Well, no - but if you see someone eating something in front of you, and then they hand you some as well...? Still, you've explained why it needed magic, not just mundane teaching. We've dealt with that bit of the discussion. Trust isn't the point, not being able to learn is.
> It is simply not a fair comparison to compare a modern
> grocery store to living
> in a hostile environment where even a small wound or small amount of
> poison can disable a person.
Only unfair if you take my remarks totally out of context like that. We were talking about being able to tell whether a certain fruit, already known to be edible, was currently ripe, when this particular type of fruit was new to you. In that context, it's the same skill. You're holding a fruit. You know it's not poisonous. Going to eat it now, or wait till tomorrow? Whether it's hanging on a tree or you've picked it up off the shelf is irrelevant.
> First of all, I never said they were brain damaged. That is your
> interpretation.
> Please careful about differentiating between what I said and
> what you have inferred.
>
> They were not brain damaged. They were soul damaged.
So what distinction are you making? Soul - a bit of a brain, not a bit of a finger.
> > From: "Jane Williams" <janewilliams20_at_...>
>
> > Exactly. Their brains were damaged. Or their eyes, though that seems
> > unlikely. In this case, they'd lost the ability to
> understand and to learn - brains.
>
> Brain damaged is a materialistic explanation. Materialsm does
> not work here.
> If they were brain damaged they could not have learned afterwards.
Unless they were healed, which is what you seem to be saying the missionaries did.
> > Whether induced magically (eating the
> > wrong root), mythically (do a HQ that trades brains for the ability to
> > digest anything), or whatever, what they'd lost was the ability to
> > understand things. And the missionaries, somehow, gave it
> back to them.
>
> Yes. They reopened or healed or recovered the parts o their
> souls that had been
> damaged by the overabundance of Darkness in the universe.
>
> This is a change in consciousness.
And again you seem to be making some invisible distinction (heck, maybe I need those missionaries). Change in consciousness. Healing of damage to the soul bit of brain. Same thing as I've been saying.
Still, there's an answer to one of those other questions in there: I wondered what had damaged them. And there it is. "had been damaged by the overabundance of Darkness in the universe". As simple and vague as that? Some people were just more sensitive than others to the proportion of Darkness, and for some reason this is the effect it had?
Powered by hypermail