Ostritch

Some times it is best to put your head down a wait for it to pass. 

Other times it is good to get rid of the  idiots.  

Does everyone ever ask if there really is a common noble humanity, or are we just trying to make the most money from human producibility ? 

“There is no time that is less insane than any other.”

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Ostritch

  1. I ask myself that question every day. When the ostrich buries its head, does it feel the vibrations of chaos in the ground? I’m happy to see you have a book in the works. I would be honored if I can buy two copies when it’s published. Warm wishes. As always…thank you for sharing your mind.

      • I am like Carroll’s Alice-led by curiosity. If I knew what it said, beyond the title of course, would there ever be an allure? Well, I read your posts, so maybe, but I remember you talking about writing a book … in the beginning. 🙂

      • Well I said I’d give Dave a free copy, but my last book I kinda over extended myself; I should say rather. I will give them at cost. Which is probly like $5 -$7 with shipping. We’ll see. Maybe I shouldn’t b so nice and just sell em. I guess I’m not a very good capitalist. 😜

      • Bad bad capitalist!!! Rofl. Well, even if you saw me everyday and we happened to be besties, I wouldn’t want free copy. Nothing is free in publication and you should/deserve to make a profit. I’d barter but I have nothing to barter with. :p This is the most I’ve exchanged words with you. Kind of nice. Have a lovely day. I must focus on finals.

  2. I hope you are doing well! I have a question this Christmas season. What do you make of John 1:1-3?

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.

    • Hi! My book called”Absolution” hopefully will be published soon that addresses that incidentally. I will gladly give u a copy for free when I get it done. Id b totally interested in your estimation of it . But directly I would ask you: can you know anything without the word that identifies it?

    • So… The first sentence describes as it is an example of the first thing that can possibly have any meaningful existence. Beginning is the word; before the word there was no beginning ; in the beginning was the word. The word, as the only effect possible of meaning, was God, the effective beginning of all that can be known. Through this, word, God, all things are made; because without a word there can be no meaning. The word was with God and the word was God.

      Now, though, because ‘things are made’ people only see the made things, and so ‘in the beginning ..’ Etc.

      • What about the personal qualities that “God” and “Word” seem to possess in this passage; being in relationship, referred to as “he” and “him” ?

        Thank you for offering your book. I would be glad to receive a copy.

      • That is an involved discussion for sure. I think my book address s that too, incidentally. I am more motivated now to finish it sooner .

      • The personal qualities are there because meaning is very personal. Meaning establishes the world. God may have created the world, but if so, then the mechanism by which creation can be known is meaning itself. This only contributes to what I am saying. For the act that God may have done, His act of creating the world, likewise involved creating some way for humans to know of Him. But this way seems to not have any distinction that can be particularized for knowing God. For the same sensations, the same sensibilities, the same logicking, the same experiences can center upon any known thing to establish that thing. What differentiates the meaning of things has to do with significance, but significance is likewise a type of meaning. Every way that humans can experience life is part of the creation that God did or does, and nothing particularizes in an absolute sense across humanity the necessity of knowing God indeed is the creator of all things. This process, this manner that human have for meaning, as we go on, necessitates that any particularizing of knowledge that is supposed or proposed to indicate The God be more and more distinct, more and more particularized to things, more definitive, more exclusive, which becomes a self fulfilling prophesy, as less and less people appear to be able to make the proposed same sense of God from the proposed same instance of things. Meaning itself only particularizes toward God in particular frames of meaning, or what we can call ‘culture’ but not in the sense we use it commonly. In other words: The act of creation by God should be evident at all times; it should never have to be proven but is indeed a sensibility, an obvious knowledge. For any proof that is used always places God within an exclusive context that at no time will everyone see.

        John 1:4. “In him was life.” In the word was God and was life and in God was life, the word was with God and the word was God. These first verses are reiterations of the same idea. “And the light shineth in the darkness and the darkness comprehended it not”. The light is the light of life, of God, of the knowing of God’s creation as an axiomatic instance of meaning. Where such understanding is not comprehended, there is darkness, hope, faith, want, wondering. All this is very personal. The relationship is manifest. It is not ‘conceptualized’; it is not a product of an imagination or of come creative process.

        The darkness, that situation where there was no word, no solute meaning, transcribes its darkness to a light that is beyond the comprehension of the darkness. The word becomes not a mere instance of meaning but indeed an essential identifier of true separate things of the world, a world where likewise those of the darkness are things too.

        Within this darkness, “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. [He] came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light…He was not that light but was sent to bare witness of that light. That light was the True light…” or the light that is Truth, “… which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him and the world knew him not.” (my italics)

        There is no need to exceptionalize what this is saying. One need merely read it for what it is saying. But most are not capable of reading it for what it says because the meaning of the naked word is offensive to one who sees objects distinct from meaning to which meaning refers, as away from the object that is the person.

        “And the word was made flesh.” Here we get into a more involved description. maybe for another time. maybe my book takes up there.

      • I think the personal qualities are there because the referent is a person. And, I think there is a need to “exceptionalize” what this is saying. It’s about Jesus. The Word was with God and the Word was God. And, the Word was made flesh. Jesus. In verse 4, “In Him was life”, the referent also is Jesus.

      • Yes. I understand that rendition also. Yet the fact I cannot get rid of is that somehow God is allowing me my view upon n Him; so either I am truly a devils advocate. Or God is with me. Either way, I’m ok with it. Hence, the problem. ;))

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s