They only complete love is for God. The goal is to love everyone equally, but it does not necessarily work out that way. Science is the creation of scientists, and every science advance bears somehow the mark of humans who made it. The artist exposes oneself in one’s work; the scientist seems rather to hide in one’s, but one is there. If one is to fully understand the process of science, surely the historian of science must understand the human, and if one is to understand the people who make it, one must have some comprehension of the science. The general public image of the scientist has not been and indeed is not now a flattering one, and at best it certainly is not an endearing one. Characterization of scientists almost always emphasize the objectivity of their work and describe their cold, detached, impressive unconcerned observation of phenomena which have no emotional meaning for them. This could hardly be further from the truth. The scientist as a person is a nonparticipating observer in only a very limited sense. One does not interact with what one is observing, but one does participate as a person. It is, perhaps, this fact—that the scientist does not expect, indeed does not want, the things that one is concerned with to be equally concerned with one—that has given others this impression of coldness, remoteness, and objectivity. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23

The social scientist is in a remarkably difficult position since the object with which one is concerned are people, and both they and one may be more than a little ambivalent about this matter of interaction. However, this is a special problem which I will by-pass here, nothing only that in many ways the social scientist differs from the natural scientist in terms of personality and motivations. The truth of the matter is that the creative scientist, whatever one’s field, is very deeply involved emotionally and personally in one’s work, and that one oneself is one’s own most essential tool. We must consider both the subjectivity of science and what kinds of people are scientists. However, first we must consider the process of science. Suppose we take the scientist at the time wen one has asked a question, or has set up a hypothesis which one wants to test. One must decide what observations to make. It is simply not possible to observe everything that does on under a given set of conditions: one must choose what to observe, what measurements to make, how fine these measurements are to be, now to record them. These choices are never dictated entirely by the question or hypothesis (and anyway, that too bears one’s own particular stamp). #RandolphHarris 2 of 23

One has only to consider how differently several of one’s colleagues would go about testing the same hypothesis to see that personal choice enters here. However, this is just the beginning. Having decided what is to be observed, and having set up the techniques for observation, the scientist comes to the point of making the actual observations, and of recording these observations. All the complex apparatus of modern science is only a means of extending the range of human’s sensory and perceptual capacities, and all the information derived through such extensions must eventually be reduced to some form in which humans, with their biological limitations, can receive it. Here, too, in spite of all precautions and in spite of complete honesty, the personal factor enters in. The records of two observers will not dovetail exactly, even when they read figures from a dial. Errors may creep in, and the direction of the error is more likely than not to be associated with the observer’s interest in how the findings come out. Perhaps the clearest evidence on this point comes from research on extrasensory perception. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23

If the import of an observation is immediately apparent, a scientist who is deeply committed to a hypothesis is well advised to have a neutral observer. Often, of course, such errors are minor, but they can be important, not only to the immediate problem but to society. I have wondered to what extent the disparity in figures on radioactive fallout may reflect such factors. Very few scientists, including psychologists, who have demonstrated selective perception as a laboratory exercise, take account of the phenomenon in their own work. Once the observations are recorded, other questions are asked: When is the evidence sufficient to be conclusive, one way or the other? How important are discrepancies? What degree of generalization is permissible? Here, again, we may expect personally slanted answers. Taxonomy offers a very clear illustration of the effect of personality: One biologist may classify a given set of specimens into a few species, and another may classify them into many species. Whether the specimens are seen as representing a few or many groups depends largely on whether one looks for similarities or for differences, on whether one looks at the forest or the trees. A “lumper” may honestly find it impossible to understand how a “splitter” arrives at such an obviously incorrect solution, and vice versa. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23

Such differences cannot be resolved by appeal to the facts—there are no facts which cannot be perceived in different ways. This is not to say that the facts are necessarily distorted. The problem of the criterion exists in all science, although some scientists are more aware of it than others. The matter of personal commitment to a hypothesis is one that deserves more consideration than it usually receives. Any person who has gone through the emotional process of developing a new idea, of constructing a new hypothesis, is to some extent, and usually to a large extent, committed to that hypothesis in a very real sense. It is one’s baby. It is as much one’s creation as a painting is the personal creation of the painter. True, in the long run it stands or falls, is accepted or rejected, on its own merits, but its creator has a personal stake in it. The scientist has more at stake than the artist, for data which may support or invalidate one’s hypothesis are in the public domain in a sense in which art criticism never is. It may even be because of this that scientist customarily check their hypotheses as far as they can before they state them publicly. And, indeed, the experienced scientist continues to check, hoping that is errors are to be found, it will be one who finds them, so that one will have a chance to make revisions, or even to discard the hypothesis, should that prove necessary. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23

If, in one’s efforts at checking, one has been able to come up with another one, one finds it less difficult to discard one’s hypothesis. The extent of personal commitment to a hypothesis is a prominent factor in the historical interplay between scientists. The degree of this commitment varies in an individual with different hypotheses, and varies between individuals. One very important factor here is the scientist’s productivity. If one has many new ideas one will be less disturbed (and less defensive) if one fail to pan out. If one has very few ideas, an error is much harder to take, and there are many historical instances of errors which the author of the idea has never been able to see oneself. I think many scientists are genuinely unaware of the extent, or even the fact, of this personal involvement, and themselves accept the myth of impersonal objectivity. This is really very unfortunate. It is true that only a person who is passionately involved in one’s work is likely to make important contributions, but the committed person who knows one is committed and comes to terms with this fact has a good chance of getting beyond one’s commitment and of learning how to disassociate oneself from one’s idea when this is necessary. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23

There is little in the traditional education of scientists to prepare them for this necessity, and there are many who are still unaware of it. The extent of a scientist’s personal involvement in a theory can now be a matter of grave public concern. Scientists who become advisers on political or other policy have an extraordinarily heavy responsibility for achieving some detachment from their own theories. How many of them realize this? However, once one’s hypothesis is found acceptable, this is not the end of it. One hypothesis inevitably leads to another; answering one question makes it possible to ask other, hopefully more precise ones. And so a new hypothesis or a new theory is offered. How is this new theory arrived at? This is one expression of the creative process, and it is a completely personal process. It is personal regardless of whether one or more individuals is involved, for every advance made by a group, the person contributing at the moment has had to assimilate the contributions of others and order them in one’s own personal way. After a person has abandoned one’s previous incarnation, entered one’s experiencing, and then emerged, one experiences the World as disclosing new possibilities, new dimensions of its being for one. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23

However, I am part of this World, and I have the capacity to disclose myself to one even while one is embodies in one’s usual fixed roles and self-definitions. When I am with one, I can disclose to one how I experience one. I can enter int dialogue with one; and with each of one’s utterances or acts, I can respond out of my experience and disclose to one what it is that I am experiencing. If I remain in contact with one, consistently in dialogue, I may actually lead one to the edge of going out of one’s mind, thus clearing the way for the emergence of a new self. I ask you to consider dialogue. You say something from your being—let us employ a jazz combo to illustrate. I blow a phrase on my trumpet, and you respond with a passage on your saxophone. Your response is both a reply and a question and a challenge, and so I reply. And so it goes until one of us loses one’s nerve and dares not let spontaneous, true disclosure out. Dialogue has ended for the time. Now switch to the dialogue in psychotherapy. The patient says something to me. I reply, in honesty. My reply evokes experiencing in one, and one utters this. This evokes a reply from me. We continue in this way until one has tripped off panic in the other; at this point, in sincerity, dissemblance intrudes, and dialogue has creased. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23

One of the participants does not wish to be known, and one holds back. In dialogue at its best, the participants remain in contact and let their reciprocal disclosures affect one another. If the dialogue occurs in the context of letting be and confirmation, then the weaker of the two may indeed flip into raw experiencing, find it safe, and emerge in a more awakened state. Authentic disclosure of self is a likely factor in the promotion of awakening, of authentication and validation of the other, and the emergence of independent learning. However, authentic disclosure is rare. More common is semblance, role-playing, impersonation of the other one wishes to seem to the Other. Hence, the other person seldom truly encounters a person-in-process. One meets a pledge of consistency, a World of people who do not invite one into new possibilities. If I am in your World, and I do not grow and change, then you are in a World that obstructs and impedes your growth! In true encounter, there is a collapse of roles and self-concepts. No one emerges from an encounter the same as one entered. My willingness to disclose myself to you, to drop my mask, is a factor in your trusting me and daring then to disclose yourself to me. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23

This disclosure of yourself to me assists the process of your disengagement from your disengagement from your previous ways of being. And as I disclose myself to you, I am your World, and this World discloses new possibilities to you—it evokes new challenges and invitations that may stir and enliven your imagination. In an age in which infidelity abounds, do we observe them [parents] carefully instructing their children in the principles of faith which they profess? Or do they furnish their children with arguments for the defense of that faith? They would blush on their child’s birth to think one inadequate in any branch of knowledge or any skill pertaining to one’s station in life. One cultivates these skills with becoming diligence. However, one is left to collect one’s religion as one may. The study of Christianity has formed no part of one’s education. One’s attachment to it—where any attachment to it exists at all—is too often not the preference of sober reason and conviction. Instead one’s attachment to Christianity is merely the result of early and groundless possession. One was born in a Christian country, so of course one is a Christian. One’s father was a member of the Church of England, so that is why one is, too. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23

When religion is handed down among us by hereditary succession, it is not surprising to find youth of sense and spirit beginning to question the truth of the system in which they were brought up. And it is not surprising to see them abandon a position which they are able to defend. Knowing Christianity chiefly by its difficulties and the impossibilities falsely imputed to it, they fall perhaps into the company of unbelievers. Having witnessed hundreds of evangelical children hit the college campus, I can attest to the fact that we need to start early in teaching them the reasons for their faith. Make no mistake about it. Young children can ask profound intellectual questions about God and religion. And if we do not take them seriously and work to provide them with good answers, it will impact the vibrancy of their Christian commitment sooner or later. Just last night I received a phone call from a woman in our neighbourhood called Monica. Monica has a son in high school who is a friend of my youngest teenage daughter, Jillian. Monica become a Christian five years ago, and her son is a believer, too. Unknown to me, a friend of Monica’s had recommended she read an apologetic book on Christianity. She then called to ask me some apologetic questions. #RandolphHarris 11 of 23

The conversation was quite interesting. She opened up on the phone about a frustration and a fear. The frustration was that she still has a large number of non-Christian friends and relatives who regularly asked her hard questions about her faith that she was not able to answer. She felt fear because of the spiritual life of her son, like most teenagers, was something she could not take for granted, and her son regularly asked her questions about Christianity that she could not address. If she did not take hard questions seriously enough to find out answers, she feared not only for her son’s spiritual growth but also that he would not respect her own dedication to Christ. Her son had pointed out that she had time to do a number of hobbies, watch television, and so on, so that if getting god answers to certain questions mattered to her, she would have gotten them by now. He concluded that her faith must not matter that much to her, because she had not taken the time t wrestle with issues that might show her faith was false. I encouraged her to continue growing and to be intentional about making progress in learning apologetical answers to various questions. My experience leads me to believe that Monica’s situation is not unique. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23

Monica’s call reminded me that it is important to develop our Christian minds by learning why we believe what we believe. This is an important aspect of our spiritual lives. As we grow in our apologetical knowledge and skills, our faith becomes more steady, powerful, and confident. We also grow in our courage and boldness as witnesses for Jesus Christ. And we learn to be attractive, nondefensive ambassadors for Christ who are prepared to give an answer to someone who asks us what we believe and why. As one can see, there is great importance in the transformations of our minds toward Christlikeness as it relates to evangelism. An important foundation for evangelism is the ability to answer questions, much like Monica’s need just mentioned. The Master is always there, behind the disciple, always ready to give one stability, guidance, inspiration, peace, and strength. If the disciple does not find these things coming to one from the Master, the fault is in oneself, the blockage is self-created, is somewhere between the two, and only one alone and remove it. If the disciple becomes responsive enough, if one’s mind is harmonized with the master’s, there will be a feeling of one’s presence even though a continent’s width separates them. The master’s nearness will sometimes seem quite uncanny. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23

Yet the deeper we travel, the less need have we of thoughts and words, for all multiplicity collapses in this marvelous unity. We can neither think nor talk of this sublime state with any accuracy. Hence the only medium whereby we can properly represent it is—silence! Hence the competent teacher gives one’s best teaching not through lectures, talks, or books, but through this magical, mysterious, yet effective silence wherein the higher initiations are wrapped. To sit with such a teacher in the right receptive attitude for a single hour of meditation may bring more than ten years of previous self-effort could bring. For one can telepathically carry the other’s power of attention to a depth in the stillness which is habitual with one but which is rare or unknow to most. Thereafter one of the veils is torn aside and one can more easily penetrate to the same depth alone. One should ask oneself whether one is attracted by the teacher’s mind or body, whether one is devoted to the teacher’s thought or flesh. If one can answer correctly one should grant that real discipleship exists only when the sense of the teacher’s physical form is absent and one’s spiritual being is present. And this indeed is the case. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23

The outer relation is only a beginning, a slight foretaste of the richness possible in this inner relation, this union of heart and soul. Then the disciple finds that the teacher’s nearness to or distance from one is not to be measured in miles, is not an affair of what can be seen sensorily, but of what can be felt mentally. Sat-sang, or inner affiliation with the master, is regarded as more important than outer association with one. “If any human is willing to do His will, one shall know of the teaching, whether it is of God, or whether I speak from Myself,” reports John 7.17. Would you know who is the greatest saint in the World? It is not one who prays most or fasts most; it is not one who gives most alms or is most eminent for temperance, chastity, or justice; but it is one who is always thankful to God, who wills everything that God wills, who receives everything as an instance of God’s goodness and has a heart as an instance of God’s goodness and has a heart always ready to praise God for it. By this point we are beginning to get a glimpse of what those renovated in Christlikeness look like. We know that they will have a thought life centered on God in His goodness and greatness, and therefore on truth. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23

Also, their feelings will be dominated by the rich array of beneficial feelings that naturally accompany love, joy, and peace, along with their foundational conditions of faith and hope. However, such conditions of thought and feeling are not to be produced and sustained without massive changes in other dimensions of the human being, nor do those massive changes in other dimensions come about without corresponding transformations of thought and feeling. Each constituent of the human being is but one element in an interlocking whole. Those constituents can to some degree be distinguished and described in isolation from the others, but they cannot actually exist or develop except in tandem with the others. “And now it came to pas that there were a great multitude gathered together, of the people of Nephi, round about the temple which was in the land Bountiful; and they were marveling and wondering one with another, and were showing one to another the great and marvelous change which had taken place. And they were also conversing about this Jesus Christ, of whom the sign had been given concerning his death. And it came to pass that while they were thus conversing one with another, they heard a voice as if it came out of the Heaven. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23

“And they cast their eyes round about, for they understood not the voice which they heard; and it was not a harsh voice, neither was it a loud voice; nevertheless, and notwithstanding it being a small voice it did pierce them that did hear to the center, insomuch that there was no part of their frame that it did not cause to quake; yea, it did pierce them to the very soul, and did cause their hearts to burn. And it came to pass that again they heard the voice, and they understood it not. And again the third time they did hear the voice, and did open their ears to hear it; and their eyes were towards the sound thereof; and they did look steadfastly towards Heaven, from whence the sound same. And behold, the third time they did understand the voice which they heard; and it said unto them: Behold my Beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased, in whom I have glorified my name—hear ye him. And it came to pass, as they understood they cast their eyes up again towards Heaven; and behold, they saw a Man descending out of Heaven; and he was clothed in a white robe; and he came down and stood in the midst of them; and the eyes of the whole multitude were turned upon him, and they durst not open their mouths, even one to another, and wist not what it meant, for they thought it was an Ange that had appeared unto them. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23

“And it came to pass that he stretched forth his hand and spake unto the people, saying: Behold, I am Jesus Christ, whom the prophets testified shall come into the World. And behold, I am the light and the life of the World; and I have drunk out of that bitter cup which the Father hath given me, and have glorified the Father in taking upon me the sins of the World, in the which I have suffered the will of the Father in all things from the beginning. And it came to pass that when Jesus had spoken these words the whole multitude fell to the Earth; for they remembered that it had been prophesied among them that Christ should show himself unto them after his ascension into Heaven. And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto them saying: Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole Earth, and have been slain for the sins of the World. And it came to pass that the multitude went forth, and thrust their hands into his side, and did feel the prints of the nails in his hands and in his feet; and this they did do, going forth one by one until they had all gone forth, and did see with their eyes and did feel with their hands, and did know of a surety and did bear record, that it was he, of whom it was written by the prophets, that should come. #RandolphHarris 18 of 23

“And when they had all gone forth and had witnessed for themselves, they did cry out with one accord, saying: Hosanna! Blessed be the name of the Most High God! And they did fall down at the feet of Jesus, and did worship him. And it came to pass that he spake unto Nephi (for Nephi was among the multitude) and he commanded him that he should come forth. And Nephi arose and went forth, and bowed himself before the Lord and did kiss his feet. And the Lord commanded him that he should arise. And he arose and stood before him. And the Lord said unto him: I give unto you power that ye shall baptize this people when I am again ascended into Heaven. And again the Lord called others, and said unto them likewise; and he gave unto them power to baptize. And he said unto them: On this wise shall ye baptize; and there shall be no disputations among you. Verily I say unto you, that whoso repenteth of one’s sins through your words, and desireth to be baptized in my name, on this wise shall ye baptize them—Behold, ye shall go down and stand in the water, and in my name shall ye baptize them. And now behold, these are the words which ye shall say, calling them by name, saying: #RandolphHarris 19 of 23

“Having authority given me of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. And then shall ye immerse them in water, and come forth again out of the water. And after this manner shall ye baptize in my name; for behold, verily I say unto you, that the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one; and I am in the Father, and the Father in me, and the Father and I are one. And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been. For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contentions is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of humans to contend with anger, one with another. Behold, this is not my doctrine, to stir up the hearts of humans with anger, one against another; but this is my doctrine, that such things should be done away. Behold, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will declare unto you my doctrine. And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23

“And I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all humans, everywhere, to repent and believe in me. And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God. And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto one will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit one with fire and with the Holy Ghost. And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto one of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one. And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things. And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23

“And whoso shall declare more or less than this, and established it for my doctrine, the same cometh of evil, and is not built upon my rock; but one buildeth upon a sandy foundation, and the gates of hell stand open to receive such when the floods come and the winds beat upon them. Therefore, go forth unto this people, and declare the words which I have spoken, unto the ends of the Earth,” reports 3 Nephi 11.1-41. The truth of our intellect is according to its conformity with its principle, that is to say, to the things from which it receives knowledge. The truth also of things is according to their conformity with their principle, namely, the divine intellect. Now this cannot be said, properly speaking, of divine truth; unless perhaps in so far as truth is appropriated to the Son, Who has a principle. However, if we speak of divine truth in its essence, we cannot understand this unless the affirmative must be resolved into the negative, as wen one says: “the Father is of Himself, because He is not from another.” Similarly, the divine truth can be called a “likeness to the principle,” inasmuch as His existence is not dissimilar to His intellect. Not-being and privation have no truth of themselves, but only in the apprehension of the intellect. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23

Now all the apprehension of the intellect is from God. Hence all the truth that exists in the statement—“that a person commits fornication is true”—is entirely from God. However, to argue, “Therefore that this person fornicates is from God,” is a fallacy Accident. My day begins again, and again I dedicate myself to the service of God. May it be His task I perform. Remember the Messiah of the house of David, Thy servant, and Jerusalem, Thy holy city, and all Thy people, the house of Israel. Please grant us deliverance and wellbeing, lovingkindness, life and peace on this day of : The Feast of Unleavened Bread. The Fest of Weeks. The Feast of Tabernacles. The Eighth-Day Fest of Assembly. Please remember us this day, O Lord our God, for our good, and please be mindful of us for a life blessing. With Thy promise of salvation and mercy, please deliver us and be gracious unto us, have compassion upon us and please save us. Unto Thee we do life our eyes for Thou art a gracious and merciful God and King. Just as the proximity of an electrified wire coil can induce a current of magnetism in a bar of soft iron, so the proximity of those who love God and are true Christians can induce some of their Christlike inner stillness to appear in those who are receptive of God’s grace. #RandolphHarris 23 of 23

Winchester Mystery House

During Sarah Winchester’s lifetime, the spookiest day of the year was actually Christmas Eve. Families and neighbors would gather around the fire in shadow filled story circles to hear tales of specters and the supernatural.

The all new Victorian Candlelight Tour will feature some of our most chilling ghost stories told as you explore the most active parts of the Mansion, including the basement, which has been off limits for quite some time now. It is a rare chance to glimpse one of the world’s most alleged haunted mansions at night…all alone on a safe, self-guided adventure! Tour capacity is LIMITED and these dates will sell out quick – get your tickets while they’re available! 🎄🔔

Buy Tickets Link in bio. winchestermysteryhouse.com