example, I expect that his sayings/teachings on the today’s Gospel can help me get the logical answers of 'all' my important questions about my existence and the world as it is in real. In this case only, Jesus would be indeed the Light; the Light of True Knowledge. When I was about 17, I noticed that Christianity, Churches teachings, is not logical. So I read attentively what Jesus says on the Gospel to prove, to myself in the least and once for all, that Jesus is another man/character made famous by some rich men to form their own groups in his name. But to my big surprise, I found out that today's Christianity and Jesus teachings are in totally different worlds! And since then, it happened that Jesus only was able to help me defeat my natural ignorance for good. He simply reveals, clearly and accurately, the set of truths that define the world’s reality; by showing how the world/life runs in real.

    PLEASE note that, as we will see, no one is allowed or has an interest in preaching these set of truths openly and clearly (via satellites for example); exactly as Jesus does on the Gospel. But if one will do it, the world’s laws (religious and political) will not let him live more than a couple of days, if not worse. Yes, as we will see, it is much like a dilemma that the common people in the world can read these truths on the Gospel directly but not hearing them in public, addressed to billions, or just millions.

    I am new here. The title ‘Science’ of this site got my attention. So I came in here to share with some others what I know while hearing and accepting them, one by one, as they are. After all, having the knowledge of reality lets someone be a wise calm person... right?

    Before going to details on my coming posts, I like adding a crucial hint. I personally didn’t need any proof that Pythagoras did exist in order to believe in what is known as Pythagoras Theorem of the right triangle. In my studies, I was interested always in the presented ideas only, never in their origins, in order to know if it is good for me to add them in my set of knowledge or not.

    Wish you all be safe,

    Kerim


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,667
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post
    Hello all,

    I guess most people in the world are not supposed to see Jesus related to any branch of science, including the one of the World’s Reality.

    Please let us start with what the word science could mean practically. In brief, it is about the natural rules that define how the word/universe is made and runs. An inventor discovers one or more of these rules. And a scientist/inventor usually applies some of the discovered rules to achieve new projects/goals.

    I have heard since I was a kid (I am 71 now) that Jesus came to save humans. It seems that all Christian Churches and Denominations around the world have agreed that Salvation (thru Jesus) is based on faith; much like Jews, Muslims and Pagans are also supposed seeing their salvation (after death, in the afterlife)... though not thru Jesus.

    I guess most of you heard, once in the least, what is called ‘The Original Sin’. In the far past, Pagans and Jews were used seeing a serious natural weakness in one’s body as due to sinning. In other words, they used believing that the weak (or handicapped) person had to be a sinner or inherited the sins of some of his ancestors and deserves, therefore, the wrath of gods/goddesses (Pagans) or God (Jews). But this belief is over now for good; at least among real scientists, mainly doctors in medicine.

    So, if there is an ‘Original Sin’ it has to be a ‘Natural Weakness’ that every human baby is born with.
    Could you guess it? Well, no one can deny that every human baby is born with a total ignorance of himself (his own existence) and the world as it is in real. By the way, I guess the greatest real weakness in a mature person is being ignorant of what he is supposed to know and do.

    Thinking scientifically (logically), if Jesus came to save me, for example, I expect that his sayings/teachings on the today’s Gospel can help me get the logical answers of 'all' my important questions about my existence and the world as it is in real. In this case only, Jesus would be indeed the Light; the Light of True Knowledge. When I was about 17, I noticed that Christianity, Churches teachings, is not logical. So I read attentively what Jesus says on the Gospel to prove, to myself in the least and once for all, that Jesus is another man/character made famous by some rich men to form their own groups in his name. But to my big surprise, I found out that today's Christianity and Jesus teachings are in totally different worlds! And since then, it happened that Jesus only was able to help me defeat my natural ignorance for good. He simply reveals, clearly and accurately, the set of truths that define the world’s reality; by showing how the world/life runs in real.

    PLEASE note that, as we will see, no one is allowed or has an interest in preaching these set of truths openly and clearly (via satellites for example); exactly as Jesus does on the Gospel. But if one will do it, the world’s laws (religious and political) will not let him live more than a couple of days, if not worse. Yes, as we will see, it is much like a dilemma that the common people in the world can read these truths on the Gospel directly but not hearing them in public, addressed to billions, or just millions.

    I am new here. The title ‘Science’ of this site got my attention. So I came in here to share with some others what I know while hearing and accepting them, one by one, as they are. After all, having the knowledge of reality lets someone be a wise calm person... right?

    Before going to details on my coming posts, I like adding a crucial hint. I personally didn’t need any proof that Pythagoras did exist in order to believe in what is known as Pythagoras Theorem of the right triangle. In my studies, I was interested always in the presented ideas only, never in their origins, in order to know if it is good for me to add them in my set of knowledge or not.

    Wish you all be safe,

    Kerim
    What has this to do with the scientific study of religion?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    What has this to do with the scientific study of religion?
    You are right. Jesus on the Gospel didn't present a religion; like divine rules to be obeyed and rituals to be observed... etc. Instead, he brought 'knowledge' of the world's reality because no man can do it as perfect and clear as he did. Unfortunately, there is no forum for such science that explores/describes the reality of the world into which we were all brought temporarily.

    On the other hand, I fully understand if someone, you or anyone else, doesn't like, in order to be on the safe side, talking about the natural truths that Jesus revealed, mainly the ones that shouldn't, being taboo, be discussed in public anywhere on earth. This is why I started my introductory post with: "most people in the world are not supposed to see Jesus related to any branch of science, including the one of the World’s Reality".

    So I agree with you that Jesus, the all-knowledge being (unlike any person in human history), has no place here (sub-forum) where only ancient and modern religions that are based on blind faith, not on true knowledge, are studied. It happens that I, being a scientist, couldn't accept any idea by blind faith (though pretending having faith in someone or something can please those who have a similar one). Naturally since I was teenager, I tried to know Jesus based on reason only (by verifying his revealed truths even experimentally). With time and thanks to his hints, sayings and teachings I have no more questions about life with no logical useful answers.

    Your remark is interesting, but I wished you were able to give me also a possible solution; as to where such topic could be moved in the Science Forum. Thank you.

    Kerim
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,957
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post
    So, if there is an ‘Original Sin’ it has to be a ‘Natural Weakness’ that every human baby is born with.
    That hardly seems likely.
    If one subscribes to "Jesus"/ "God" etc then we were made the way "he" wanted us to be. Ergo any "weakness" was "built in" and therefore no sin of ours.
    He simply reveals, clearly and accurately, the set of truths that define the world’s reality; by showing how the world/life runs in real.
    Oh good. What are these "truths"?
    talking about the natural truths that Jesus revealed, mainly the ones that shouldn't, being taboo, be discussed in public anywhere on earth.
    What "natural truths"?
    So I agree with you that Jesus, the all-knowledge being (unlike any person in human history), has no place here (sub-forum) where only ancient and modern religions that are based on blind faith, not on true knowledge, are studied.
    What "true knowledge"?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    What "natural truths"?
    Sorry, but I hope that you are one of the independent thinkers. Each of them has built a set of knowledge that includes whatever he has accepted as logical useful ideas (useful to him in the least) based on his personal observations and experiences, also on his logical reasoning when necessary.

    At school, I couldn't like the courses of Literature (related to any language) because teachers had to ask me to quote what some famous writers and philosophers said about the subject under study and not what I personally think of it. Fortunately, this couldn't happen in scientific courses even when my solution of a problem differed from all other's ones. When this happened, my teacher had to admit I am right though by following a different path to solve the given problem.

    As we will see there are many crucial truths to talk about. Let us start with the following one, though in steps:

    [1] How do you define a rich man?

    I am afraid that the definition of being rich is not simple.
    For example, if a little kid inherited one billion dollars, does this imply he became a rich person for life? In real life, to be rich will depend on other things, not just money.

    Last edited by KerimF; March 29th, 2021 at 11:54 AM. Reason: adding a quote
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,957
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post

    [1] How do you define a rich man?
    I am afraid that the definition of being rich is not simple.
    For example, if a little kid inherited one billion dollars, does this imply he became a rich person for life? In real life, to be rich will depend on other things, not just money.
    In other words you want to redefine "rich".

    Still waiting for those "truths".
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    In other words you want to redefine "rich".
    Still waiting for those "truths".
    Sorry, since you have good reasons to fear answering such a natural question, I don't think we will have a mutual fruitful conversation.

    At least you discovered that, by just mentioning the words 'a rich man', the study of the first natural rule which I chose as a start had to be 'taboo'.

    I wish you know that I am not here to teach you or convince you about anything.
    After all, I guess you are happy with what you know already about the world's reality though it seems you prefer not revealing in public what you have in mind.

    I respect you anyway.

    Kerim
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,957
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post
    Sorry, since you have good reasons to fear answering such a natural question
    I don't fear answering the question.
    I did answer it. The word "rich" has a specific, agreed-upon meaning. Yes, it can be qualified, e.g. "rich in experience", but the word "rich" on its own means "lots of money".
    I don't think we will have a mutual fruitful conversation.
    If you want to redefine words and give them your own particular meaning then I agree - there's little chance of a fruitful conversation.
    At least you discovered that, by just mentioning the words 'a rich man', the study of the first natural rule which I chose as a start had to be 'taboo'.
    And yet the only thing, so far, "supporting" your contention of "first natural rule" appears to be your, so far, entirely unsupported belief. Hardly "Science of World’s Reality".
    I wish you know that I am not here to teach you or convince you about anything.
    So you're here just to post your unsupported claims?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,667
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    What has this to do with the scientific study of religion?
    You are right. Jesus on the Gospel didn't present a religion; like divine rules to be obeyed and rituals to be observed... etc. Instead, he brought 'knowledge' of the world's reality because no man can do it as perfect and clear as he did. Unfortunately, there is no forum for such science that explores/describes the reality of the world into which we were all brought temporarily.

    On the other hand, I fully understand if someone, you or anyone else, doesn't like, in order to be on the safe side, talking about the natural truths that Jesus revealed, mainly the ones that shouldn't, being taboo, be discussed in public anywhere on earth. This is why I started my introductory post with: "most people in the world are not supposed to see Jesus related to any branch of science, including the one of the World’s Reality".

    So I agree with you that Jesus, the all-knowledge being (unlike any person in human history), has no place here (sub-forum) where only ancient and modern religions that are based on blind faith, not on true knowledge, are studied. It happens that I, being a scientist, couldn't accept any idea by blind faith (though pretending having faith in someone or something can please those who have a similar one). Naturally since I was teenager, I tried to know Jesus based on reason only (by verifying his revealed truths even experimentally). With time and thanks to his hints, sayings and teachings I have no more questions about life with no logical useful answers.

    Your remark is interesting, but I wished you were able to give me also a possible solution; as to where such topic could be moved in the Science Forum. Thank you.

    Kerim
    What? How can I be "right", and how can you "agree " with me, when I stated nothing and just asked you a question?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    I did answer it. The word "rich" has a specific, agreed-upon meaning. Yes, it can be qualified, e.g. "rich in experience", but the word "rich" on its own means "lots of money".
    If I understood you well, you agreed that a rich man is simply the one who has lots of money.

    I am afraid that ‘just’ having or getting lots of money doesn’t let someone be rich for long.

    In reality, one’s money and valuable possessions need an equivalent level of protection. In other words, money (or material wealth if you like) and protection are twins; they have to follow each other, though not instantly. But their close relation may not be obvious or clear to the majority in the world (actually, the common people are not supposed to know it).

    For example, even the little money you have is protected by the ruling system that made it. In other words, one’s banknotes, for example, may not be worth the value of their printed papers if their protecting system was defeated totally by a much stronger one. Somehow this happened recently where I was born and live. After attacking and destroying the city in which I live the value of 1,000,000 local pounds had to decrease to about 20,000 only (500 times lower, so far). So the local rich men who knew in advance about what was planned against their region, they managed to exchange their local pounds with the ones that are protected by the attacking strong system(s). By the way, even one’s valuable properties have to be protected by rules which are usually made and/or approved by his powerful ruling system, but he may also have his own protecting system.

    This is not the end of the story. It is just the beginning

    I stopped here because if you can’t agree on what I said so far completely, we have no choice but to confess that we live in two totally different worlds.
    I mean perhaps you were lucky for being born in a wonderful world in which rich men, for example, can live among their common loving people without any sort of protection.
    Otherwise, you may like adding some interesting remarks before going on.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by exchemist View Post
    What? How can I be "right", and how can you "agree " with me, when I stated nothing and just asked you a question?
    Let us ask our friend 'Dywyddyr' how he understood your question.

    On my side, I understood from your question that whatever I am looking to study with others here has nothing to do with the 'scientific study of religion'.
    Since I am new here, I didn't mind agreeing with you and hoped to get an advice to correct this situation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,957
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post
    If I understood you well, you agreed that a rich man is simply the one who has lots of money.
    No, I stated that. "Agreement" doesn't come into because you disputed that definition - In real life, to be rich will depend on other things, not just money.
    I am afraid that ‘just’ having or getting lots of money doesn’t let someone be rich for long.
    Beside the point.
    "Rich" doesn't specify a duration.
    In reality, one’s money and valuable possessions need an equivalent level of protection. In other words, money (or material wealth if you like) and protection are twins; they have to follow each other, though not instantly.
    Partially greed (to a limited extent). But that's nothing to do with "rich" per se. How do you establish "an equivalent level of protection"?
    But their close relation may not be obvious or clear to the majority in the world (actually, the common people are not supposed to know it).
    Why do you think this? What makes you think that "the common people are not supposed to know it".
    For example, even the little money you have is protected by the ruling system that made it. In other words, one’s banknotes, for example, may not be worth the value of their printed papers if their protecting system was defeated totally by a much stronger one. Somehow this happened recently where I was born and live. After attacking and destroying the city in which I live the value of 1,000,000 local pounds had to decrease to about 20,000 only (500 times lower, so far). So the local rich men who knew in advance about what was planned against their region, they managed to exchange their local pounds with the ones that are protected by the attacking strong system(s). By the way, even one’s valuable properties have to be protected by rules which are usually made and/or approved by his powerful ruling system
    No. That's nothing whatsoever to do with a correspondence between "rich" and "protection".
    Protection of an economic system is not the same as protection of an individual's wealth.
    I stopped here because if you can’t agree on what I said so far completely, we have no choice but to confess that we live in two totally different worlds.
    Agreed. I live in the real world, you live... somewhere else.
    I mean perhaps you were lucky for being born in a wonderful world in which rich men, for example, can live among their common loving people without any sort of protection.
    One of my uncles was rich - made a fortune by selling his business to RTZ in the 1960s. He didn't have any protection as such.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    One of my uncles was rich - made a fortune by selling his business to RTZ in the 1960s. He didn't have any protection as such.
    A side note: Do you read the entire message before replying it, line by line? You gave me the impression that you don't, but perhaps I am wrong.

    Thank you for adding this last sentence. It tells me that I wasn’t clear enough concerning the invisible protection.
    For example, how the buyer, RTZ, was sure that your uncle couldn’t claim that he still owned his business after he sold it?
    There are rules that protect RTZ. Their deal wasn’t made in a wild jungle. These protecting rules are supervised by a powerful ruling system which has all sorts of forces to ensure that they can be applied on its people.

    And how your uncle was sure that the money he received has the value he was estimating?
    His money (I assume it is made of the local currency) is also guaranteed by his ruling system as long its forces are not attacked and defeated by a much stronger one.


    This is why I said earlier: “the common people are not supposed to know it”; to know the existence of this invisible protection, for example.

    Sorry to say it... in case, you can’t see it too, I think you are content fully already with the natural truths that are ‘agreed-upon’ only.

    After all, billions of people around the world live normally and are satisfied of themselves almost fully even without having any knowledge on how to solve advanced math/physics problems.

    Have a good day.

    Kerim
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,957
    Quote Originally Posted by KerimF View Post
    Thank you for adding this last sentence. It tells me that I wasn’t clear enough concerning the invisible protection.
    One more time: protection of an economic system is not the same as protecting a rich person.
    This is why I said earlier: “the common people are not supposed to know it”; to know the existence of this invisible protection, for example.
    I very much doubt that. They may be unaware of it but a moment's clear thinking will make it apparent.
    Sorry to say it... in case, you can’t see it too, I think you are content fully already with the natural truths that are ‘agreed-upon’ only.
    Then you'd - probably - be mistaken.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    One more time: protection of an economic system is not the same as protecting a rich person.
    In real life (not in the great speeches), most of 'what the economic system has in a country' belongs to its high class. So, practically speaking, protecting an economic system is synonym to protecting rich families, not the poor ones or even the ones of the medium class.


    Yes... I know... I know... what I have just said doesn’t describe at all... the reality in your wonderful world.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Does science fiction create reality or the other way round?
    By Harry Cowper in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: January 31st, 2014, 12:50 AM
  2. science vs. religion: conflict and the reality of God
    By Golkarian in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: December 13th, 2012, 03:52 AM
  3. science and spiritual reality
    By saqib.microbiologist in forum Pseudoscience
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 19th, 2010, 06:47 PM
  4. Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice,
    By Greatest I am in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: February 19th, 2009, 08:50 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •