Originally Posted by Faith1960
Sorry, but I'm lost. Can you explain?
Im not surprised. You are in the same boat with most people. I can't explain o much a I might t you in a directioon, because this is about aiia answe, and no one do that for you.
Let's put it this way: History is usually presented to us in a linear fashion. This not exaxtly how things happen, though. Things were known and lost and fod against lost. But the last bits we know about, some major losses an the pocess of re-learning, we know bit about. What is injersing relatve to your question is that the religions we know toina tie of loss and deloped along with some things that were regained.
So we have Christianity coto ua time of great barbarism, during the Roman empire, where thins fooe were sod that is verttle wonthat seemed that death was the only hope of escape. Things were harshly material, and things didn't improve much for ages. And there wasomch known d, asuch exept by a vey few people. Jesus certainly had to be one of those. But those around Him weren't so savy. He said so Himself. So we have this incredibly accurate teaching put into the hands of people at time when maybe they really aren't ready for it, hence the parables, because those take into account levels of comphension, being stories and be a sort of time capsul.
But what those have to do with is inner awareness, somehing only begining to be even recognzed by science and only partly understod by the Church as an institution
. It's mystics and contemplatves understood it to a large degree, but even they were not kindly taken to by the Church. And today we have these mind/brain studies that of tell us things, but still, using new etch, in a sort of stone age, bronze age, or steampunk way. They look at surfaces, trying to see insides. It can't happn, and that is the failure of science.
Since experice is subjetive, even of things we mistakenly call "objective" as a necessary covenience of our mode of prception, science can't ldirectly at experience. Nher does the institutional Church have much of a sueful protocol for doing so. It prescribes and proscribes, but doesn't tell us much in the crunch of need to know about awareness itself. The questions I eadiosed are a direct way of discovery of the answers to the questions about mind and brain.