1 May 2004 01:04
On being whole
<Lanasnest <at> aol.com>
2004-04-30 23:04:25 GMT
2004-04-30 23:04:25 GMT
If we were to look at a newborn, in it's perfection, most humans (who possess a heart) would cry out at it's perfection. If the baby had only one leg...we would pity it at best...or toss it over a cliff, or in a dumpster at worst. Why? Because it wasn't "whole." We are biologically and psychologically manufactured to "spit out" the maimed. If we look for truth, we look for it's completeness. In order to know if something then is true, we must see the beginning, and the end needs to come into agreement with it's beginning. If we look at an Ecosystem, we marvel how "perfect" it is (that is w/o mans intervention). If we are hurt...we go to the doctor to make things "whole" again...do we not? So what does it mean to be whole? This is why I challenged our "physicists and mathematic friends" to look at a circle. In order for something to be whole, it must be complete. When Jesus (OH GOD the J word!) healed someone, he said "be ye whole" what do you think he meant? Perfect? No...think some more... Lucaks said, "...to go beyond this immediacy can only mean the genesis, the creation of the object." Creation? Genesis? How does the bible start? I (and most scientist) dont believe that the creation came from NOTHING it obviously came from SOMETHING. The bible says that the "word was"...the mere thought from god created something...back to another subject...does thought have force? Marx said,"theory has also become a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses." Where do you think he got that "thought"? Lana _______________________________________________ Marxism mailing list Marxism <at> lists.econ.utah.edu http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism(Continue reading)
RSS Feed