"There is an Eastern tale which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep. But at the same time this magician was very mean. He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing. The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and above all they ran away, for they knew that the magician wanted their flesh and skins and this they did not like.
At last the magician found a remedy. He hypnotized his sheep and suggested to them first of all that they were immortal and that no harm was being done to them when they were skinned, that, on the contrary, it would be very good for them and even pleasant; secondly he suggestedthat the magician was a good master who loved his flock so much that he was ready to do anything in the world forthem; and in the third place he suggested to them that if anything at all were going to happen to them it was not going to happen just then, at any rate not that day, and therefore they had no need to think about it. Further the magician suggested to his sheep that they were not sheep at all; to some of them he suggested that they were lions, to others that they were eagles, to others that they were men, and to others that they were magicians. And after this all his cares and worries about the sheep came to an end. They never ran away again but quietly Awaited the time when the magician would require their flesh and skins.”
Ouspensky (Uspenskii), P.D., In Search of the Miraculous
Originally posted by avalanchethecatYes, this describes the bad shepherd. But Jesus refers to Himself
"There is an Eastern tale which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep. But at the same time this magician was very mean. He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing. The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and abo ...[text shortened]... re their flesh and skins.”
Ouspensky (Uspenskii), P.D., In Search of the Miraculous
as the good shepherd who will lay down His life to protect His sheep.
Originally posted by RJHindsDid you read the story?
Yes, this describes the bad shepherd. But Jesus refers to Himself
as the good shepherd who will lay down His life to protect His sheep.
...secondly he suggested that the magician was a good master who loved his flock so much that he was ready to do anything in the world for them...
Originally posted by avalanchethecathyonotized sheep,eh? At least he was fair dinkum-I doubt the sheep were faking it,(as some people do when put on a stage and asked to act like a chicken)
"There is an Eastern tale which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep. But at the same time this magician was very mean. He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing. The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and abo ...[text shortened]... re their flesh and skins.”
Ouspensky (Uspenskii), P.D., In Search of the Miraculous
Originally posted by avalanchethecatSupposing that the theists are the sheep in the tale,who is the magician? And what does the hypnosis refer to?
"There is an Eastern tale which speaks about a very rich magician who had a great many sheep. But at the same time this magician was very mean. He did not want to hire shepherds, nor did he want to erect a fence about the pasture where his sheep were grazing. The sheep consequently often wandered into the forest, fell into ravines, and so on, and abo ...[text shortened]... re their flesh and skins.”
Ouspensky (Uspenskii), P.D., In Search of the Miraculous
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoYour presumably rhetorical questions here are you conceding that the allegory does not work for atheists or deists, but only for religionists, yes?
Supposing that the theists are the sheep in the tale,who is the magician? And what does the hypnosis refer to?
Originally posted by FMFThe tale can apply to all possible proponents of all possible stances. Since avalanchethecat,as per my understanding, was certainly not a theist, I presumed that she is clubbing theists with sheep. Hence my question--which is a straightforward question--was asked.
Your presumably rhetorical questions here are you conceding that the allegory does not work for atheists or deists, but only for religionists, yes?
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoBut atheists - and their lack of religion - can't be fitted into the tale without it losing its meaning; as you well know, I think, unless you don't understand the allegory.
The tale can apply to all possible proponents of all possible stances. Since avalanchethecat,as per my understanding, was certainly not a theist, I presumed that she is clubbing theists with sheep. Hence my question--which is a straightforward question--was asked.
Originally posted by FMFDon't you think that atheists also behave like sheep e.g. following their set views blindly,like the sheep in a flock follow their leader? " the positivism of many scientists,whether latent or open,is incomaptible with skepticism,for it accepts without question the assumption that material effect is impossible without material cause." is a quote I just picked up.http://www.answers.com/topic/skepticism
But atheists - and their lack of religion - can't be fitted into the tale without it losing its meaning; as you well know, I think, unless you don't understand the allegory.
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoWho would you say is the atheists 'leader'?
Don't you think that atheists also behave like sheep e.g. following their set views blindly,like the sheep in a flock follow their leader? " the positivism of many scientists,whether latent or open,is incomaptible with skepticism,for it accepts without question the assumption that material effect is impossible without material cause." is a quote I just picked up.http://www.answers.com/topic/skepticism
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoAnd how does that explicitly relate to atheists and not theists or deists?
A scientist or a group of scientists who,for the moment,have a working hypothesis which explains the phenomenon under examination very satisfactorily ( till some phenomenon comes up and upsets the hypotheses.).
Originally posted by rvsakhadeoNo not at all. I think you have your tongue in your cheek. What kind of "immortality" do you think atheists believe in?
Don't you think that atheists also behave like sheep e.g. following their set views blindly,like the sheep in a flock follow their leader?