And from where does the spirit originate?
God of course.
All that I am is behind my eyes. You could excise my brain from my body and place it into a robot body and I'd retain the entirety of my personality - except for the part where I get annoyed because my knee hurts.
This applies to you also. You'd keep your mind, your thoughts, your intelligence and your faith.
Thats like saying all thats in a computer is hardware.
More to it than that.
On the faith, no I wouldn't.
Faith is of and by your spirit, or soul, heart and will.
The intellect cannot percieve the reality of it, because it is outside the dimensional capacity of the carnal intellect.
However, I would say that the intellect can examine it, and fully well realize there is something to it.
Now you appear to be arguing for an interconnectedness between what you call "spiritual knowledge" and what you call "carnal knowledge" - which is odd given your previous distinctions.
They are interconnected.
Electrical knowledge must also, and does, include magnetic knowledge.
Two different entities, which are present simultaneously.
That which comes through the spirit is instantly percived, intellectually, even though it did not originate there.
This is a difficult concept possibly, for you to grasp, since you are convinced the intellect functions on it's own and is all there is.
Again this is why I draw attention to relational aspects with women.
They, generally speaking, do not operate primarily from a logic intellect,
position as we men do.
There is truly a great reason for this though, in that we can be influenced and balanced with respect to all dimensions.
It's no wonder, God gave you two daughters.
He gave me two as well.
Incidentally it's worth noting that electricity is only magnetic when it moves or changes and magnetism is only electrical when it moves or changes. A static magnetic field generates no electricity and a static electrical field generates no magnetism. It's also worth noting that the two phenomena are inverse waveforms of one another, unified under the field of electromagnetism.
True.
Flow is involved, for the presence of both.
Uhh... This doesn't seem to be a response to what you quoted..
Knowledge is knowledge, and there are all kinds of knowledge.
Where it originates, is irrelevant.
You expressed relief at reading the concept that scientists and atheists are always open to any new knowledge, I pointed out that scientists and atheists have been saying this throughout this thread... how does what you said relate to that?.[/color][/b]
The only problem here is the reluctance to percieve spiritual knowledge, is to a degree, just another branch of science, although it is much more than that.
However, due to it's unique nature, it has to be pursued and conducted under different procedures, than normally instituted.
Word roots tell us what words mean. "Carnal" refers to the flesh..
The Bible just takes it a step further to include all physical related aspects.
You do seem to selectively read though. Everyone responds to what you say, to varying degrees of completeness - sometimes entire posts, sometimes specific sentences - but you do not do them the courtesy of reciprocating. People have to ask you the same questions four or five times before you even acknowledge their questions even exist..
I pretty much read all of them, but they go off in many different directions, and cannot get to all of them.
I suppose I could go back several pages, but I would have to go back further and further as time goes on.
If you do not have time to read and respond, you do this discussion no favours at all as it appears you ignore large chunks of it even when directed to you. Take the time to read everything before you respond, rather than dipping in and out of it.
Well if I could slow it down to my time frame, I could get to them, but I'd have to stop it for days at a time, to do that.
The best I can do is offer my apologies to anyone I did not answer.
Then it would be fair to point out that there is no non-outside induced way of knowing.
All things being normal, there is know way that I know of, to unknow someone or something.
The relevance of how I can't "unknow" my child to the discussion is still unclear.
The relevance is, like Dr. Hugh Ross, I can't unknow the dimensional reality of someone and something that I know,
because there is no scientific evidence, it exists, or evidence appears contrary to the someone's account.
