Total posts: 2,869
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
In the end, whether or not prayer works is very subjective and to use a scientific or medical analogy, works like a placebo.
Is that what I said or are you asserting your opinion again while ignoring the substance of my post? never mind the answer to that is clear lol. Laws and principles are as concrete as your long, pointing finger and hysterical nonsense. Whenever you are met with rationale you retreat to your silly little phrases. That just shows what a soft core you really have underneath all that crusty surface.
Which does beg the question: Irrespective of whether or not God exists, is religion like a placebo to its followers?
Does your activity in this forum and strong bias act as a placebo for you??
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
simply because there is no God.
Thanks for the assertion but you need more than assertions to deal with logical and conclusive arguments. So go ahead and.....
wave your clasped hands around, close your eyes as tight as you can and pretend to be earnest as much as you can but it will all be in vain.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
In yet another sense, it's a way of saying "Applying true scientific method to this proposition will provide results that are inconclusive at best, and therefore cannot be said to be in any way scientifically verified as effective."
I don't have a problem with prayer not meeting the requirements of the scientific method, however spirituality is indeed a science, it is certainly a method of study. But of a different nature. The difference between the two is that one deals with material objects/phenomenon you can test, verify and observe, the other deals with a labyrinth of non-material laws and principles you can test, verify and observe. One can be done collectively while the other individually. They both can be applied and observed, but both cannot be collectively verified. Not in a way where you can repeat and demonstrate and produce consistent results.
TBH I let science study what it is purposed for, and I let spirituality study what it is designed for. While they study two different natures they also can work harmoniously together given you don't force one study on the other.
Created:
Posted in:
Having said what I said above, it doesn't mean that God is unaware of what people pray for, anymore than God is unaware that if you walk off of a building gravity will take hold and bring you to your death at any given moment. These are just moral and natural laws that govern our relations with spirituality.
Created:
Posted in:
Guys don't forget that God is not sitting around answering prayers and or rejecting them lol, that's not the correct picture or how this works. God sets laws and principles in place both for the natural as well as the moral reality. Jesus says according to the individual their own faith has made them what they are and are not, read the Gospels. What he's saying is that both prayer (if we're talking about the petitioning kind) and faith are principle oriented, meaning in order that prayer be effective there must things in place it is a law-based framework. You might say "well isn't that mean" or indifferent...but it's not any more mean than natural laws and their relationship to the natural world and how it operates. It's just the way the world is set up and governed, though it's impersonal it is also effective and interactive without God having to sit around being the recipient rather it's already set in place and ready for the individual to participate.
It's principle based for good reason, meaning one can't slap their kid around one week and then the following week pray for effective petitioning. This is what I mean that things "have to be in place" for faith and prayer to have legitimacy, it's more like a recipe or a framework one has to abide in for it to have any influence or power behind it.
So in a sense Ethang and Rosends are correct, any study about prayer will always be inconsistent and not one you could ever observe some sort of perfection because again, it's actually based around the individual and whether or not they abide and live in accordance with this framework and matrix of laws. If you want effective faith and prayer one must work within this matrix (irrelevant to who the individual is), find the correct recipe so to speak. So while God does create these frameworks God is actually not just dealing directly with peoples personal issues and prayers. Thinking that God does conjures up distorted concepts about how God operates within creation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
I am not sorry for telling you the truth.
Me neither, that is what I will always do. I'm not limited by your religious cult.
And I am not interested in spending the last hours of my time here arguing with a spiritual egotist.
Bye bye, Mr. Spiritual Egotist. But your personal messages you sent me and your insults/condemnation betray your own statement.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
If you are a Christian why does your profile list your religion as "other"?
Mainly because people might be confused as to why I incorporate teachings that extend beyond just the Bible. The Gospels were the first source I connected with as a young kid, it's what I have been applying all my life, Jesus was my childhood hero lol. Having said that I'm an Omnist towards spirituality recognizing that the Bible is only one source of many that contains valid information and knowledge that is both useful and important.
So while the Bible is well apart of my life and application my beliefs are not limited to that one source. That doesn't mean that it's not what I am, it just means I study spirituality as a whole.
God is much bigger than any single religious source or spiritual texts. In my personal decision I am open to all of God and in that I'm not afraid to allow the fullness of who God is into my data base of knowledge. I actually don't mind having Christianity as my profile pick, it's more an issue with particular religious denominations and dogma that I find disturbing, then always having to rectify their mistakes in debates. So I choose to have a fresh slate and not be bogged down with the baggage of useless and inaccurate religious jargon, but on the same note I have no issue with the teachings of Jesus and actually I'm quite in love with them.
I've been reading the Bible so long it's apart of who I am period, I've been applying the Gospels probably longer than most people have been a Christian. So it's kind of like studying a myriad of different sources of knowledge, I could call myself Christian per say but it would be limiting to the full scope of what I know and have observed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Bet you $5 it will be athiests first
I think I might have won the bet... his post is leaning more towards my claim. No protestants are Christian, only Orthodox Catholics lol. Well I don't even label myself that, but he lumps all people together who have not joined his organization.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
because you aren't even a Christian.
Neither is anyone else here who hasn't gone and joined the local Orthodox Catholic Church right Mo? nobody here is a Christian except for Mopac right? certainly no protestants here are Christians are they Mopac? so would it really matter whether or not my profile says I'm Christian? of course not according to you so this statement really doesn't hold any weight.
But any Christian should know what the recipe for being a Christian is according to Jesus and we all know that has nothing to do with becoming a Catholic or joining a religious organization. Sorry dear but try again.
The blanket statements I make don't apply to you
Excellent, then stop making them.
That is even why you say that Jesus is an incarnation.
Do you even know what that word means? or you just don't like it because your Catholic buddies don't use terms other religions use? If Jesus was not an incarnation what was he?
Incarnation-
a person who embodies in the flesh a deity
(in Christian theology) the embodiment of God the Son in human flesh as Jesus Christ.
a particular physical form or state : version
a living being embodying a deity or spirit.
the Incarnation, Theology. the doctrine that the second person of the Trinity assumed human form in the person of Jesus Christ and is completely both God and man.
You don't have an understanding of things that is in line with what the church teaches.
I don't care what the self proclaimed "Orthodox Catholics" believe, I've always been much more into the heart of the Gospels and message of Jesus rather than religious authorities and religious control.
To you that is not important, because you don't believe in the church anyway.
I believe in the body of Christ, which is made up of those who abide in those teachings. But not your particular organization no, they are corrupt at the heart of their development and you can see that in the way you treat other believers just like the Pharisees and Sadducees did while Jesus walked the earth. I don't bow down to religious snobs, not ever.
If that is the way you wish to live your life and attempt to worship the Creator that is all your decision.
You think you know better.
Lol, the one thing good about religious snobs is they are always hypocritical so their statements always apply to themselves.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Lol yeah he is a little labeler ain't he....he will probably go off on a tangent about "protestants" next.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Lucifer is a name that only exists in translation, it's origin being in certain Latin translations of scripture, which carried over to some English translations such as the King James bible. It actually refers to the morning star, or the planet Venus which tends to become visible in the night sky before the sun rises. That is why it is also referred to as the bringer of light.
Yeah I was going to say the scriptures aren't quite clear about who or what Lucifer is, or whether it is a who at all. Or maybe it is clear, but interpreted/translated poorly.
The early Latin translations of scripture created a lot of confusion in the west. For example, the Orthodox Church does not accept nor has it ever accepted that because of Adam and Eve's transgression in the garden, all of humanity inherited their guilt. We do not have this understanding of "original sin" at all. In fact, because of this understanding of original sin, the Latin church in the west had to create doctrines such as the immaculate conception of Mary to explain how she could be the spotless and undefiled mother who gives her flesh to Christ's incarnation. The Orthodox Church has no need for such a doctrine, because we don't believe in original sin as the Latins do! One can not inherit guilt, to us this is preposterous.
Well this is my understanding as well, not only is the "original sin" doctrine that everyone inherits plain stupid it is contrary to the laws of creation. This also causes great confusion what the actual role of Jesus is dealing with sin and how that whole scenario is applied and how it relates to our lives. Then we have to continually explain to atheists that no, we don't pay for what Adam and Eve did lol and yes that is quite ignorant for anyone to claim that.
So though I'm part of the "west" this does not apply to me either which is why it's always good to stay away from blanket statements because it comes off as you talking about everyone. Do you not live in the west?
Created:
Posted in:
The Devil is always representative of the negative forces in creation, if it exists at all it's just a spiritual being and one that walks on the dark side. Jesus, is an incarnation, and if anything a representative of the positive forces in creation. Two sides two different forces. Jesus is not a fallen being and does not rebel against God so traditionally speaking I don't think he is Lucifer or what the Christian interpretation of Lucifer is. Jesus is the epitome of one who is always one with the Father, one who sacrifices every part of his being for the Creator. I don't think any being matches that passion or description other than Jesus Himself.
Is there any real reason or any scriptural passage as to why you keep trying to make Lucifer Jesus? BTW unblock me for God's sake, not even sure why you did in the first place.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
Reasons To Believe In God:
* To take control over and manipulate others for one's own self-serving ends.
You are always so one-sided you never leave any room for others to explain themselves. Even when they do you don't care, you're not really here for debate or discussion more than you're here just to preach. Instead of making assertions and blanket statements try asking first, then argue your opinions AFTER the person answers. At least you'll get a chance to at least read someone's reason to believe in God heck, you might even find their answer as logical as your own interpretations of life. Surprise surprise! the answer you asserted is so far from the reason I believe in God I couldn't even begin to tell you how absurd that is. Wanna try again or do you want to ask first?
* For cultural or family pressure reasons through naivety, gullibility or vulnerability.
We all learn from others before us whether what they teach is wrong or right this is not just relevant to religious thought, you always single out religious beliefs because of your anger and bias towards it. You fail to see any of the truth or beauty that could be there simply because you despise it. No one will therefore ever take you seriously because it's so damn obvious you have such colored glasses on.
There's not even any reason to ever show you any truth or beauty behind it because your frustration will overshadow it, tell me then what point there is even to discuss this with you? When and at what point are you open to any of it? if God exists how could any of us ever begin to communicate that with you at a level where you will listen and consider things?
I don't think anyone would argue that there's a lot of stupidity and falsity in the religious arena, duality is not exempt from this observation of life but at what point are you willing to hear and consider the good sides?? the sides that make sense and the sides that have freedom and logical ideas or interpretations, the side that has nothing to do with controlling people or discriminating against others?
* Out of sheer ignorance and arrogance to satisfy a selfish distorted ego.
Oh yeah baby you got me lol! it's not the guy that made this silly assumption and parades his biases all over the forum that has the huge ego issues and selfishness problems nahhhh…..it's all just us!
Reason Not To Believe In God:
* To take control over and manipulate others for one's own self-serving ends.
* For cultural or family pressure reasons through naivety, gullibility or vulnerability.
* Out of sheer ignorance and arrogance to satisfy a selfish distorted ego.
Do you like these assertions when they are pointed back at you? to where you can then claim you're always persecuted and at the suffering end of religious control and thought?? it is easy to make such statements and assumptions about other worldviews but how much are they actually worth in a debate or conversation?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Salixes
I am prepared, right here and now to place my reputation on the line and disprove the existence of God.
LOL a challenge?? that's cute Willard...
In this case "proof" and or "evidence" belongs with the individual translated as interpretation not necessarily as a collective agreement (but not opposed to that either). Proof is defined as "evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement"....and evidence is defined as "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid". In this light you can't "prove" anything, all you can really do is give your own personal interpretation of what we observe.
Science for example is not at all opposed to Theism, it's simply a neutral method of study we use to determine the natural world and its functions (it has no say on whether or not God exists) and since that's the case you can't use that as an excuse to reject the possibility God exists. All you can assume is that what we observe through the scientific method translates as atheism. Having said that I fail to see how you could ever believe that you can prove something to someone else's interpretation.
To a Theist, intelligent processes occurring in our universe is an indication (evidence) of an intelligent Source since processes are associated with minds, to an atheist for example.....these processes occur all by themselves, they are just coincidentally natural events. See how they both have their own interpretation of what we observe?
To a Theist, NDE's, spiritual experiences, paranormal activity, religious sources and OBE's are good solid evidence that the soul indeed exists independent of the physical body. Whereas an atheist per say assumes these are just manifestations of some imagination. See how they both have their own interpretation of what we observe?
To a Theist, it's obvious looking at creation as a whole and where we currently are that there is indeed a Creator. To an atheist it's obvious no Creator exists simply because they can't "see" God, to them the universe is just some mechanical manifestation.
To a Theist, processes and matter come after mind/intelligence and consciousness not before. To an atheists matter somehow creates conscious beings and intelligence.
To a Theist evolution for example is a process and that process is how the Creator brings things into existence from point A to point B. The same with solar systems arranging, planets forming, habitations developing, embodiments appearing, consciousness/sentience manifesting ect ect….And again, to an atheist evolution occurs by itself and planets form for no real purpose or reason. Stars are born and die just because ect ect
These examples are interpretations of the individual (and I could go on and on), the individual looks at the evidence and observations and applies their own logic and common sense. To a Theist their interpretation is obviously superior, it comes together and makes much more sense. To an Atheist a Theists interpretation is silly, probably stupid. But they both are interpretations of what we all have in front of our faces. So you can believe in your own mind you can prove your worldview is the correct one but that's a pipe dream, a delusion. Your interpretation is no more valid than mine and your assumptions about the world we observe are no more intelligent than mine. You have your opinions and interpretations and I have mine, mine are proven to me and your are proven to you.
When we come together to discuss the subject at hand we are left with arguing our own interpretations and common sense logic. You'll never be able to make any step beyond that fact, you can try but it's nonsensical since all our ideas about creation or the universe are personal observations.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
1. What is God
An eternal "field" of awareness akin to energy.
and what was it's cause?
God is postulated as eternal (as is energy), it's a non-sensical question, this field of awareness is a fixed reality (infinite), the "base/foundation" (prior state) of all that exists. If God is not eternal then there is no need to make the argument at all. The argument is specifically predicated for things that began to exist......AKA creation (universe).
This is not "special pleading" of course, which I know is coming....it is the very attributes of God, call it convenient if you will but that is the nature of the Creator. It's really no different than accepting that energy is eternal, or not created. It's not special pleading to say energy is not created or destroyed, it is the very nature of energy and what is known or understood about it. Same thing.
In Theism it is proposed that mind or awareness comes before matter, and using commonsense and logic it's a decent premise, because we observe intelligent processes occurring within the universe. To assume the opposite would be to blatantly accept that processes occur by themselves. So Theism does indeed have a strong basis and platform.
So basically we have a foundation that is uncaused (like energy), and a universe that is caused (matter/formation/evolution/processes). .
2. So we assume that everything including God begins.
"Begins" is the problem with this statement. You included God but God is not included. This would only be relevant to what we observe in the natural/physical universe. "Everything that BEGINS to exist"....
3. We assume that the universe and more appropriately matter began to exist.
We don't have to assume it, we can observe it take place. If we can observe a planet forming for instance, we know it was once not there. If we can observe a stars death, or birth we know ect ect...The universe is a product of change and evolution, both of those attributes necessitate a beginning or a condition.
4. Therefore we assume that the universe and more appropriately matter has a cause.
True, based on what I said above, or we can deduce.
5. And the notion of transcendency is what it is. A fanciful higher brow word intended to define something that is only notional.
Not really, if God does indeed exist (which is what we're postulating) then the term has actual meaning and a legit premise. God is above and beyond the normal human experience and the average physical sense perceptions, God is much more like energy by nature which exists within form as well as independent of form and everything that exists, exists within God. You can discard it if you wish to assume God does not exist, but that's not intelligent. You have to actually follow the logic not discard the proposition because you find the idea fanciful. That's just an opinion.
6. And arguments such as Kalam attempt to give validity to notional assumptions. Which in terms of knowledge leaves us still firmly stuck at the beginning of something without a clue.
As far as I can tell, following the logic behind all premises it's simple but fairly secure.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Why should it be a he and why should it not be Chinese?/
For starters the Creator is not subject to any environmental factors in any way, that would be creation not God. To put it simply, God doesn't have a race, genetics, gender, blood, skin or anything of the sort. God is not a product of anything created.
Why should it be the long haired Northern European hippy guy of Bible illustrations.
Lol, I believe even Christians know that Jesus (the Jew) was just an incarnation, meaning even though Jesus took on an earthly body his soul exists independent of that and actually that's true for everybody or any soul.
It was probably originally envisaged as a swarthy black haired Middle Easterner.
Again, same thing applies as above. People like to slap on some image of what an incarnation may look like, but that's just the form it took on in creation. They call that an incarnation!
I personally think that it is a formless cloud of data.
Now you're getting much closer. Although God is not devoid of consciousness and sentience (intelligence/personhood) God is not confined to any forms in creation in Its full state of awareness. So while God is formless (omnipresent) It's not just a cloud of data lol, more like an ocean of conscious awareness without any boundaries or limits. It is awareness distinct from anything created, any bodily formation but not inanimate.
I won't be worshipping it though.
What would you be doing? considering your own soul came right out of God... what if in that sense, you are closer to God then your own momma? "worshiping" in its most common simplistic meaning, is just "the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration". It can be a weird thing or just a normal expression.
I normally wouldn't be replying to you as you always seem to get irritated or angry or try to turn my comment into something to be offended by but I find this somewhat interesting I guess.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
I can't even tell what religion you think is right, but every one of these religious phonies in here thinks you're wrong too, they just won't tell you.
How is that relevant to anything we ever discussed? and I openly told you I approach religions and spirituality as a whole, they call that an Omnist, do you know what an Omnist is Ludo??
What that means son, is that I recognize there are truths, facts and insights within many religions and spiritual texts not just one. Simple stuff.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
You mean by saying "open your mind!" and "I have the knowledge that heaven is really a physical planet, and all religions have their own planets, and you could travel there if you had a spaceship powerful enough"? Your special knowledge which, like god of the gaps, you refuse to comprehend? You make claims, not arguments. I can't even tell what religion you think is right, but every one of these religious phonies in here thinks you're wrong too, they just won't tell you.
We had two separate discussions Ludo....and perhaps in the heat of the exchange you glossed over some of my points. Would you like me to link you to that? you present a challenge to make sense (arguments) then you claim the explanations are just claims lol, wow.
You mock me about planets and yet the universe is chock full of galaxies WITH planets, does that make sense when planets are for the purpose of inhabiting?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Can you make your argument without referring to any other worldview to do so? This way you're not saying "Mine doesn't make sense all the way either, but I think yours makes less sense, therefore mine is correct". Consider it an open challenge
I have taken the reigns on this in another thread and given you the steps that connect the dots but all you're capable of doing is claiming "God of the Gaps" argument in replace of a rebuttal (which it isn't, it's just a way to avoid an argument when an opponent begins to make sense). It seems when someone does as you just asked you still aren't able to consider it. So I fail to see your reason for nagging PGA to explain himself. Perhaps find that thread and go back over what I spent the time to write.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Oh well I guess Hari wasn't keepin him busy enough, this place is going down hill again, was hoping to get more intelligent users and topics but that's too much to ask lol. Have fun I'll join back in when the quality raises.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
12 topics in a week, the compulsive behavior is obvious...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
This guy has too much likeness to Willows, same repetitious topics, nonstop posting and same lingo. He's trying to cover it up by toning down his insults.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
this just basically says mass came from energybut where did the energy come from?even the subatomic particles are made up of things, that came from where?
Check out post #127
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
First there is nothing, then there is a thought, then that thought becomes everything. Although, it makes more sense to me that there was never absolute nothing... there has always been something and that something is an infinite something... in part conscious, in part not conscious... the idea here is the consciousness can manifest out of nothing. All it would have to do is ask a question..
This is good thinking, however there is a process to go from thought....to forms in creation. The link between the two is energy. If you study how energy forms matter, it basically isolates itself to create form through process and time, but you're right it begins with thought...so I argue that intelligence makes that possible. Having said that, that only applies to the realms of form and duality. Beyond the realms of form there still exists activity, these realms of existence are purely mind and thought. These are more like dream experiences only the Source has full control, you can basically create whatever you want just by thought, pretty badazz actually.
When you go beyond mind and thought, which are projections of pure consciousness this is where you would find in part, conscious and in part not conscious. This is where consciousness can withstand eons of time and stillness, more like sleep or deep, deep meditation. This is actually not as scary as most people think, it's actually the most peaceful state God can exist in. To have no worries, no bad things, no trouble, no other persons or things can be a good thing, especially when you manifest in and out of creation where there is really no rest lol. So it is essential not to be frightened by the thought of eternally existing in an alone state, because it's actually more like rest on a large scale, it is pure peace.
Then when God desires to rise from that state it has endless opportunities of experiences to observe.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Uh, to prevent you from further embarrassment, like ethang5 has had to go through
This is why those who severely lack any reading comprehension and lack the intelligence to deduce things through common sense should stay away from interpreting scripture, and any spiritual texts for that matter, rather should be silent and taught. Scripture is like coding when it comes to its figurative language, those that have no spiritual comprehension usually walk away with really ignorant interpretations. Kind of like the Catholics think they really eat Jesus' body and drink his blood, not knowing that the figurative language means to apply what he teaches, abide under what he taught. Not that we literally consume blood and eat flesh!
Here's another example where the Bible uses the word "secret" again...
Psalm 91
He that dwelleth in the secret place of the most High shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.
I will say of the Lord, He is my refuge and my fortress: my God; in him will I trust.
Again, the Bible uses the term secret as a means to describe what only God has access to, or an intimacy between God and the soul.
tell us what a woman's secret parts could bethen why was he so interested in discovering woman's "Secret PartsWhy was JESUS such a PERVERT?!
Lol and this is a perfect example why you should stay clear of any Bible passages.
It's figurative language for the inner part of a person (the heart, soul, deep confines of their being ect ect), the places no other can observe and know about but God. It's an intimate observation....it's common sense. There's absolutely nothing in that chapter or verse that renders a perverted interpretation. Get real "Brother", the embarrassment is all on you.
Created:
Posted in:
It's stories like these (Job) that if we were to discard the literal rendering of it (like the setting, people, bet with the Devil and curses...) it's easy to find the underlying message. By focusing on the actual events rather than the underlying content we miss the actual message.
Can anyone here, using the story as a figurative rendering tell me the message or messages of this account? try it...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
@TheDredPriateRoberts
This is a post by Outplayz in another thread which sums things up pretty well.
"The infinite source, which i define as an intelligent agent, would be everything. It would be occupied and non-occupied space. It is a infinite cosmic intelligence. Well, this is one way of defining it at least. I have a second way of defining it which would be more correlative to your ideas that this infinite consciousness lives in one of the infinite occupied spaces. But... i like to think that the source is everything. There is no where it can't go, nothing it can't be... therefore, i think it is everything and everywhere."
At some point there has to be an acceptance (based on logic and sound reasoning) that all things come from a singular reality that has no regression, it's basically a unified omnipresent fixed foundation, this is what Theism proposes as conscious awareness AKA God. People seem to be willing to accept that energy is eternal (not created or destroyed), omnipresent, through all things and independent of form and yet seem to struggle with the concept that awareness has the same properties.
I actually take you one step further to explain why energy even exists at all, and what it is.
Energy is present with conscious activity, conscious activity generates energy. If this is true both conscious activity and energy co-exist, this brings all things together because it also explains why energy creates intelligent processes and operates as an intelligent force in the universe. Basically God uses this energy to create whatever it wants at will. Before creation was the Big Bang....before the Big Bang there was an omnipresent "ocean" of conscious awareness generating megatons of energetic force....this energy was condensed and then released to generate and bring forth the fusion, bonding and changes of chemistry which enabled the Creator much more tools to create with.
Even if you were to study quantum mechanics they basically bring you into an awareness that all things are interconnected and at the very bottom or lowest levels are a singular unified foundation out of which all form comes into existence. This foundation we as spiritualists call awareness. That is as far back to the wall as you can go, because awareness doesn't need form to exist it is pure awareness, out of which energy is generated. There is no regression problem when you consider this platform.
Created:
Posted in:
When you're talking about God and creation you're looking at two distinct things that exist together simultaneously, you're looking at one.....the full state of consciousness of God that pervades every single thing and is Omnipresent, then two... you have forms in creation and there you have very limited states of conscious awareness that exist within the full state of awareness of the Creator. If you look at it like energy, you find the very same thing with the same attributes. Energy exists both within form and independent of forms, God is the very same way and exists both within form and independent of forms. In other words just like energy, God can't be outside of something! to pervade all of creation means to exist through all things.
So to believe that creation is somehow different or distinct from God is not seeing the whole picture, it only appears that way. But would anyone here argue that God exists through all things and pervades all of creation?? I doubt it, that's a basic Theistic premise that has been articulated in just about every religion including Christianity, and if you say otherwise that means God is no longer Omnipresent and that something exists outside of God.
And the point behind me saying this is to say when you look at creation it's what God wanted to do, and does....whether or not that translates into "fun" it certainly doesn't exclude it.
Created:
Posted in:
Guys, God is indeed a conscious Entity and the very nature of consciousness desires to express itself in some form, any living Being or sentient Entity is not devoid of that simple truth even if it is God. Yes, God is surely a greater reality than human states of awareness but why this forced assumption that we are sooooo much different, or that God is sooooo far removed from anything we could imagine like us? we, as individual expressions of the Creator are just tiny versions of Itself. Inferior, limited, smaller, ignorant but not all that different from the core of our souls (nature of consciousness). God has made you basically out of Itself, in other words you are made of what God is made of only on a much smaller scale.
A good thing to remember is that God exists in a state of conscious awareness alone, so when you look at creation you're looking at what God wanted or desired. To say that is not the case would be to deny reality. The question of the OP was "what does God do for fun" and that may be a strange way to word it but I take is as the same as asking "what does God WANT to do"? seeing as God exists in an alone state it's a no-brainer what God would certainly want to do. And that would be to create many different types of experiences of all kinds in this world and the many worlds beyond this one. The investment God has in all of this is that God can experience everything you do, like it or not....if God is Omnipresent this is true any way you look at because there is nowhere something exists or where something is happening where God is not present.
Just because God has the title of God, that doesn't negate God of desires, wants or a need to express Itself, then you take away the very nature of even God as a sentient Being and assume God is just a thing or some non-conscious inanimate force that has no personality or feelings. I mean come on this is easy stuff here. The genius behind all of this creation is that God has access to every single channel of awareness, and this is what any Being would want to do if it exists alone, eternally.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
does not make us equals with God.
I don't use that language so I would appreciate you quoting verbatim. If you're talking about my suggestion of a song "what if God were one of us", that doesn't translate into us humans are equal with God.
Actually if the statement had any truth to it, it would be more like "God lowering or limiting Himself" to become like one of us, not the other way around. And the reason for that suggestion would be in all the posts I have fully explained in this topic. I know you don't like it, but I don't really care.
There's two ways I would articulate becoming a co-creator, two different systems of thought, none of which I would expect you to understand.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You're not baiting me again like you do in PM's are you lol? get me talking about something and then condemn me and make accusations against my character because I'm not a member of your personal flavor of Church?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Nothing particularly interesting about building a monastery, the guy seems like your average monk, Buddhist or sage. Living a chaste life is always impressive no matter who you are but they could also fall into the category of weirdos, those that enjoy inflicting self pain and self-flagellation so I would prefer to know the individual personally. In his speech I don't see anything that special, the video was rather unintriguing to me. Just seemed to be bragging on about an average monk character. Kind of reminds me of the Buddhist monastery down the street in a cow field lol.
Did the guy offer any contributions of insights or knowledge besides enduring some hot desert weather conditions? All in all I'm left wondering why you posted this video I guess?
In the video it says "this country was spiritually hungry, and God sent us Elder Ephraim"....what did he do? he helped build monasteries all over America...huh? is that what Jesus did when He was sent to fill people? build churches all over the place? basically all he did was house other Orthodox believers. I think it's a nice gesture but nothing out of the ordinary or what I would consider spiritually enlightening especially for spiritually hungry souls.
I thought it was nice they help people with groceries occasionally but every church I know of does that kind of service so this is all just average stuff really, nothing that sets it apart from any other type of monastery. It seems to me like monks have a lot of time of their hands to do just about whatever they want.
I notice you always talk about Orthodox believers being persecuted, what about Doukhobors? or spiritual Christians they are called, their belief system is much more appealing and realistic IMO, why were they so persecuted by the Orthodox "Priesthood"? and treated like slime?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
To be a co-worker with God or to be in synergia with God does not make us equals with God.
Where did I say that?
Synergia is moreso about emptying the self in order that the grace of God may fill that emptiness. It is about aligning oneself to The Uncreated Divine Energy.
You're preaching to the choir, been doing that for a long time. If you want to know something just ask me.
God's omniscience of everything that happens even in the future is no big matter to God. Existing outside of time, the beginning and end of it is plain to see. So even though we have freewill, God still knows what we are going to choose. God transcends temporal reality, having Himself preceded it.
Thanks for the opinion. I'm not of the Calvinist sect but thanks.
This is how we understand these things in The Orthodox Church.
I know I know, the Orthodox Church lol, sure pal. What does any of this have to do with our personal discussion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I understand we are very limited especially in thought and knowledge, if God knows and sees all then there's nothing new for God to ever experience, if there were that would be a limitations wouldn't it?
I do believe God is omnipresent but I think omniscient is somewhat of a misconception. There's obviously things God could know, but when you create a free agent like a soul there's just too many variables and dynamics involved to predict everything. My humble belief is that God knows everything in the moment, as it takes place. There's also foreknowledge so don't get me wrong, it's like owning a pet, you can create an environment for it, you can know when it will exist and even be in control over when it dies and so forth, but you can never predict with certainly what that pet will do or how it will react or act in any given circumstance.
Even if God were to know every little thing that could ever happen it still doesn't mean God wouldn't create things. As I said before it's the only outlet God has, so why would the Creator disregard it? Yes, if God is only partially omniscient then yes, that would be considered a limitation and my reply is who cares? I'm willing to live with that answer....God is still a maximal Being, that means God is the greatest Being even if there's elements even God doesn't necessarily know about.
If God experiences everything through your eyes, perception and perspective including all things alive that's a lot of observation and experience. That's better than the alternative which is nothing. If you could only watch a movie that you directed, but placed actors within the movie and were able to live out those roles within that movie wouldn't you do it if it were the only thing you could do?
I understand we are very limited especially in thought and knowledge
That's the investment God has in this, if God is experiencing life through your vessel then at one conscious level God is limited in thought and knowledge. It's through your very limited, restricted and confined awareness that God gets to live out. What you see and experience is what God sees and experiences, if your view is limited then God's view is temporarily limited, you know what I mean? Ever heard that cheesy song "what if God were one of us"? lol I used to hate that song but I had never thought about it really until now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Of course, I can't dispute you on this. I agree with what you said earlier, comparing this life with a classroom. We are all at different grade levels. There can't be compulsion in religion.I spent a great deal of my life chasing after entertainment. I did learn from it. In the end, I grew out of it. Having been through that, I can be grateful that I know firsthand that to make this your life is a very vapid thing. Had I not, maybe I would be more envious!
Well you never know bro, like Outplayz and I were discussing after a million years in heaven you may want to come back and play some more lol, it doesn't have to always be a bad thing...But I get what you're saying, I started my spiritual journey as a young kid. After I had a taste of God I knew right then what I was interested in. I've spent the rest of my time here making mistakes but pursuing God in the midst of them. I've always been more interested in the deeper qualities of life.
All of my experiences, good and bad... all of my bad decisions and life mistakes... in the end, they helped to mature me.If I could save others the trouble, I would! But sometimes people need the trouble. God's chastisement is for the sake of our healing. A lot of times, wisdom doesn't really make sense until you come to know the folly.Glory to God
Amen, all that's true.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
To me this life can mean many things. One of them being a lesson. Here let me give an example. Say i already have it planned out that i will be a vampire (i know i know, my favorite fantasy) in my next life. The real question is... what type of vampire would i be relative to who i am. If i am going to struggle with my darkness than become a light vampire... then, it would be good to practice urges. So, in this life i would struggle with addiction in preparation for a harder struggle of not killing good people. Also, that's not the only thing. Stuff like family will also be different in a vampire existence. I will live for years while my family dies. So, in this life... i have it set so i can have the maximum time around the people i love. This is interesting, bc things like set backs in life and having to stay at home makes sense in order for me to be with my family more. I may look at these set backs as a bad thing in this life, but it was designed in order for me to experience what i want to the maximum in this life bc i know my next i will miss them for a long time. You can imagine how many other things in this life can be straight out preparation for my next. I believe it is this way, bc in my infinite state... i know a lot more than i do now. I may have already planned out eternity of experiences in my infinite state... so it's like a cosmic chest game. Moving the pieces with infinite steps already planned out.
That was brilliant, very thoughtful, I don't get very many responses that show people know what the hell I'm taking about lol. Just wanted to add that just because this life can be a lesson like I was saying, it can be chosen as well, after a millennium of another existence a soul may want to come back here for 80 years and live a more simple life, have a little family again ect ect..... And like you said it also can be just a step in the grand scheme of steps.
I've studied every religion at least once so they are all hazy unless i research them again (which i'm not in research mode at all right now). But, i do remember Mormons bc they did have an interesting take on the afterlife. It was much different than Christians so it stood out. I think they have like 4 or 5 levels of heaven. The ultimate one is where you get to create your own world or something like that and others being stuff like purgatory or being in a social world. But, that came with a lot of things to do like be a good Mormon, marry, and what not. I don't remember exactly, but it's interesting. I'd look it up bc i don't remember exactly how it works but it was cool in my opinion.
That is interesting I never paid them much attention. I'll look that up. I know you and I have talked about becoming a mini-creator or a co-creator, and it would make sense with the implications involved a soul would have to be a very advanced being to be given such freedom. I never was attracted to that particular religious organization but that's creation for ya, so many paths and ways of life to choose...who knows, after an eternity one might be willing to do anything lol.
Creation is cyclical, so the original Source does this over and over and with the creativity of the individual soul there's always a new experience. It would be like being placed within a newly designed maze, where the soul has a beginning point and works its way out and the maze is different every time.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
The child of God should strive to reach the state where they no longer need to be entertained in order to have peace. In the end, I believe such a person actually appreciates the beauty of God's creation in a much more profound way.
I could agree with that, but each soul has to come to that understanding themselves. You can't force or make something think that way, they have to learn things in their own timing....this is why creation panders to all levels of conscious awareness. You can see this play out in so many ways just be observing people.
Having said that, being entertained in one reason why creation exists. On other levels the intentions and desires are not the same.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Oh, i agree on those types of levels. I just don't agree i have to do anything special to get to those levels. Like, i don't think i have to relive this life 100 times before i'm ready for the next level...
I don't know about that but I do know there are universal laws like cause and effect and laws of consequences meaning you can pretty much do anything you want in creation but you may have to pay consequences for certain things, which actually is good because there are some real maniacs out there lol. So the only twist is that a soul may lose the freedom temporarily to choose what it wants whereas before it was free. And really all that means is we should be careful in what we choose, watch our actions and at least try to mature.
This may explain partially why we would ever be here in the first place because actually this level of creation is like the lesson level, even though there is a lot of beauty there's a lot of suffering along with it. I would say it is probably a lot harder than it is easy and pleasant.
So in a nutshell our actions can actually trap us in places, this would be the only aspect that's not always so fun. But it is that way for a reason believe it or not. And if it wasn't that way creation would much worse, without some level of control it would most likely self destruct.
or how Mormons say you should do this or that to get to this level of heaven. I simply think i will just pick the next experience in whatever next level i probably have already planned out.
Do Mormons have levels of Heaven? I've heard some of their more bizarre beliefs but I didn't know they had that aspect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I'm not objecting to anything. My view is one life time experience is so tiny and restricted compared to what is described in the time period after this life, it seems rather inadequate in the context, rather trivial really. Which then raises the question, why even bother?
We bother because without experiences there is nothing else, the physical plane is just one experience of many. When you leave the physical body, there are places where you can have experiences that last for eons. But again, wouldn't you rather have experiences of all kinds? short term...long term, trivial, extravagant ect ect. Since you will always exist at one level or another there's no reason to NOT have experiences. You're here aren't you? that speaks for itself.
the discussion/theory of "nothing" is also interesting
Lol, the theory of nothing? can "nothing" even be a theory? just kidding around, do you mean nothing as like nothing exists beyond this experience?
certainly we are limited in so many ways, including our understanding. we have limits and we understand and are bound by them, I'm not sure how to even imagine anything without limits, or a beginning.
Pure conscious awareness is without limits or a beginning. It's just a fixed reality not bound by anything, for example when you close your eyes, sleep or are meditating notice your conscious awareness has no limits, no form, no boundaries....basically anything you want to think of you can think of, anywhere you want to go you can go, consciousness is just like that.
Having said that your physical body and brain confine you to this particular world and experience, so it actually reduces what you really are, it limits you to what you can do but when you leave this physical body you will have much more freedom and less restriction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
However, i tend to think there are no levels... my personal belief that connects most to me, or i hope for, is that i am simply an infinite being manifesting into finite experiences.
Ironically that is actually why there are levels, or a multiverse. You can't have endless possibilities or experiences on one planet or one physical realm. The physical is restricted and limited as are these physical bodies, so you would be delighted to know there exist places more like sci-fi. If you eventually want more wild experiences there must be a place for that too, that's the cool part about these levels....it's not a bad thing. I mean compare for example NDE experiences to our normal experiences here in this realm and you will see what I mean and that's just the beginning, there are many more levels beyond just the net one or the astral plane.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Especially if you are not prepared to listen to both sides of a discussion, or in fact are not programmed to do so.
What are you even babbling about?
I would suggest looking at God as a metaphor, applying a tad bit more rationale to your thinking and extracting yourself from the biblical murk that you have been conditioned to accept.
None of that makes any sense, especially in light of my conversation with Dred, as a matter of fact I don't even think we mentioned the Bible in all of what we were discussing. Again, what are you even babbling about?
God is not a metaphor, that's just your silly opinion.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
it just seems with such limited time (more so for some) and in context with the vastness of everything and time, this extremely limited time and experience seems so inadequate with the limited experiences and knowledge we gain over a lifetime.
I'm not sure what the problem is, can you help me understand what it is you're saying? I understand what you wrote, I'm not sure if you are objecting to something or just saying something...
perhaps I'll need to see what I can find as to why souls were created in the first place but that seems like the infinite regression problem.
I went over some of this in my first post. Souls are created because this enables the Creator to experience something outside the alone state. In other words if God, which exists alone, created no souls there would be no other experience outside Itself. This is also the creative expression of God, souls are the ultimate creation kind of like the Frankenstein story lol, only not a nightmare or a monster. When God creates a soul it is something that is very special to God, a soul is a tiny part of Itself. You are a reflection of God's heart and soul, that is the single most greatest thing God can create.
God sends the soul into creation and then has access to that experience, in other words God experiences everything through you.
I don't recognize an infinite regression problem, souls are created from a singular fixed Reality. Meaning all souls originate from an Ultimate Soul AKA God and there is nothing before that, nothing that precedes that. And one thing to consider is that time does not exist outside of creation, time is the passing of what we know as the universe (material structure), but God is not on a time scale, rather exists independent of time.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
Just don't get me wrong, with all that I've said there is a distinction between what God can do as opposed to what the devil can do. I don't believe any devil has the ability to make animals speak that have no voice box, that's absurd. You're giving too much power away where it doesn't belong.
God creating things through processes IS supernatural, but the devil doesn't have any power to do either of those things. He's not a creator, and he doesn't make animals talk. When you expect someone to believe such things they lose respect for what you wish to communicate.
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
How are those things obvious metaphors? God is supernatural. So is Satan. They are capable of doing things that break natural laws because natural laws don't apply to them. If you accept the existence of supernatural beings, then you must accept the possibility of supernatural events.
So when you claim they are capable of doing things that break natural laws, we should see them occur all the time correct? not just in stories, if the devil can make animals talk in human voices, you should be able to give me an example of that IRL. Otherwise it's logical to conclude that talking snakes fall into the category of figurative, again I ask...then what is figurative if not talking animals? And since we know how human bodies were and are developed, we can conclude that being formed from dirt is a figurative expression. Essentially we are made from "dirt" or what some call star dust, meaning we are created from the same elements as every other thing. But this is again figurative speech. We aren't really formed literally from dirt, we are made from the same elements as earth, as stars as every other thing, but to get from an element to a human body there is in fact a process.
These processes are indeed supernatural events, because they do not occur by themselves, but this is not magic. It's how God uses the elements to form what it is God wishes to create. But dust of the earth is not erected like a clump of clay into a human body lol, that's not how you were created.
There would never be any need for your parents if God erected human bodies from the dirt you stand on, think about that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DynamicSquid
Yep, I wish to continue it hopefully in any manner you would like :)
Created:
-->
@SirAnonymous
There are some Christians like EtrnVw who think large portions of the Bible are metaphorical or symbolic. I think they don't take it as literally as they should
When I was a kid I used to take it all literally, so I'm fully aware of what I have concluded. It's not a matter of me overlooking something. And, even with a figurative understanding I lose no message or objective of the texts. As well I wouldn't say large portions of the Bible are metaphorical, I would say the majority is most likely literal, with overtones of figurative expressions. The Bible is a really big book, with plenty of metaphors and analogies. Even with the first few chapters of Genesis being figurative most of it is not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
tell us what a woman's secret parts could be
It's figurative language for the inner part of a person (the heart, soul, deep confines of their being ect ect), the places no other can observe and know about but God. It's an intimate observation but not a perverted one goof ball.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DynamicSquid
Yeah, no I'm really confused. I guess my stance on this topic is the way it is because I just feel like it. I know that's not really a "fair" reason why, but I believe that a new theory can only be accepted if there is proof to it.
Well that's why we're talking about it. You can't find some scientific demonstration that proves what I'm saying because it is in the hands of spirituality, so part of the "proof" is me presenting you with information that is correct. I don't think you are confused, you just haven't really had the opportunity to consider some of these ideas, that's just the start of it. Just be flexible, you are obviously a good person, bright and open-minded just having this discussion with me for this long.
It's just like how some religious people are very reluctant to change their beliefs, even through they are clearly wrong. I guess that's like how I think. I'm also more worried about other issues, not this. I feel like that if I were interested in this topic, then my reasoning would change. I don't give this topic much thought.
But you are very much a part of God, and even though that may sound weird right now somewhere inside you the curiosity will grow at some point. You might not be interested in it now, but eventually as you get older you're going to really start questioning yourself, what you really are and what the hell did all this come from lol. The business of life can keep you distracted but believe me, there will come a time it will interest you.
I would be more inclined to first get you to think about God before any religions per say. In my opinion it's one of the more intriguing topics, how can it not be?? try asking me questions about God, the soul or how creation is put together...
However you do have an interesting point on this topic.
Good, it should be interesting for you. And thanks for being patient.
Created: