the beginning of knowledge.

[4tune8chance]

I think it has to do with recognizing the importance of who it is who is giving you the knowledge to begin with.
The passage says--- The Fear of God is the beginning of knowledge....
It's the very beginning..... the point at which knowledge starts is at the fear/reverence of God.
I have an idea.... here's the source of the word, in the ancient usage--- sources are always a good source to understand the concepts.

H3374 - yir'â - Strong's Hebrew Lexicon (nkjv)

H3374 - יִרְאָה yirʼâh, yir-aw'; feminine of ; fear (also used as infinitive); morally, reverence:— dreadful, exceedingly, fear(-fulness).

www.blueletterbible.org

Jesus used this in one of his sermons, dealing with when people were afraid that they would be killed for following him.

He told them in response----

27 “Whatever I tell you in the dark, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops. 28 And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. 29 Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father’s will. 30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. 31 Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.​

​

It's the idea of taking into account the power of someone who can do you greater harm, than those whom you're really afraid of.

Eg., In light of the violence taking place in the US nowadays, who will you be afraid of---
The rioters who are violent destroying property, or the police, who can lock you up, and destroy your life?
Of whom are you going to have a legitimate fear?

I asked Two questions, 1. "What sort of knowledge are you referring to? But I am confused by the answer, because the sermon appears to be telling followers not to be afraid, not sure how that counts as being knowledgeable about something. To be well informed on something I would expect lesson on topics, yes?

Second question "Why must fear be apart of it." Why can't "love of God is the beginning of knowledge"? Seems to me to put a positive spin on learning rather then learning because you have to.

 

[5wize]

I was reminded of this earlier, and thought it'd be a good thing to redux this.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.

The fear/reverence of God is the BEGINNING of knowledge.

Not the middle, not the end, not somewhere in between the beginning, and the end....

It's the very beginning of knowledge.

That's the basis of the Stockholm syndrome.... use fear to gut the natural and useful protective boundaries of the victim's mind and then fill it with whatever crap you want. That's why faith has led to whatever local or contemporary beliefs are being huckstered at the place and time you find yourself. Communism, Islam, Christianity, QAnon, child abduction and abuse, sex trafficking, whatever necessary mental state filled Steve's void for emotional survival. Never a path to truth.

 

[5wize]

.....

 

[Ficciones]

while hilarious, this makes no sense whatsoever.

I'm suggesting, with reference to the scripture you quoted, that Christians are like women in an abusive relationship. You're afraid of Him but you rationalize that He really loves you. A good "wife" learns her lesson.

 

[SteveB]

That you learn to understand God who's thinking is far greater than us humans.

This just shows me that you haven't read the bible like you claimed to.
It's plainly stated, and demonstrated throughout the bible.
Then the only thing one has to do to learn it is think on the terms provided in the bible.

I think the things I say that can be backed up can be reasonably considered true. You don't seem to understand this, as evidenced by the fact you didn't back up your statement.

But I don't have any means by which I'm able to corroborate what you claim. You never provide anything I can do this.
When do you start doing this, then we can move beyond the inanity of your diatribes.

Yes, which is why I ask you questions that get to the heart of the matter, but you never answer. I'm not going down the same route as you if it doesn't give answers.

Had you bothered answering the questions that I'd previously asked, instead of dismissing, discounting, and mocking them as useless, strawmen, etc..... you would've found a completely different collection of responses.
Especially since my questions were entirely so I could learn to understand your thinking, so I could more accurately develop my responses to your questions.
So, the only thing you left me with was how I view/understand what you say.
Your tactic of refusing to answer my questions leaves what you think is misrepresentation squarely on your shoulders.
I've explained this to you several times now over the past 3 years.

All you have to do is detail your experience, that you don't only castes doubt on your claims.

🤔

This just demonstrates that you've not paid any attention whatsoever to what I've stated several hundred times before.
I have detailed you my experiences.
I've broken down the steps of my experiences for you so you can do them yourself.
I've provided the biblical passages from which I've been able to corroborate, and test my experiences against.
The only responses I've gotten back from you with these is mockery, disdain, clipping my posts, disregard for what I've stated.

However..... As I've stated the above several dozen times, and you obviously fail to make the connection, why don't you give me examples of what you think detailing my experience would look like.

You don't understand, how do you know this is information? How do you know Jesus spoke these very words?

Reading, history, archaeology, and experience.

 

[SteveB]

I'm suggesting, with reference to the scripture you quoted, that Christians are like women in an abusive relationship. You're afraid of Him but you rationalize that He really loves you. A good "wife" learns her lesson.

yeah. I wouldn't know.
I don't abuse my wife. I do however love my wife, just as Jesus loved the church. Just as Paul tells us in Ephesians 5:25-33.
To lay down my life, for her, etc....

Do you abuse yours, and use this idea you're talking about to abuse yours?

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.

This is false. If 'knowledge' is understanding and validating truth then you do not begin by fearing one of the 10,000 gods. Knowledge comes from testing ideas about what is real with empirical evidence.

Our knowledge of modern medicine did not come from a fear of God. Our knowledge of nuclear physics did not come from a fear of God. Our knowledge of bridge construction did not come from a fear of God.

Literally everything we can consider human knowledge is from the scientific method, empirical evidence, and testing and retesting. DNA, respirators that keep Covid patients alive, the combustion engine, rockets, solar panels, our understanding of the moon's effects on the tides, the technology of the internet, lasers, chemotherapy, weather predicting radar - everything is from empirical evidence and testing our ideas.

Fear of a god not a path to knowledge. At best that fear leads to nothing we can prove as knowledge. At worst it makes people believe in things that cannot be known. And that does not help us move forward as a species.

“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
-- Frank Herbert, Dune

 

[SteveB]

I asked Two questions, 1. "What sort of knowledge are you referring to? But I am confused by the answer, because the sermon appears to be telling followers not to be afraid, not sure how that counts as being knowledgeable about something. To be well informed on something I would expect lesson on topics, yes?

Second question "Why must fear be apart of it." Why can't "love of God is the beginning of knowledge"? Seems to me to put a positive spin on learning rather then learning because you have to.

Well, what part of what I stated did you now understand?
It's a pretty basic concept.
Did you not read the linked article I provided?

 

[SteveB]

That's the basis of the Stockholm syndrome.... use fear to gut the natural and useful protective boundaries of the victim's mind and then fill it with whatever crap you want. That's why faith has led to whatever local or contemporary beliefs are being huckstered at the place and time you find yourself. Communism, Islam, Christianity, QAnon, child abduction and abuse, sex trafficking, whatever necessary mental state filled Steve's void for emotional survival. Never a path to truth.

You're more than entitled to believe that.
And by doing so, you'll find yourself in the lake of fire listening to the derision, laughter, and mocking of those who hated you, instead of paradise with someone who thinks you're worth dying for.

 

[Whatsisface]

This just shows me that you haven't read the bible like you claimed to.
It's plainly stated, and demonstrated throughout the bible.
Then the only thing one has to do to learn it is think on the terms provided in the bible.

Here's what you said...."I've told you hundreds of times before that I'm learning to understand how God thinks, which is infinitely greater than the way humans think".
So, how can we mere humans learn to understand God, if his thinking is infinitely greater than ours? If we could understand how God thinks, we would be on a par with God's thinking.

But I don't have any means by which I'm able to corroborate what you claim. You never provide anything I can do this.
When do you start doing this, then we can move beyond the inanity of your diatribes.

Yes I do, I always give reasons for the things I say. You don't, you just say stuff with out reasons to back it up.

Had you bothered answering the questions that I'd previously asked, instead of dismissing, discounting, and mocking them as useless, strawmen, etc..... you would've found a completely different collection of responses.

Laughable. It's all my fault, except you do the same to everybody.

Especially since my questions were entirely so I could learn to understand your thinking, so I could more accurately develop my responses to your questions.
So, the only thing you left me with was how I view/understand what you say.
Your tactic of refusing to answer my questions leaves what you think is misrepresentation squarely on your shoulders.
I've explained this to you several times now over the past 3 years.

Err, what questions? Please, feel free to repeat them.

🤔

This just demonstrates that you've not paid any attention whatsoever to what I've stated several hundred times before.
I have detailed you my experiences.

I've broken down the steps of my experiences for you so you can do them yourself.
I've provided the biblical passages from which I've been able to corroborate, and test my experiences against.
The only responses I've gotten back from you with these is mockery, disdain, clipping my posts, disregard for what I've stated.

Only in the vaguest terms, but when asked for detail you make excuses and run away.

However..... As I've stated the above several dozen times, and you obviously fail to make the connection, why don't you give me examples of what you think detailing my experience would look like.

All you have to do is say what you did and how showed you God is real.

Reading, history, archaeology, and experience.

Could you be a bit more specific? The above is too vague to say anything meaningful.

 

[Nouveau]

Literally everything we can consider human knowledge is from the scientific method...

As much as I love your Dune reference, I have to disagree with the above. This is at best an exaggeration. If true, it would mean humanity had zero knowledge prior to the development of science. But we obviously have plenty of knowledge derived from other means - art, stories, oral tradition, philosophy, etc. These other means aren't always as reliable, and don't always produce knowledge of the same sort, but it is knowledge nonetheless.

 

[5wize]

You're more than entitled to believe that.
And by doing so, you'll find yourself in the lake of fire listening to the derision, laughter, and mocking of those who hated you, instead of paradise with someone who thinks you're worth dying for.

Yup.... and if an attempt at trust fails to get the child in the van... fear is the next tool utilized in the arsenal.... it’s clockwork. “ You better get in the car kid or you/your mom/your dad/your siblings will die or be very very hurt.” You need a more grown up hobby Steve.

 

[Ficciones]

yeah. I wouldn't know.
I don't abuse my wife. I do however love my wife, just as Jesus loved the church. Just as Paul tells us in Ephesians 5:25-33.
To lay down my life, for her, etc....

Do you abuse yours, and use this idea you're talking about to abuse yours?

No, Steve, I'm not part of your cycle of violence.

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

As much as I love your Dune reference, I have to disagree with the above. This is at best an exaggeration. If true, it would mean humanity had zero knowledge prior to the development of science. But we obviously have plenty of knowledge derived from other means - art, stories, oral tradition, philosophy, etc. These other means aren't always as reliable, and don't always produce knowledge of the same sort, but it is knowledge nonetheless.

Man was using the scientific method before it was codified. Man gained the knowledge that fire burns after the empirical evidence of someone getting burned by a fire. Man discovered tigers were dangerous after the empirical evidence of a tiger eating a person.

And I love stories and art - but they are not 'knowledge' if we say that knowledge is what is objectively real. When the bard sang the story of Icarus flying to the sun I do not think any of us would consider that knowledge of objective truth. But it is a great story.

And I love philosophy but it is used to explore human concepts, not objective reality, and concepts cannot be true or false. They are very subjective. One person may believe that Stoicism is wonderful and another would find it stifling - and neither is right or wrong. If you are saying they both have 'knowledge' of Stoicism I suppose you are right. But in this case I think we are striving for what is objectively true in the world.

Maybe we are splitting semantic hairs. But I think we can say you can gain knowledge of human concepts through many means. However, if 'knowledge' is what we know to be objectively true in reality then it has always been based on evidence.

"No one respects the fire quite like the fool who is badly burned"
-- Pete Townshend

PS: I cannot wait for the new Dune movie

 

[The Pixie]

I was reminded of this earlier, and thought it'd be a good thing to redux this.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.

The fear/reverence of God is the BEGINNING of knowledge. ...

I find it disturbing how much Christians say we should both fear AND love God. I have no idea how a person can do that - though I must admit I have never been in an abusive relationship.

 

[Mr Laurier]

I was reminded of this earlier, and thought it'd be a good thing to redux this.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge,
But fools despise wisdom and instruction.

The fear/reverence of God is the BEGINNING of knowledge.

Not the middle, not the end, not somewhere in between the beginning, and the end....

It's the very beginning of knowledge.

Its not.
A lord who rules by fear, meets the fury of a people in revolt. And dies ignominiously.
It is true that fools despise wisdom. Preferring superstition and fantasy. As exampled by yourself.

The fear of an imaginary boogieman, is the end of wisdom. Not the beginning of knowledge.

 

[SteveB]

Here's what you said...."I've told you hundreds of times before that I'm learning to understand how God thinks, which is infinitely greater than the way humans think".
So, how can we mere humans learn to understand God, if his thinking is infinitely greater than ours? If we could understand how God thinks, we would be on a par with God's thinking.

He's given it to us in the bible.

Yes I do, I always give reasons for the things I say. You don't, you just say stuff with out reasons to back it up.

No. I know you think you do, but I seldom see anything that explains why you say what you say.

Laughable. It's all my fault, except you do the same to everybody.

Your decisions are indeed all your fault.
Nobody ever sticks a gun to your head, or forces you to choose the way you do.
If you wind up refusing to follow Jesus,

Err, what questions? Please, feel free to repeat them.

I've explained this before, and you even put together a really well-stated post which further elaborated on this idea....

It doesn't work that way.
Questions are based on ideas presented in posts.
As dialogue is developed, and conversation takes place ideas arise which give rise to questions.
I ask my questions based on this. I don't ask them out of the blue. I never have.
You however repeatedly decided, even after these previously provided explanations, that my questions did not matter. As a result, I've ceased taking you seriously. You made it clear you didn't want to be taken seriously by this.

Only in the vaguest terms, but when asked for detail you make excuses and run away.

Such are the excuses of people who don't want to be taken seriously.

All you have to do is say what you did and how showed you God is real.

I already have.
Read for the purpose understanding, learning, and application.

Jesus plainly stated---- if you love me, you will keep my teachings, and you will be loved by God, and we will come and make our home with you.

Could you be a bit more specific? The above is too vague to say anything meaningful.

It's only vague to people who don't want to be taken seriously, or apply, and learn for themselves, just how meaningful it actually is.

 

[Whatsisface]

He's given it to us in the bible.

So His thinking isn't infinitely greater than ours, because we can understand what he's thinking through reading the Bible, right?

No. I know you think you do, but I seldom see anything that explains why you say what you say.

Yes, I give reasons to back up my points, you just say stuff.

Your decisions are indeed all your fault.
Nobody ever sticks a gun to your head, or forces you to choose the way you do.
If you wind up refusing to follow Jesus,

Why can you never maintain context? We were talking about you refusing to answer my questions and that you blame me for it, when you refuse to answer everyone's questions.

I've explained this before, and you even put together a really well-stated post which further elaborated on this idea....

It doesn't work that way.
Questions are based on ideas presented in posts.
As dialogue is developed, and conversation takes place ideas arise which give rise to questions.
I ask my questions based on this. I don't ask them out of the blue. I never have.
You however repeatedly decided, even after these previously provided explanations, that my questions did not matter. As a result, I've ceased taking you seriously. You made it clear you didn't want to be taken seriously by this.

So you claim you ask people questions, but I've never seen any. So I ask you to present some, like everyone else does, ad yet again you dodge.

Btw, no one takes you seriously. That's the sum total of your time here.

Such are the excuses of people who don't want to be taken seriously.



I already have.
Read for the purpose understanding, learning, and application.

Jesus plainly stated---- if you love me, you will keep my teachings, and you will be loved by God, and we will come and make our home with you.


It's only vague to people who don't want to be taken seriously, or apply, and learn for themselves, just how meaningful it actually is.

 

[Nouveau]

Man was using the scientific method before it was codified. Man gained the knowledge that fire burns after the empirical evidence of someone getting burned by a fire. Man discovered tigers were dangerous after the empirical evidence of a tiger eating a person.

And I love stories and art - but they are not 'knowledge' if we say that knowledge is what is objectively real. When the bard sang the story of Icarus flying to the sun I do not think any of us would consider that knowledge of objective truth. But it is a great story.

And I love philosophy but it is used to explore human concepts, not objective reality, and concepts cannot be true or false. They are very subjective. One person may believe that Stoicism is wonderful and another would find it stifling - and neither is right or wrong. If you are saying they both have 'knowledge' of Stoicism I suppose you are right. But in this case I think we are striving for what is objectively true in the world.

Maybe we are splitting semantic hairs. But I think we can say you can gain knowledge of human concepts through many means. However, if 'knowledge' is what we know to be objectively true in reality then it has always been based on evidence.

"No one respects the fire quite like the fool who is badly burned"
-- Pete Townshend

PS: I cannot wait for the new Dune movie

Well, I agree that if we define anything based on observation to be science, and focus only on empirical (i.e. observation-based) knowledge, then it follows trivially that all human knowledge is based on science. But those are some pretty big qualifications to the initial claim. Stories and art often convey very real knowledge about human existence, but convey it through metaphor and allegory - a great example is Jordan Peterson's psychological take on the Bible. Such stories were conveyed by oral tradition long before anything resembling the scientific method was used, codified or otherwise. And there is real knowledge to be had in philosophy - not empirical to be sure, but objective knowledge of the relations between concepts.

PS. The Dune trailer looks great. I read all the books in anticipation, and was gutted when they delayed release to Oct 2021. I'm just really hoping the movie does well enough to bring a sequel.

 

[Lighthearted Atheist]

Stories and art often convey very real knowledge about human existence, but convey it through metaphor and allegory - a great example is Jordan Peterson's psychological take on the Bible.

How do you confirm which stories convey real knowledge vs. those that are fiction? Empirical evidence

PS. The Dune trailer looks great. I read all the books in anticipation, and was gutted when they delayed release to Oct 2021. I'm just really hoping the movie does well enough to bring a sequel.

I agree - I am very hopeful.