The Good, the Blind and the Arrogant

2001-9-13 04:16:00

In an e-mail from Sterling I found this quote:

"In the city of God there will be a great thunder. Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb. "The third big war will begin when the big city is burning." Nostradamus 1654

This is quite an interesting prophecy if it is a true quotation. There is a lot of false data in circulation. For instance, there was recently circulated a supposed study on the IQ's of various presidents showing that Bush had the lowest of the bunch and Clinton had the highest. This was totally made up, obviously by someone who didn't like Bush.

Even so there are many references to Nostradamus that are not true. My question is: Are there any Nostradamus buffs in the group? If so can you find this quote?

Some of the falsified quotes from Nostradamus come from World War II when each side would make up quotes from him indicating victory for their side and destruction for the other.

I never did compliment John Z on his attempt to find common ground on the various opinions on atomic energy and other points. Sounds like you are attempting to apply principles of unification with us. Good move John. I'll be writing more on this subject shortly.

Claire writes that three people in disagreement can all be right and cites the parable of the three blind men and the elephant.

Two opposing beliefs can have overlapping elements of agreement but the two actual areas of opposition cannot both be true.

Let us examine the elephant parable.

The first blind man grabs the tail and says the elephant is like a great rope. Was he correct?

No. The elephant is not like a great rope. He was deceived into thinking he had the whole of the elephant in his hands.

The second man grabs an ear and says the elephant is like a great carpet.

Was he correct?

No. The whole of the elephant is not like a great carpet. He was again deceived into thinking he had the whole of the elephant in his hands.

The third man grabs a leg and says the elephant is like a great tree. Again, this man was wrong also.

If the three could open their eyes of vision they would all see they were wrong and deceived because the piece of the elephant they felt was just that, a piece. None of them had much of an idea as to what the whole of the elephant looked like. It is true the three blind men were correct in their view of the pieces, but the three could only be correct of they had said something like: "A piece of the elephant is like a carpet." The argument was about the whole elephant and thus all three statements were incorrect.

Thus my statement that three opposing teachings or statements cannot all be true stands.

Benjamin writes:
"But I have no desire to be disruptive; such is not my intent. And since I am so poorly understood here, I think it would be best for me to be silent for a bit, at least until my communication skills improve."

Please do not fear being disruptive here or be concerned about your communication skills. I do not think anyone feels that way, even though some disagree with your approach and philosophy. My point is that your attitude on the list has made a paradigm shift and I was curious if you woke up on the wrong side of the bed when you returned to the list.

You are more than welcome to stay and voice your opinions.

"I cannot agree with the inherent limitations for which you argue..."

I do not argue for any limitations. I have always argued for the fact that we are unlimited and the limitations we pass through are temporary.

I said: "The unknown creates fear, but when the unknown becomes the known fear evaporates as the morning light causes the dark to no longer exist."

Benjamin replied:
"The unknown does not create fear. The unknown simply IS the unknown."

I do not know why you are picking at straws and arguing with my basic thought here. For example, many fear death simply because what happens after death us an "unknown" to them. If they knew for sure what happens after death the fear would cease. Without the unknown factor there would be no fear; thus the unknown creates the situation inducing the fear. Stating that the fear is caused by how the individual "chooses to relate" to the unknown is like defining what IS, IS.

Those who fear death have not even learned how to make a choice to nullify fear. No choice in this matter is even available for them until they evolve to a higher level.

For instance, there are choices available to the Greater Lives that are not even possible for us at our state of evolution.

I find the following statement by Benjamin somewhat disturbing:

"Yes, conceit that our security was adequate. The arrogance of believing this could not happen in America. Terrorism can happen elsewhere, but not here in the land of the red, white and blue! That is the attitude I characterize as conceit and arrogance. Well, now we have had the wake-up call: terrorism can happen here as well. We are, after all, a part of the world, no matter how superior to the rest of the world we may think we are, and we can be stung and abused just as the rest of the world is and has been.

"Few Americans are aware of the subtle and persistent arrogance that is part of our culture, and that is unfortunate. To get a clearer perspective on this, I recommend living overseas for a while. Almost anywhere will do. Or watch the international news through a medium other than an American source."

As I have been watching television today I have not seen this and after viewing the outpouring of love and concern and soul to soul sharing and helpfulness that is manifest in average Americans helping each other, I would say that one would have to have a jaundiced eye to write the above.

Everyone I know has considered that catastrophes such as this and worse could happen to us and none of them have conceit and arrogance about our safety as you accuse. What kind of cynical people do you associate with anyway to give you such a view of people, most of whom are good and decent?

One of the problems is that the nightly news, Jerry Springer and the tabloids give the impression that the majority of people are conceited, arrogant, dangerous and to be feared, but in reality the far majority of people in this and other countries are just attempting to follow the rules of life and get along the best they can.

As far as your accusation of Americans being seen as arrogant overseas; I am familiar with this belief, as I have lived overseas with the people for a couple years.

Those who see Americans as arrogant do so largely because they do not understand us and this perception is as much of a fault of Europeans, English and others as it is us. It is even revealed in the handwriting samples I have examined that Americans as a whole are much more outgoing and extrovert than most in other countries. This is often perceived as arrogance whereas it is merely a personality difference. Being outgoing and arrogant are two different things and the various people I got to know realized this when they became associated with a variety of Americans.

Of course, there are some arrogant Americans, but I have seen no more arrogance with us than with people of other nations.

I have found overall that an American will go more out of his way to be friendly than will others go out of their way to be friendly with us. This is a positive characteristic that we do not give ourselves enough credit for.

Speaking of arrogance, a new member, Vijay Kumar of India writes this concerning himself:

"Vijay Kumar is the only human being present on Mother Earth who is indirect contact with the Creator of all the Universes (the complete Cosmos).... can his visionary powers be questioned!!"

It looks like there are people in India with some arrogance also.