Total posts: 2,869
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
I'm sure he is trying to convey that "God" is the Ultimate Reality because It is the only reality or even conscious reality that exists that has full knowledge and omnipresence over all of creation and beyond (whatever beyond means), in other words the Ultimate Reality cannot be missing anything it is a full state of Reality as it truly is. And of course this would be true, and is true obviously and I don't think any real Theist would deny that the Creator is an "Ultimate Reality" but what Mopac doesn't understand or refuses to accept is that it only works for those who accept God as existing, because the term is self-evident. But it doesn't mean squat to an atheist or someone who has not accepted the reality of God. If you have accepted the reality of God, then there is no real reason to reject it, it's not a complicated theory. It just means there is no reality more real than God, every other thing that manifests out of that reality is only a part or piece of that. Although I doubt Mopac would explain that way it's basically what it means. But like I said, there's no reason for anyone to accept it without first embracing a Theistic viewpoint.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
Let me start off by saying that you're lucky I'm even responding to this, because I literally have to scroll a million times just to get your quotes because of your incessantly annoying choice to individually post each and every response you had to me, quite literally giving me a headache.
Well that was due to your incessantly annoying responses, rather than running out of characters I'd figure I'd give each of your special responses an individual space. But now that I've read your first line you will be lucky if I read the rest. Actually I won't, I'll waste my time later and wish you a pleasant new year.
That said, here we go:
Sorry don't bother, you bored me to death with the first line. Let me know when you have something new.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
For instance the loon who claims to be Napoleon must be believed because it is his personal testimony.
Sorry Bully, I don't play your games. Show me THE claim and how many as compared to spirituality and religion. Testimonial evidences are not to be accepted until considered and proven to oneself. It's not my problem you believe Theism and spirituality to be an absurd claim. Perhaps you are not yet mature enough to evaluate claims based on their merit and intellectual worth. Then again, evaluating testimonial based evidences is not for your every day goof ball. Maybe you are not ready to look at it objectively. Sorry Old man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
You are the key that unlocks the spiritual door not someone else
More of that "you'll never know unless you believe" bullshit. Nice argument. As if the human brain has the ability to alter reality with its beliefs. Hilarious.And the rest of your response is just more of the same garbage. Next.
So in other words you want to play it your way, you don't want to perceive spirituality as it is and learn new things. Fine, then just admit it and say so. I actually thought you would like that lol. You guys never cease to amaze me.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
no secular medium or source is ever going to prove something to you they cannot touch or reach themselves
Exactly. Let me share a little piece of common knowledge with you: Humans are incapable of knowing that which they cannot empirically perceive. That means the human brain literally cannot know anything at all unless it can see it, smell it, taste it, hear it, or touch it. That is a proven fact. The fact that you deny it doesn't make me wrong. It makes YOU wrong.
Did you pay attention to anything I wrote? Go back and read it in its entirety. Conscious experience happens at many more levels than what YOU are currently aware of.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
and why are you waiting for that?
Because I'm not delusional.
Lol, you mean you are not willing to look at facts, spiritual based facts from legit sources. You're going to wait around for some other man to prove it to you lol, good job dude. You won't listen to me about the nature of spirituality instead you want to be sarcastic and rude. Whatever.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
who or what exactly are you waiting on to so-called demonstrably prove it for you
Evidence
That you are dismissing without any real reasons because evidence consists of testimonies (would you like me to give you the definitions?), which is fist hand encounters so there is no reason for you to treat it like it doesn't exist, skeptical is fine but evidence exists. To you, spirituality is as good as empty claims which you denied. Otherwise you would admit there is in fact evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
Let me give you an example, if you reject spirituality and religion as a whole, how will you ever know
I mean how many claims of something do you need to realize it's not just a claim but a reality?
Argumentum ad populum. A number of people claiming something is true doesn't make it true.
Is that the best you got? you are quick to dismiss it, but are not as quick to consider it. What does that say Mr. Agnostic?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
I never said they were empty claims. I said they were unproven claims.
I believe you mean the same thing TBH, correct me if I'm wrong because you dismiss them as the same. If I was wrong you wouldn't be using the term "unproven" instead you would be considering it as part of evidence to be evaluated and possibly learn from it. Because, to whom do you mean unproven? your assumption is that spirituality is unproven and therefore you don't accept it as evidence before you even give anything a try, to you they are empty claims otherwise you would put some value to it. Do you not see the circular argument? what is the difference you wish to distinguish between empty and unproven? this is why I was careful to use cross referencing when referring to spiritual experiences because "unproven" is a subjective claim, that is your perception only and at what point are you willing to learn from someone who has experienced something you have yet to?You seem to skip all my points about involvement, as to basically say you don't give a shyt. Well Brutal, that is what makes the difference.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
The fine-tuning argument is about attempting to prove God's existence through the complexity of the world
Of course. As explained.
-- that is not "only" an interpretation.
Of course it is, silly.
You clearly don't know what you're writing about. You should stop typing before the whole site is laughing at you.
LOL. Nice try.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
The interesting thing is, the anatomy of physical embodiments require a certain environment to survive in. This can happen at many different levels of conscious life and certainly well out of our capacity to observe in an endless universe. The "magic" is, is that conscious activity is never dependent on forms in creation, rather is restricted to the form it is experiencing through. Those forms are supported by the "fine-tuning" of the multi-verses.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
The so-called "fine-tuning" argument of the universe is only an interpretation really, just as materialism is or atheism. It more or less points to the irregularities of the formation of our own galaxy, where earth, moon and sun are positioned in such a precise way where it meets the needs for creatures to develop. Or even deeper, the way stars form to seed the universe and the arrangements of planets, the endless array of galaxies which could certainly contain life for other life forms. Quite incredible if you really think about it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
Did you mean go five miles from where you are now so you can get yourself a hotdog and a Big Gulp? Try making some sense. Thanx.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@disgusted
The universe is so fine tuned that 99.99999999999999999999999% of it is fatal to life.
And......how precisely do you know what the rest of Gods creation is for? have you been there? how many galaxies and planets within those galaxies have you explored dear Bulproof? life on this planet is fit for its inhabitants.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WisdomofAges
Are you an automated machine or do you actually have a normal, thought out objective here? you seem fixated on a certain formation of paragraphs, words and phrases and never do you sway from it. It's quite disturbing actually. Shock us all and write something different, for Gods sake something, anything....and perhaps pretend the caps lock key is broken. It's hard to read anything when one is being screamed at constantly.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@janesix
How do you know Jesus is real?
I would say there a few factors that indicate this was an actual event, not a fabrication and that Jesus was an actual historical figure. A spiritual Master who came to change the face of religion. And did so.
1. There is no proven motivation or any reason why some random writers would invent a rebel outcast spiritual figure like Jesus, the outcome and punishments of that time were not worth the effort to do so. Can you give me a legit motive or reason the writers would have had to concoct such a story? when I read the Gospels it seems pretty genuine to me, and most of the arguments I've heard in favor of rejecting them as good evidence are not very convincing. If the Gospels are somehow genuine, then they indeed count as evidence.
2. I don't think the Gospels would have made it this far if they were indeed a fabrication.
3. The actual contents of the writings, they are indeed magical. Any spiritual person would recognize the actual contents of the messages are masterful, only a true spiritual Master could convey such a perfect, flawless work, and the writers themselves don't seem to meet that description. Why would anyone not want generations worth of credit and worship? only to give it away to some fictional character like Jesus?
4. The accounts of the Gospels are very honest and down to earth, they don't come across as being a lie or some fabrication even if the authors made mistakes it comes across as very genuine, just my opinion of course. It just doesn't write like a true fictional story to me. I believe the authors believed what they wrote even if they made obvious errors. Hence, Jesus was most likely real. It's just that the material we have is imperfect and so what? it's all written works of testimonial based evidences.
Created:
Posted in:
There's much more than just the "fine-tuning" argument/proposal, that's just a surface level interpretation or just one way of considering. There's what is called an accumulation of evidences, which includes many factors not just one or another. Most people have philosophical reasons as well as personal reasons. All the evidences and theories accumulate to an overwhelming conclusion.
Created:
-->
@linate
the point i'm making in this thread is that it's obvious this is a glaring error in the bible. the bible treated the story as literal when it's obvious it's not literal and false. if you strive for truth at all costs, it's contemptable to say the bible has no errors in it.
It's not uncommon for spiritual texts to illustrate spiritual principles or some message using what seems like a literal account or an actual story. But some people don't get figurative language anyways, like the mess people make of the teachings of Jesus and His parables.
I'm not arguing for a literal interpretation or a figurative one here, but do you have an issue if it were figurative? or, do you have a problem with both figurative and literal, literary styles being used in spiritual scriptures?
Created:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
When considering the arc story one must keep in mind the fact that Noah died in his early 900's
Lol
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Happy new year mate.Lets be friends a little better this year.Good year.
Have an awesome new year mate, I'm down for a little more love. Shoot me a friend request though, you wouldn't want to hurt me feelins! love ya.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
Yeah, it's me, Archaholic. It's good to see you again.
Good to see ya around.
But what do you mean Goldtop is not here? I see the Goldtop of here is the same stupid guy that I used to endure on DDO.
Oh yes, he is certainly here now and I know why, him AND Bully. I meant he's not here for anything other than harassing Theists so it doesn't matter how much I love him.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
Are you by any chance this dude that used to love everyone on DDO?I remember someone who claimed to love Goldtop. Lol.
Lol come on man, Archaholic? is that you I didn't recognize ya...yeah that was me not Mopac, I really have no other motivation so yeah it's true. Unfortunately it's not reciprocal, Mr. Goldtop has become the worlds finest atheist preacher and is not here for such nonsense. Mopac would not like to be compared to me though, he would be insulted. He's an Orthodox kind of guy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
May Nothing have mercy on the complex system of neural connections in your brain meat that creates your sense of consciousness and self.
LMBO!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I am very concerned that we establish a 'common reference frame'. Let me suggest that the difference between the physical/scientificand the spiritual is akin to the differnce between lust and love... science can explain lust but love is spiritual. That analogy may not be perfect, but is it the sort of thing you have in mind?
What I have in mind when referring to spirituality is the reality that will still be present when you leave the physical body. The Bible labels it "spirit" and eastern religions call it consciousness. Same thing and the same reality that transcends the physical body and sense perceptions. Because there is indeed an objective reality beyond this one we have coined the term "spirit/spiritual" to convey the distinction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
Not exactly. Claims have been made for a very, very long time. These claims have never been proven, hence the existence of atheists. As I said, spiritual phenomena have never been demonstrably proven to exist.
At what point are you ever going to consider that experiences are more than just an empty claim? I mean how many claims of something do you need to realize it's not just a claim but a reality? who or what exactly are you waiting on to so-called demonstrably prove it for you and why are you waiting for that? no secular medium or source is ever going to prove something to you they cannot touch or reach themselves anyways, you're wasting precious time in doing so and why so many forms of spirituality ARE available.
You are the key that unlocks the spiritual door not someone else, but you do have many sources to pull from to learn and apply many things. This is what I mean by cross-referencing. It is really the only form available capable of "proving" anything to you, because as you experience spirituality for yourself you will find that many, many others not only have experienced similar things but that there is a lot more to learn from and experience. Someone like me could carry you a long ways in spiritual terms but at some point you will have to get involved, instead of just rejecting everything that is related because no one has proven it to you. The facts and information are there sir, at your own dispense and your own convenience. But, you will never know what is true and what is baloney unless you participate, spirituality is not about beliefs in all honesty because of its objective nature.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@BrutalTruth
Well, he's right in the aspect of personal experience. If one empirically experiences something, and they can conclusively verify what it was, then they can know what it was. If what it was is something spiritual, then they're proven to themselves that something spiritual exists.
Good assumption, as well cross referencing is one of the most compelling aspects of spirituality.
Unfortunately, in the entire history of man as we know it, no one has ever been able to demonstrably prove any conclusively verifiable spiritual phenomena. That, coupled with the fact that I've never personally experienced such a thing, is the reason for my atheism.
Then you got silly with this one, spirituality has been established like a road map for a very long, long time. It's purpose of course is to feed you bits of knowledge and facts about all of this and how it relates to you personally as you are ready to embrace it. To prove anything about spirituality means to get involved, be willing to get your hands dirty. Stop snuffing it off like it's not a reality, get your butt involved now not later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
You think it is "haughty" to believe that God experiences through your channel of awareness and you've given me no reason to accept that attitude. Knowledge is not the same as experience even though knowledge comes through experience. God expresses Itself through forms in creation and experiences everything right through your experiences. Many believers think that God is so far out of their own district the idea comes across as absurd, but this is in fact the investment the Creator has in all of this, you can be nothing else...it is what you are, what God is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Anyways I could care less about what you decide to believe about me, perhaps you could argue or ask a question about anything you would like. That might make more of a difference then just dancing around in my thread.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
If I say that what you are saying is unsound theology, you will simply attack my faith.
No, you will attack mine. Just as you did below.
Well, this is what I think. The Greek word for "will" is "thelema", and based on what you are saying, it seems to me that this is really your god. I don't recognize your will as being God, sorry. A god only in name.
Try again.
The God I know and believe is omniscient, and it would be haughty of me to presume to be able to teach God anything.
I know, and I refuted that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
My foundation IS Christianity, the Gospels of Jesus. However, my beliefs are not limited to just the Bible. That is not how I approach the subject even though that is what I was raised with. I've learned many things in spirituality and I always move toward what is true and what is accurate. Religions do not dictate what I experience or accept.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Commonly refers to the transcendental nature of our experience...what we experience apart from the physical sense perceptions alone. Spirituality refers to that whole field of expertise.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
Wait a minute...you're convinced? since when lol?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
The question is obvious, but can it be answered?
Yes, as always there is nothing that can't be answered or articulated.
What do you mean by 'spiritual'? I've spent a fruitless period discovering it has multiple and inconsistent meanings.
The reason it has multiple meanings is because the term refers to a wide range of facts and phenomenon. Like saying "material" or "food"....it covers all that is material and all that is food... Likewise the term spiritual refers to all that meets that nature.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Castin
My main point is that scientific findings can be interpreted in favor or against Theism, it just depends on how one examines and interprets the evidences. Science should not be used against Theism since science is a neutral study, atheism seems to pull in that direction though, using science as a means to support a materialistic worldview when in reality no such thing is happening. Science does not claim or support worldviews, it's just a method we use to understand the world around us in a better way but it has no preferences about origins one way or another.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Okay Mopac, lemme know if you have anything to add. You don't like the way I present myself, others don't like the way YOU present yourself oh well...anything you wanna discuss here?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
My beliefs in a nutshell...…
There is in fact a spiritual reality, this is something I have observed for myself, I don't need anyone's opinion or observations I have my own. Others observations are what I call cross referencing and that is what spiritual sources are for.
I believe that spirituality and religion as a whole has acquired facts and evidences that are both applicable and observable. This of course relies on participation, application and practice and involves a different nature of experience.
I believe that spirituality and religion are not just about belief and accepting someone else's testimony, but about experience and learning for oneself, this is the very point of spirituality. That you learn of the spiritual or transcendental aspects of your own experience. You just have to connect with it, not accept it. Two different things and perhaps atheists are unware of that fact. Just because they have never connected with any particular belief does not mean they have to reject the whole idea.
If you have any questions about specifics just ask.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
He doesn't care. Don't let them fool you at all.
What can I say, I'm a sucker...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Just out of curiosity, what about my beliefs have you examined through all these years? I am able to articulate any one persons beliefs in both this forum and DDO's, name them and I'll show you. I would be surprised if you had no idea about my beliefs, I was hoping for more specific questions. I can give you a basic outline but geeze, you don't pay attention?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Is there any particular reason why you never ask me about my beliefs? when you ask...it sets things up for more discussion about this whole ordeal. And that is ideal.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Lol, I'd rather just discuss things and leave out the assertions TBH.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mopac
Okay, I'll let you know when you make statements that are "haughty" lol. This is a debate site, I will make statements that reflect reality, including myself and my beliefs, label them what you like.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Read that again..."They aren't deluded in the sense they believe in something that is fiction but rather accept a reality that is temporal and uncaused, in other words they accept a lesser reality and in doing so they limit their potential."
I was supporting atheists in that statement, I was using the word "deluded" from another persons perspective.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Yet you would have me lie to myself about my facts and experiences - you call them delusions.
If you read my responses in this thread, you will see I never did that...
"They aren't deluded in the sense they believe in something that is fiction but rather accept a reality that is temporal and uncaused, in other words they accept a lesser reality and in doing so they limit their potential. "
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Yet you would have me lie to myself about my facts and experiences - you call them delusions.
When did I do that?
You demand I am flexible, but seem reluctant to reciprocate.
What do you mean? where was I not flexible? demonstrate that please...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
..and...spiritual facts and encounters are many, not just one thing or another. Which is why I promote asking, be more specific in your questions...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Spiritual facts, and my own encounters, if I were to accept atheism I would be lying to myself, and I'm not about that.
Created: