Apg17,

27 God did this

                        so that they would seek him

                        and perhaps

                        reach out for him

                        and find him,

though he is not far from any one of us.

If i just could speak for 24hours

where would i go
what would i say

?

Mark 7,6

He replied,

“Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites;

as it is written: “

‘These people honor me with their lips,

but their hearts are far from me.

> where is my heart?

Take risk

It is possible that all will work out exactly as you wish!
You will be fired UP

If it does not work out as you wish
you will be richer in life-experience - you will be wiser

Do some thing today

That you will be thankful for

even in 20years from now

and let me know what it was!!!

PLEASE

David Hammons
“Bliz-aard Ball Sale” (1983)

WOW


http://dedmaxopka.livejournal.com/71750.html

The Best Case - NOT REALLY BUT NICE TRY - for the Existence of God

Probably the most well-known intellectual atheists of the 20th century were Albert Camus and Jean-Paul Sartre. However Camus privately and Sartre publicly converted vaguely to monotheism, Catholic and Jewish respectively.

A look at the rationale behind their conversions constitutes the best case for the existence of God. We may call this the existentialist argument for God. It’s also touched by Pascal, Kierkegaard, Chesterton, Lewis, Wittgenstein, and the film (I haven’t read the book) Life of Pi.

First, ground rules:

1.    God’s existence or non-existence cannot be objectively demonstrated through empirical evidence or deductive argument. Why?

2.    Because the question of God, by most definitions, concernsbasic presuppositions about reality itself. Contra “new atheism” the question is not scientific. It is pre-scientific, pre-theoretic, as Karl Popper eloquently stated. Consider:                      

3.    You can demonstrate the proposition “a tree exists” by showing a tree to me. You and I share (in language and practice if not in conscious theory) basic presuppositions like the physical world exists, other minds exist, and one can satisfactorily demonstrate to other people that a tree-size physical object exists by showing it to them.

4.    But you cannot objectively demonstrate basic presuppositions themselves. We have no common ground here, no criteria for satisfactory objective demonstration in language and practice..

So how could we move forward? Is the question itself pointless, leaving us only the agnostic or the arbitrary? Not necessarily. (Not if you care about the question anyway.)

Wittgenstein in Culture and Value (1984) offers the imagery of iron. Physical sciences, deduction, and so forth are cold. You need cold to set the molecular bonds and use the tool. But first you need heat. As heat forges iron, so intuition and reflection and personal experience mould our understanding of the scaffolding of reality. These are other, more fundamental, more necessary means of knowing than objective empiricism. These are the kind of methods you must use if you are to investigate the question of God.

Which basic presupposition—atheism or theism—makes more sense of your experience of the universe? There is no objectively right or wrong answer here.

The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.

—Richard Dawkins

As for me, I don’t see myself as so much dust that has appeared in the world but as a being that was expected, prefigured, called forth. In short, as a being that could, it seems, come only from a creator; and this idea of a hand that that created me refers me back to God.

—Jean-Paul Sartre

Does the possibility and actuality of a physical universe ordered by natural laws make more sense to you under the lights of atheistic or theistic presuppositions? Does the possibility and actuality of meaning or purpose in human experience line up better with one or the other? Paraphrasing Life of Pi, “given you can’t objectively determine which story is true and given the immediate result is the same, which is the better story: the one with the cannibalism or the one with the tiger?”

For me, the most interesting observation is that in fact humans have this wide sense of purposeful personhood which may make more sense under the theistic premise of a transcendently purposeful personhood in God.

I don’t know whether I’m convinced. I remain agnostic for the time being. The iron’s still hot.

Posted on April 6, 2013 with 869 notes

Ein Buch muß die Axt sein für das gefrorene Meer in uns.

—

Franz Kafka (via ordinaryzek)

A book must be the axe for the frozen sea within us. 

crazy people 

- i found it here:

http://whakahekeheke.tumblr.com/

This is motivating

Will see what i can do!

Can do - will do

WHAT

If I do nothing, if I study nothing, if I cease searching, then, woe is me, I am lost. That is how I look at it — keep going, keep going come what may.
— Vincent van Gogh

I am tomorrow, or some future day, what I establish today. I am today what I established yesterday or some previous day.

— James Joyce

The best way to make your dreams come true is to wake up.

— Paul Valery

All I know is a door into the dark.

—Rest in peace, Seamus Heaney (1939-2013)
Last words to his wife in Latin sent via text message from his hospital bed:
"Noli timere [Don’t be afraid]."

Everyone is my teacher. Some I seek. Some I subconsciously attract. Often I learn simply by observing others. Some may be completely unaware that I’m learning from them, yet I bow deeply in gratitude.

—  Eric Allen

(Source: goddesswithinyou, via jbe200)

                ? !      

. . .

Wings

What is life?

JESUS