Amos

But our mind is twain because if it was twin we would have no knowledge of our subconscious mind and if our subconscious mind was fully conscious to us it would not be sub-conscious and therefore not twain either.

The bible wants to show us how we must come to understand our own mind and in doing so "will know the depth, width and breadth of the Lord our God" and so obtain the mind of God. I would say that if you haven't figured his our by now the entire bible must still be a "word salad" to you.

Doctor X

Oye.

That is your belief, which, for better or worse, does not determine physiology. Now "twain because if it was twin" had better be a typographical error because it makes no sense otherwise. It certainly neglects the obvious alternative to "twain" which, Heavens to Betsy, better approximates the reality--it is one.

More circular reasoning. . . .

You cannot assign a coherent intent to a collection of texts. Certainly not:

No, not at all a concern of El or YHWH or even Elohim. I am sure this was the motivation to the genocide ordered of Saul . . . no wait . . . it was the intent behind YHWH trying to kill Moses immediately after electing him his spokesperson--fortunately Mrs. Moses had her son's foreskin handy--never know when such stuff comes in handy--yes, that is the lesson: SAVE THOSE FORESKINS!! You do not wish to be caught without one should the Almighty decide to stalk you after appointing you to greatness.

Glad that cleared it up--a fragment that has irritated generations of scholars for CENTURIES . . . it was all an exercise in Jungian individuation!

No . . . wait . . . Freudian movement from the anal phase to . . . um . . . Fritz Pearl? No, I have it! Reichian! It commands us to build Orgon Collectors! You see! THAT was what the whole whale-and-Jonah-thing was . . . Jonah needed to collect more Orgon energy!

I think the individual would do well not to impune the reading comprehension of others given his manifest and consistent inability to comprehend texts.

One is free to believe in whatever one wants, no matter how ridiculous and dishonest, of course, but one cannot expect a text to support it because he proclaims it does.

--J.D.

Amos

Yes, you are right, "it is one" except that one side doesn't seem to know much about the other. The other side here is the reign of God and "the scribe who is learned in the reign of God can bring from his storeroom both the new and the old (Mt.13:52)"

You seem to think that our reading comprehension depends on our ability to memorize words from dictionaries but that is not always true. Here, in fact, the opposite is true because words are used to make parables to describe something that is not a rational event and therefore the words mean something different then what they usually mean (or they would not be parables and metaphors).

Oh yes, I arrive at my interpretation from the text so it is really supporting me.

Doctor X

Grounding into reality again, both know what the other does. Even those born . . . or aquire . . . a disconnection have communication between both hemispheres. Discovering a disconnection syndrome is very subtle if it is there.

That is, of course, if you still write about the mind. This, on the other appendage:

proves a non sequitur.

Argumentum ad vertatem obfuscandam.

On the contrary, it involves understanding what the words and the passages that are built by them mean.

Parables--parabolai--παραβολαι--"comparisons" are a particular type of Greek form. What you are doing, on the other hand, is ignoring the meaning and context and are rather randomly making up meaning as you go along.

In your mind only, unfortunately.

--J.D.

Amos

Exactly, "both" means two, "know what the other does" means divided yet one, and if "a disconnection" is possible they must be twain instead of twin.

In my view our intuition is the memory of our soul (which is retained in our right brain, if you remember) and if they are fully one we can trust our intuition and base our actions on it. Before we can do this we must "go fishing on the right side of the boat" and perhaps "put on our cloak of faith" and dive head-first into this celestial sea. If we come up dry we will soon be able to "walk on this water" and base all our actions on it. At this time there is no longer any communication between these two because they will have become fully one and if you think that this is a bit of stretch you should go looking for Atlantis.

How some ignoratio elenchi on your part?

Yes, they are like a work of art and require noetic vision to be interpreted. If you disagree with this please tell me what noetic vision is for and why would we have the need to make such a distinction.Not true at all. I am the person with whom the artist is communicating.

Doctor X

No. From a physiologic--and, therefore reality--standpoint, one can disconnect parts that would not "normally" be disconnected that crosses your twain. Sorry your twain is a fabrication. Perchance you should call it "Clemens?"

Memory is not that hemispheric specific depending on the level of memory--as you should remember!

Oddly enough, nearly all Unspeakable Infidels that are Right Handed, are left "dominant" for short-term memory. The actual complex memories--that involve sight, sound, smell, emotion--have diffuse storage in different areas of the brain. Thus, it is much harder--despite Hollywood depictions--to "erase" long-term memory. This is why dementia patients "live in the past" so to write.

Given the above, I may dismiss the rest, incuding the unwitty reference to Atantis.

You tried to attach an argument to moi, so argumentum ad veritatem holds. You have, as indicated above, engaged in ignoratio elenchi rather chronically.

Ipse dixit.

If you wish to challenge an opponent to a duel, and he has a claighmore, I would suggest you not use a toothbrush.

"Noetic" means comming from the mind itself. Unfortunately, language is learned from. The different word-orders and concepts of different languages demonstrates this.

You are trying to justify eisegesis--reading your beliefs into texts. This is the weak "new critical" approach where the critic dismisses the intent of the author, the context of his worth, and then mastrubates about "what I think."

Well, you may want Shakespeare to write "Romeo and Julian" the great homoerotic passion-play . . . unfortunately, he did not.

A schizophrenic may have a "noetic" vision of reality--it does not correspond to reality.

Sorry.

On the contrary, communication requires a willingness to understand the artist. You have demonstrated anything but that willingness.

You wish to make what you believe equal to reality--as the fantasies about how the brain works indicated. This may seem easy with art--works of art have a hard time complaining. However, reality has a way of contradicting fantasy.

Similarly, as indicated above, the texts do not support your interpretations.

You are left with two choices:

1. Continue in ignorant solitude.
2. Make the effort to read some scholarship and at least have a basis for your beliefs--this includes the brain.

--J.D.

Amos

Thanks, I'll take the first option.

Doctor X

Then I shall no longer waste my time.

This board does not have "signatures," though the one I usually use proves apt.

--J.D.

He does not sell his secrets cheaply.
It is perilous to waste his time.

Devilnaut

What an ugly thread. I suggest Amos save his pearls?

Soul Invictus

This thread is getting so far off the OP, it's not funny. I haven't followed all this "twain" business, nor see it's relevance. What's the issue of twain btw Amos and Doc, and why should Amos concede, Devilnaut?

Doc,

Let me know when you are finished with that book. I'd be interested if your views have changed on the validity of a human sacrifice. Maybe Heathen Dawn is lurking this thread.. Maybe he/she can offer some insight?