Not in the way that it was originally thought of. But this experiment shows that eyes can emit light. Which confirms the plausibility of the seventh sense. I first mentioned this idea with Hawking Eye Radiation, then used it so explain other mysteries including some about birds, seizures, and some other ideas.
This doesn’t exactly prove my theory, it proves the expected result. The theory behind it could still be wrong.
The study completed here provides the first direct evidence that perceived x-ray–induced phosphenes result, at least in part, from production of Cherenkov light emission. Does this confirm the theory we had about bird sight? Not even close.
Something important to note here is that just because at certain energies the eye produces visible light, doesn’t mean that the eye cannot produce other waves under different energies. It’s not proof. It’s proof of concept. And I’ll take it.
The worst part of all of it is that I’ve been trying to figure out a way to test for this for about two years, and this study was published two years ago. Onward.
And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell. – Matthew 18:9
People take this verse in Matthew metaphorically. But should we? If the wages of sin are death, and something is causing you to sin, I think literally is the only way to take this verse.
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 6:23
I have not gouged out my eye yet, but I think it’s important to think about the importance here. Something like There is no sin in heaven, so if you can’t stop sinning, what will you do? Don’t introduce yourself to God saying, I would have stopped, but I could stop doing this one thing. This verse to me, is saying, what can you do to remove that thing? If you can’t delete the app, can you disable it. Can you get rid of your phone? Or do you need to gouge out your eye?
This is uncomfortable, but I don’t see a way around it. Let me know if you disagree.
Mental illness is not a new thing. I started reading the Lobotomist, which is the story of the founder of lobotomies, and I think there are some really interesting findings. This is likely not new ground, but I think it’s important.
What actually got me started reading this book was some simple discoveries that I thought were important to explore. Namely, that some lobotomies were successful in helping patients. But others seriously harmed patients. I don’t think my previous model successfully accounted for this result. So while this was clearly bad science, something was proven here. If the mind was elastic and resilient, how could such a puncture permanently ruin the lives of so many. On the other hand, if the brain is only a physical conduit of software, how could we account for the cures and improvements of some patients. My previous model was flawed.
Walter Freeman, the lobotomist, essentially at one part in the book started sampling the brains of corpses of the mentally ill. The biggest takeaway from this study was that the schizophrenic patients’ brains looked normal according to Freeman. You’d think that such a serious malady would be something you could observe physically, like so many other brain disorders. But not this one.
So if the brain is appearing to function properly, is it? If these brains are functioning properly, what is going on? The terrifying possibility is that these symptoms may be real.
Perhaps this is the bridge between the hardware and software, the real and mental. Clearly the physical can affect the mental. And we know that the mental can affect the physical. Why these psychological surgeries are certainly not the answer, they show us something important: the brain can be influenced by physical trauma.
And if this is true, I think that we must conclude that there is no reason to conclude that these conditions that could be caused by physical trauma must have been caused by spiritual or psychological trauma.
We know the answer, but our kids likely don’t. I have a two-year-old and a four year-old, so they certainly do not. They are smart, and like any kids, they ask tons of questions. I took a personal oath early to tell them the truth. That’s why this issue has been so difficult for me.
Santa doesn’t add up. Our narrative gives us more questions than answers. Kids are supposed to simply accept this story, with very little evidence. Except perhaps the most important of all: presents. So we take these young people who are most vulnerable and moldable, and indoctrinate them in a lie. Why?
I want my kids to think. I want them to ask questions. And I want to be able to tell them the truth.
But they could tell their friends. Yes, they could. It sounds terrible, but is it? Is it bad that your child would learn that a fairy tale was a fairy tale from my child? I think the faster we are to sort out the part where people’s feelings matter more than the truth, we get to the bottom, and our kids begin to grow.
I have no doubt that my four year-old would play along knowing Santa is ‘pretend.’ They imagine all the time. Is it so ludicrous to think that they could deal with this simple truth?
The silver lining is the belief in something you cannot see. In the Christian worldview, this is what we call faith. But I simply do not what my kids to have faith in something that they have no reason to believe.
What if my kid tells your kid Jesus exists? It’s something that she and I believe is true, but you don’t necessarily believe. The point here is to have a discussion. To figure out which is more justified, belief or non-belief. If we can’t discuss what we believe and why we believe it, what are we doing?
I’ll hold off telling her for now. But I don’t know how long I’ll last.
It [love] keeps no record of wrongs. I Corinthians 13:1
So God keeps no record of wrongs.Fair enough. But what about loving myself?
We’re supposed to ‘love our neighbors as we love ourselves. (Mark 12:31)’ Thus, part of loving ourselves is keeping no record of wrongs.
I think this is one of the things separating me from true happiness. I live in a delicate place in between worry and regret. As soon as I’m done worrying about what the right thing to do is, I start either regretting what I decided or doubting that what I did was right. It’s a no-win situation.
But if I try to love myself, I must keep no record of wrongs. I have to know that my sins are forgiven. This, there is no reason to worry about making a mistake. It’s not that we shouldn’t avoid paths that lead us away from God, quite the opposite.
So not only does God keep no record of wrongs, I shouldn’t either. For my own sanity, and because I think the Bible alludes to this as well.
“My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” Jesus’ last words on the cross have stuck in my mind for years. Yesterday, I was watching a debate between Jimmy Akin and Bart Ehrman about the reliability of the Gospels, when I heard that Jesus was simply quoting Psalm 22 when he spoke these last words.
And yes, this Psalm is very appropriate. Jimmy Akin talks about it in the debate.
My point here is as simple as it is unqualified. I think that perhaps Jesus spoke only these first words of the Psalm so we would be led to the last words of the same Psalm: “He has done it.”
That may be the most important theme of the Bible, certainly the New Testament. He overcame sin and death gave us eternal communion with God.
Maybe it’s just a coincidence, but I think it may at least be an Easter Egg left to shed light on the situation. Jesus knew that he had done it.