Total posts: 2,869
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
So souls can't be tortured, then?
First of all, who is torturing them? you know I don't believe God tortures souls right? so lets get that out of the way. Souls experience bad things if they put others through bad experiences, and there's many ways that can happen.
Next, what I was referring to above was specifically regarding the usage of the PHYSICAL body, not the spiritual body, or spirit form. Consciousness itself cannot experience pain because it is formless, pain is only relevant where there is an embodiment that can experience both pain and pleasure. In the physical world, the nervous system was created as a means of creating the exposure to sensations on a physical level.
Let me say this though, that the soul itself is also distinct from the spirit bodies, and so the subtle bodies can also experience forms of feelings...I'll explain below.
How do they experience pleasure?
Number one, when you leave the physical body you will be present within an energetic subtle body where there is still a high form of sensation, perhaps different from the physical body but still present within your experience. The vibrational quality of the subtle body exists at a much finer and higher frequency than that of the material earthly body which is far more dense and limited. The exact anatomy of this energetic body is probably somewhat of a mystery at least in this world, however I believe there is still a tangible energetic frequency that we experience. Because of the lightness of the spirit, the physics change drastically as your spiritual body can travel and move multidimensional.
Now having said that, sensations are not the only thing we experience and the soul being an eternal reality one can inhabit some dark places within creation depending on its Karma and one doesn't need to "feel" to have terrifying experiences. But like I said I'm almost certain the subtle body experiences sensations on an energetic level without a physical body. Pleasure comes in many different forms, not just through a physical nervous system but some of the energetic qualities of sensation in your spirit body will probably be euphoric and unlike anything you're used to. Not to mention the places of creation on other planes would shock you, the beauty is unreal. I've seen spiritual beings and they are fantastic, and I haven't seen a whole lot.
Actually the physical world is the outermost layer and probably the least of what exists in terms of ability, beauty and pleasure. There's colors, planets, creatures, landscapes and beings like you've never imagined and the experiences are far greater. Most people never consider the Creator as an eternal creative force and what the implications of that are, lets just say the Creator has been very busy for a long time lol, there are no limits to what can exist.
As we discussed before, creation is made up of layers and when you leave the body and are present within the astral world that is only but one other universe, and there are several. As you leave each plane of existence your soul has a layer that corresponds with that world so that you have a "body" to interact within that experience. But if you were to leave all the worlds and layers of creation and that which confines your soul to those places you would be conscious but completely free of any form whatsoever.
When you get into the pure conscious realms, you basically are navigating with your thought and instincts. It would be like living within your dreams so to speak in the sense whatever you think of you experience right then and there. Of course the beings that are permitted to experience this have learned full control over the emotions and the mind, otherwise you would probably severely traumatize yourself. Luckily for now, you are confined to the physical world through a physical body where it takes more time to manifest your ideas and thoughts into reality. In other words you don't get yourself into trouble as quick as you can imagine it, your physical body has to build or act out what you are thinking and desiring. But there are worlds that don't have these limitations, you experience everything as soon as you think it or want it. To leave all worlds of experience and to be completely free of anything related to creation is to exist as God exists in the full state of pure consciousness.
Sorry to ramble there, but just know the physical world and all its beauty is not the end of pleasure or experiences.
That's not my point in bringing it up: my point was these stories ONLY come up when people die in some less-than-instant way, when blood flow and thereby oxygen flow to the brain is gradually reduced to critical levels.
Brain death occurs within minutes after the hearts stops beating, after the heart stops beating and there is NO brain activity is when an NDE can take place. TBH it's not really anything gradual, we're talking minutes after the heart stops. The soul can only come back into that body as a useful component only if the heart is resuscitated.
There's a documentary called "I Survived Beyond and Back" that correlates each testimony with medical facts and documentation. Some of the testimonies have been reported hours after brain death. But again, if the soul must come back due to an accident of some kind, it can reenergize the body if that body is still intact and then breathing and heart beating can begin.
This allows for the idea that the brain, given the option, resorts to survival instinct and combs through the most important memories and ideas a person has had stored in their brains to find a reason to keep fighting.
You don't seem like you are very familiar with NDE's. Probably because you believe it's stupid, I'm sure you have put little effort into research instead of reading some materialistic BS trying to come up with reasons why it could happen. NDE's are clear, vivid and objective occurrences that are totally new to the individual like journeying to a completely new world. Of course that's because they are certainly in a new plane of experience.
Do people who get shot in the back of the head experience the same? People who die instantly, in other words, that don't have the prolonged lack of oxygen.
Why don't you get it? people can only report what they experience if they can come back into the body, if someone's head was blown off there is no option for the soul to come back into the body. In other words they do experience the same thing, they just can't come back into the body to tell you about it. They have completely lost the physical body. An NDE means that a person has had the experience, but was able to gain back function of the body and they returned to it, thereby telling you of their observations.
It'd be really helpful if one of those people could report what happened right before they died, then you'd have something to compare your NDE experiences to.
They do, they experience dying and feel their heart stopping and then they momentarily black out as their brain shuts off. Then comes the experience of leaving the body, which usually gets reported as the sensation of "going through a tunnel". That is the soul separating from the body, you will experience a suction or pulling and that is the spirit pulling away from your earthly form....... this is when people then have conscious experiences outside of the brain and body.
Instead all you have is exactly what I laid out: people whose brains experienced critical blood and oxygen deficiency for enough time to have been declared dead, or nearly dead, and who fortunately came back.
Lol, okay you're the expert.
So you're 100% certain that the brain shuts off THEN an NDE occurs? Not that what's being called an "NDE" here happens inside the brain as it's still functioning in its death throes, THEN it shuts off, and that memory is accessed right after resuscitation? It seems a pretty critical piece of your theory, how are you certain?
NDE's are recorded after the heart stops beating and there is no sign of brain function. After this occurs, the person watches themselves LEAVE the body as they freely move around in a parallel world, with real places, people and things. People can't leave their body Ludo unless the body dies, that's when an NDE occurs, and then unfortunately sometimes they are allowed back to finish their journey here.
These are not sleeping or dreaming states either, or half comatose states of consciousness. People know what it is like to dream or have some strange sensation that is different to normal consciousness. These are highly functioning, vivid and clear states of consciousness outside the body, no dreaming or half alive crap. We're talking HD here pal lol. Don't assume people are too stupid not to understand the difference.
One thing to remember, that NDE's happen to people of all walks of life and the documentary I mentioned above has no agenda other than to document the facts. No one is trying to sell religious ideas or propaganda, these are just ordinary folks and as a matter of fact many people who have had one don't report it in fear they will be seen as a freak or something. But it does indeed change their views and attitudes of life and death.
I have a thread somewhere within this forum with a bunch of NDE facts, right now I don't have the time to go back over it all. Perhaps I'll show you later or something. Also, if I don't get back to right away I'm having difficulties with logging in.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Yeah I used to have that problem with DDO too. All other sites work fine on my computer, just can't log in here and it's pretty frustrating. It finally allowed me to sign in after 20 tries or so, sometimes I can't get it at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
An experience/observation itself is evidence, whether or not it proves something true is irrelevant to the fact that experience is grounded in reality and can be objectively proven. Tell your martial arts Master that his experience is subjective as he objectively throws your azz to the floor lol. Tell a surgeon that his years experience in surgically removing body parts is subjective, as he objectively removes your gallbladder.
First hand observations are used as evidence in court to support what may be objectively true to prove a case. To observe something is to know something objectively, to experience something is to connect observation to reality. I think you're getting experience/observation twisted with being able to objectively prove something to another party, that's two different things because you have to have more tools available to demonstrate something to someone other than having witnessed something yourself. That doesn't mean that what you experienced is not an objective truth or fact.
Someone could run up behind you and push you over and because you experienced it that is what makes it a fact, you observed someone pushing you over. However you have to have more than your word to "prove" it to someone else even though it did happen, maybe a video, another witness or you get the guy that shoved you to admit it. Either way, regardless if you have the means to prove it it still objectively happened. That is what experience is.
Subjective means to be influence by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions....if you experience something objective those factors are irrelevant, and not all experiences are subjective, not even remotely.
You cannot compare all experience and observation to mental illness because mental illness is a malfunction, you wouldn't take a faulty tool and compare it to a normal functioning tool as a means to fix something. That would be stupid, a normal functioning tool is meant to solve problems whereas a malfunctioning tool loses its ability to solve those problems.
I can take my experience playing guitar and objectively prove to you that I can play it by my own experience. That means I can use my experience and objectively show you it's true, that I can play. There's different kinds of experience of course, where I could demonstrate my experience but then there's first hand witness or testimony, where I have no means of demonstrating something other than by testifying. It doesn't change the reality that to experience something is to objectively know it.
Created:
Posted in:
I don't know why, but I'm having difficulty logging in. I've never had an issue before but lately I cannot sign in, it just keeps saying "oops, there's a problem"....if I try several times in a row I might get lucky and it will log me in. Anyone else having this problem??
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
For what may it be like being burnt to ash after you die. Its gotta hurt.Or would it ?
Lol, you can only experience pain through the nervous system of the physical body, and that only occurs while you are consciously awake within the body. Once the soul leaves the physical body after brain death, which occurs after the heart stops beating your experience will be outside the confines of your earthly body. You will be present within the subtle body, what people refer to as the spirit body. This is the subtle layer that confines you to the next parallel world.
But once the brain shuts down, there's no more use or feeling of the nervous system that is prevalent within only that body. Think of the physical body as merely a piece of machinery, that you use to navigate this world but you are only temporarily using it. Once that piece of machinery breaks down, there is no more use of it. The nervous system that you experience within the body can only function while there is blood flow and brain activity, at least your experience of it. So no, when you are being cremated you aren't experiencing being burned lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Surely a soul couldn't ummmmmm survive being burnt to ash.
That contradicts the meaning of having a soul. Soul means to survive the death of the body and the body of course just being a vehicle or vessel which the soul occupies.
Oh but by that time ya soul would have already flown away.
Correct, once the body loses function the soul separates from the physical body and leaves it behind. In other words your conscious experience will continue.
Or woukd it have ?
Yes it would have, cremation is done after brain death and after the heart stops beating. By then, the soul has no more use of the physical body, it would have been long gone. Actually, as soon as the brain shuts down the soul is already detaching from that body.
When does ya soul leave your body ?
As soon as normal function of the physical body begins to shut down. When your physical body experiences death, you will then experience leaving or separating from the physical body and most likely you will watch your body as it lays there lifeless. From there your conscious experience will prevail, you will be present within a parallel reality.
Can i say leave ?
Yes, why yes you can.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgmi
do you agree that it's a stupid theory for atheists to just assume people hallucinate elaborate afterlife stories when they die?
Well TBH it doesn't surprise me, they have to make up crap to support their materialistic assertions. Is it stupid? yeah on one level it is, the fact they don't attribute conscious experience outside the confines of the brain and body as evidence of a soul or at the very least consider it is foolish because that is exactly what it supposes. It's not like the concept of souls, paranormal encounters and afterlife experience haven't been recorded and presented for as long as humans have existed.
NDE's are flat out evidence that such propositions exist, but instead of taking those witnesses at face value they are forced to conjure up stories about brains as if they even know how anything works at all.
Now, this is in spite of the fact that NDE's take place after no signs of brain activity, as that is what defines an NDE.
Then, gullible people like Ludo aren't aware of the reality that a soul cannot come back into the body if the body has been damaged beyond the point of a soul being able to use it again, so obviously if someone's head gets blown off an NDE (coming back) is not possible lol. That's not proof that NDE's aren't actual or that conscious experience doesn't extend beyond the life of the brain, that's only proof that the soul needs a body that is still capable of normal function at some point to re-occupy it...Once death is final, the soul moves on, obviously a near death experience can only occur if the physical body is resuscitated. An NDE can only happen if the physical body is in a condition where it is reusable, then a soul may re-enter that body to tell of their encounter.
But brain death can occur while it is deprived of oxygen and blood flow depending upon an injury, and once the death of the brain happens the souls conscious experience continues outside the confines of that brain because it exists independent of that brain. As I've told Ludo before, the brain is simply a conduit or component that confines the conscious experience to a material body and as the brain shuts down conscious experience continues.
This is shown through NDE's on a worldwide scale, not just a few here and there. It has also been shown through spirituality and religion for eons and is thoroughly understood in these circles as a fact, not some silly hallucination or dreams. People that have spiritual experiences and NDE's are fully aware of what normal conscious experience is, and no one can tell them that what they experienced is anything other than what it was.
why do you think atheists have such stupid ideas? why do they have this deep seated need to disbelieve?
Confirmation bias you know...what they blame others for lol. That's the irony, and it's also a bit of irony as a group of followers they portray themselves as the superior bunch that follows the evidence, but when evidence of a soul is evident they sweep it under the rug. As I said above, they are FORCED to adopt any theory that confirms their deep seated materialistic worldview.
Now, when an NDE occurs we aren't just talking about someone having a normal body experience. We are talking about the soul separating from the physical body as they watch themselves leave it! and are fully able to leave the confines of that body and have clear, vivid experiences as life continues in a parallel world. That is paramount, because it specifically highlights the fact that the soul can detach from the physical body and physical world and fully operate.
Everyone knows that normal conscious experience (as that being experienced through the physical body) always takes place within the confines of that body. In other words no one experiences leaving their physical body unless death occurs, an OBE occurs or a spiritual encounter takes place. Because normally, while the physical body is in normal operation, the brain is the component that isolates the souls conscious experience to that body to be able to interact within this world. Its job is to confine your perceptions through that brain and body, and as long as the soul occupies the brain there will be activity within that brain just like with any electrical component or conduit.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ludofl3x
Present said useful information and we can discuss it. You've threatened to do so before, then just barf up a similar word salad of what I guess you think sounds super deep and insightful and profound, when really it's just you being self impressed. I once again invite you do showcase this 'useful information and knowledge.' Except you will preface it with "ignore everything that is demonstrable in real life, otherwise you will never believe my blahdiblah." Can you do it without this condition?
Sorry Boner, but the days of you idiots pretending you have some superior ideology is over. You didn't present Jack shit, and then here you acting like I don't have any skin in the game even though if you examine the content of our posts I'm the only one who presented anything insightful and profound as you stand by and mock it lol. Here is what the materialist idiot presented....
"For me, the world is material. It is made of matter. Ideas might be 'immaterial,' such as an idea about a god, but if I take SkepticalOne's meaning, those ideas can only happen in a human brain, which is, you guessed it, made of matter. Without that matter, there are no ideas. "
Here you pretend once again that you have some superior knowledge by presenting some stale azz superficial statement and then can't even explain how it works.....present a useful analogy of how matter creates a conscious being other than what you will probably pretend is useful information that neurons firing create consciousness, can you give a reason to believe such trash? No, all you have is a stale azz statement, then you mock me even though I put all the thought into my premise.
I don't need to present anything other than what I did in an attempt to connect reality to a very good analogy while you did nothing, ohh...but sit back and pretend you are some superior expertise of reality and consciousness when in fact you are just an ignorant stubborn fool. Nice try though, your schtick is getting old, in fact you sound like a regular dumb butt.
Yes, agree so far, this is a good start...
Ohh, good boy, you see very clearly how the body is nothing more than a piece of material blob without the presence of your soul. Lets see how long that will last.
Oh no...we're already off the rails.
Are we? you had no objection above.....
This would require demonstration of the soul. Where is it detectable in the body
You missed the whole point, measuring activity in the brain is the same as measuring the presence of the soul within the body. Measuring activity within a circuit board is the same as measuring the presence of electricity. Circuit boards don't create electricity, brains don't create consciousness.
like the electricity firing the neurons and various other electro-chemical reactions that we can confirm actually exist and happen in real time?
You don't get it do ya? let me put it this way, you can't prove neurons firing create consciousness, if you tried to make that claim you are a liar. It is simply activity, nothing more and it happens as a result of the energetic presence of the soul and I gave you an analogy of how that works. Consciousness is an open question in science, whereas it is completely understood in spirituality. You can rattle off statements about neurons and chemical reactions but you have no idea of the mechanics behind such a reality.
If you were a collection of chemical reactions and neurons firing everything you experience would be nothing but flashes of existence, if it could even generate consciousness at all....like someone flicking a light switch on and off. There would be absolutely no real coherence. Rather you are first a conscious being, that is temporally inhabiting an inanimate material vehicle. It is nothing but a mask you are filtering your experience through. Your fleshy soft brain exists because your presence needs a proper conduit to confine your energetic being.
Please define 'energetic presence' in a useful way. If it's measurable, it should be definable. Also, it would need to be independent of the measurable reactions we already know about, right? Otherwise you'd just be adding "the soul powers these reactions" without demonstrating the soul exists.
This has been thoroughly explained with the analogy of the circuit board and appliances. You're acting like it doesn't qualify as an explanation in any way. Maybe it's your lack of comprehension? well it ain't mine. All you materialists can do is measure activity, I gave you a solid premise of why you can measure any activity at all. Energetic presence is followed by conscious activity, your very being generates energy. It is measurable, only you think the activity that is measured in the brain creates your consciousness when it is in fact the activity within the brain that is generated by your conscious being. In the same way we can measure electrical activity within a circuit panel because that panel is a conduit of electricity.
Yes, we can hook up instruments and measure it...and no, we don't assume the electrical components create electricity, they utilize it.
Very good, looks like you have some sign of intelligence. Well, I'm not sure about that....
We absolutely CAN, though, generate electricity, you are aware of that, right? Like it's not magic.
Don't get stupid, the analogy is supposed to give you a clear idea of what I'm presenting, I know the difference between electricity and consciousness. This is also why I presented the analogy of energy, simply showing you how the nature of consciousness is both utilized through components and form but also exists independent of those factors. Consciousness is not magic, though believing activity in the brain creates consciousness is certainly magic especially if you can't articulate how that's possible.
Can we generate a soul? Why not, do you think? Why doesn't the circuitboard's soul get credit for the electricity? Or the appliance's soul?
I don't think you understand the analogy or how electricity is harnessed and conducted through electrical components, unless you of course are becoming a wishful thinker here. The soul (consciousness) exists independent of the confines of the material body, the material body is used as a component to isolate your conscious experience to this world, as an interface to interact within the physical constructs of our universe.
Please define "you" in this sentence,
Your conscious being, the animated force that makes up what you are. The observer of the material body and all of its sense perception.
presuming it's different from your demonstration of the soul.
No it is not. Consciousness is what you are, that is what I have been demonstrating to you. Your consciousness is not dependent upon your physical body, if you left the physical body you would still be you, the observer.
And are you saying matter wouldn't exist at all without our being conscious of it?
What I'm saying is that the constructs of matter would not exist without the intelligence behind it to make it possible. God creates the universe, and material bodies evolved through processes to what they are so that your soul could inhabit them as a means of interfacing within this world.
Created:
Posted in:
----> @FLRW
And you're one of the most crippled people in this forum, you don't even know it do ya lol? Mr. Brain Lesions and don't even know what they are... you run around supporting all these silly azz materialists like a leach, blood sucking the life out of out dated and foolish thinking and on top of that believing you are some superior individual because you regurgitate some link of some retard that doesn't know their own azz from a hole in your brain. Did you know that most of these atheists here probably think you are stupid?
If you want a conversation with me, you'll have to start with scratch, because I've already waded through all the childish BS you pretend you understand. I'll need to see your raw thoughts as they exist as conditioned stupidity, before I even think about entertaining your nonsense. So you can keep trailing me with your brainless posts, but will you ever confront me with yourself? I don't think so, you'll hide behind your mask you created as a front to hide your idiocy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
@ludofl3x
For me, the world is material. It is made of matter. Ideas might be 'immaterial,' such as an idea about a god, but if I take SkepticalOne's meaning, those ideas can only happen in a human brain, which is, you guessed it, made of matter. Without that matter, there are no ideas. Do I have that right, SkepticalOne?
Your idea of the world is crippled by your belief that matter and brains create your conscious being. Your idea of consciousness is impaired by your own materialistic ideology so there's not much I can do with you. I can present an analogy of electricity and appliances and how they are distinct from one another yet how one uses the other to operate itself.....and how you can measure electrical activity within a circuit board but that circuit board does not create electricity it only confines it.....I can present an analogy about energy and how it exists both within form yet independent of form and just because every form we observe possesses energy it doesn't mean that forms create energy and I can correlate the same distinction about your conscious soul and it may make sense to you. But even that won't have any effect upon your stubborn belief in materialism because that is what you have accepted as true so no amount of evidence or reasoning will suffice.
Besides having you consider my realistic observations about your conscious awareness and how it all works it should be innate to you about what you are and what matter is, you would have to be willing to move all your materialistic baggage and trash out of the way but will you? what would be the point in me giving you any useful information and knowledge just for you to turn around and repeat the same things?
Your conscious being is confined to a material body, your brain is a conduit that isolates and conducts the flow of consciousness to isolate your experience through the physical body so what? the second your consciousness leaves the physical body it will be a still born blob, it is your soul that animates and powers the body....we can measure your energetic presence within the body because your soul powers it. You are not a series of impulses and neurons firing silly atheist, your brains neurons fire because of the energetic presence of your being. You can hook up and electrical meter and read electrical signals within any component that conducts and confines electricity because of the presence of electrical current but do we assume that electrical components create electricity? do we assume all the appliances in your kitchen generate the flow of electrical power? no, that would be stupid.
Likewise your material body is there as a piece of machinery so that you may usefully interact within the material world, that you may be confined to space and time in a form that exists as part of the material construct. But you as the powering energetic force within the body exist independent of that form. Consciousness is not a property of matter, matter is a construct of consciousness.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
such as
Mind over matter has been displayed for you in many different ways. Not only is it displayed in human terms, but of the universe itself and the products thereof. I'll let you think on that.
You wouldn't want to exist in any possible world where matter ruled over mind in totality lol, even though consciousness is limited by forms in a material world it is only because its temporarily confined to it. Even though that presents a challenge, its easy to see that your conscious will exists independent of your material body. This can be shown by your will and ability to control oneself, constrain, restrain, discipline, wait, resist, abstain or be patient. All those factors show how your will is separate from any mechanical instincts.
The processes of the universe show how mind and thought are the very directives of matter, as it exists as an inanimate feature.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
Things often claimed to be immaterial are contingent upon material.
Things often claimed to be material are contingent upon the immaterial.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The creation of one universe is the re-initiation of the previous universe.Re-initiation requires a GOD principle. Which will be generated by previous intelligence/s.Therefore we, and what may follow us in terms of alternative intelligence and GOD principle, will eventually bring about the re-initiation of the next universe.And so the process (evolution of matter) will start all over again.....New life, new intelligence new GOD principle....New religion I expect.Maybe remnants of the old GOD survives the collapse and re-initiation of the old and new universes
To make this even remotely possible, as in make sense, there must be a continuum of the first (God) principle. You can't have a first principle which collapses and re-initiates Itself lol. You must have an overarching principle which continues infinitely through any series of events. For there to be a creation and a re-creation something must have full control over such a process. So while there is always the option of new creation, there is no option of new God, creation is then the only changing factor which exists within an unchanging infinite intelligence.
Intelligence is simply a product of conscious awareness, so don't be afraid to understand God as a conscious intelligent Reality.....which fully understands the products It produces. And we don't really have to invoke religion to come to this conclusion even though it touches on some religious ideals.
So if eternity is a reality, so is the first principle that carries over into the re-initiation of the universe. The re-initiation of creation does not require a re-initiation of the God principle, there must be a factor which makes the continuum of events coherent. So the nature of God is eternal, where any series of events take place within that Reality. Consciousness is unaffected by the processes of the universe because It is not a product of the universe, the universe is a product of It. Consciousness can be confined and reduced to form to isolate it, but like energy it also exists independent of form. And consciousness (intelligence) like energy is a continuum independent of any changes or phenomenon that take place within our universe.
This is also why you can correlate the products of energy with intelligence, because energy is manipulated through intelligent processes. Energy, like awareness is neither created nor destroyed and so they actually co-exist, with energy being the byproduct of conscious activity and generated by the very presence of awareness.
Created:
Posted in:
---> @FLRW
any brain lesions
Hey Dum Dum, do you even know how damage to brain tissue is caused? did you know that people of all beliefs of all kinds may or may not have brain lesions? that it doesn't matter whether one is theist, atheist or anything else? did you know that it is probably likely you yourself have them? did you know that you can see brain lesions appear as a disfigurement in the upper section of the radii solaris of the iris? did you know that brain lesions can be repaired and how? did you know that dum dums like yourself get fixated on stupid statements they really know nothing about and keep repeating them? did you know that your conditioned lack of original thinking is easily seen by your constant and annoying quoting of other dummies?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
To your standards, it doesn't exist.
Existence is either actual or not, that's the only standard. Our beliefs, ideas and concepts exist independent of God's existence.
We could not prove that God actually exists besides it being an idea.
To prove something to oneself is different than proving it to another. You can establish the validity of a truth to yourself while not being able to demonstrate anything to anyone else. I would only want to believe in something as it exists in reality, not just an idea. Not being able to prove it, again is irrelevant to whether or not God exists.
We could only believe it, as an idea that guides us.
I don't think belief is sufficient as it stands. You as a soul aren't really separate from God so at a deeper conscious level there is much more than mere belief. God is experience, albeit extending beyond the material sense perceptions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Lol, God either exists or does not exist, one or the other. Whether or not we can prove that existence is irrelevant. So are you saying God is fiction or non-fiction?
Created:
Posted in:
What's happening between material and immaterial is the reality of what we can measure vs what we cannot measure, that's basically it. This scenario is much like a painting where God would be the canvas and the painting itself creation. In this scenario, we can only measure the products of the paint and not the canvas itself because that is what we see and observe. Materialists gather that only the products of the paint exist, because they are what we can see and measure and of course what we can't measure does not exist. However just like the painting, the canvas still exists despite us not seeing it, it is under the paint...all we see is the painting itself but the paint can only present itself because of the canvas.
You could also say that the canvas is the universe....the paint the products that exist in the universe and of course God as the Painter, but I wanted to simulate the idea that creation exists within God or that God is the backdrop of the painting. I don't want to paint the idea that God is somewhere outside of the canvas painting an image onto it because all things exist within God. In this way I think presenting God as the canvas itself paints a more accurate image.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
god as an idea exists
Ideas don't exist in reality as actual unless they are real. Santa Clause for example, exists as an idea but not in reality. Which is it?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
God, if it exists, is an idea and a concept.
But ideas and concepts aren't animated things they are inanimate. If you say God is inanimate there is no actual existence. So God either exists or doesn't, if you say God exists then God is more than an idea or concept, and is a Reality.
God as a concept only exists because God is defined as an Entity, not an idea.
This doesn't mean God is material though, in the sense of how we define material.
God exists because God is conscious though disembodied. Consciousness IS what defines God as existing and also what defines God as Being.
Another way to put it is you're saying God is either a real thing or not a real thing. If you say God is just an idea basically you are saying God is not a real thing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Tradesecret
Is God material or immaterial?
Immaterial in the sense that God exists independent of the material world. Or better put, exists prior to the material world, in other words before anything existed in our material world God existed.
Is the world material or immaterial?
The products and objects within the world are "material", but they are set within an infinite backdrop which is immaterial.
I only use the term "immaterial" though as a means to make a distinction between God and what can be measured in our material world.
The effects of God can be measured but not the substance of God, and by substance I only mean the conscious Reality of God....the very nature of God, meaning what God is. Some might use the term soul but the nature of soul is to be conscious, they are the same thing.
We could also use the terms animate and inanimate......material itself is inanimate while consciousness or soul is animate.
A good analogy here would be likened to your kitchen with an array of various appliances and we will call those appliances inanimate. Then we have electricity which we will call animate, and electricity exists independent of those appliances but is the substance that powers (animates) all the products within the kitchen. For this analogy we will say that the appliances are material and the electricity is immaterial. Material would be the inanimate objects that electricity animates. So compared to creation, material created things are animated by consciousness or soul.
Is there anything apart from God that is immaterial?
If I claim God is immaterial this question doesn't make much sense. Immaterial only falls under one category, it's the same category God is in.
If God exists, It is a conscious Reality (awareness) that does not rely on the material construct of the universe to exist.
If a conscious Reality exists independent of the material constructs of the universe then that conscious Reality is immaterial.
The material world is only a product of that conscious Reality, God is not a product of the material world, the material world and everything within it are created things.
If the material world and everything in it are created things God cannot be a material object because God is not a created thing. God does not need anything material or created to exist. likewise, consciousness does not need anything material or created to exist.
However, in order that consciousness (soul) interacts within the material world it would need a material or physical apparatus to interface within a physical simulation. Much like your kitchen, electricity (consciousness) uses appliances (material) to become something useful in your kitchen.
So basically we are categorizing products of creation as material, and uncreated things as immaterial.
Taking this a bit deeper, we could say that because all things that exist originate from one single Source that ultimately there is no real distinction because one thing comes from the other (or out of the other), making all things either material or all things immaterial because at some level everything connects. The problem here though is categorization in human terms and how we measure things. We can measure things that are created (which are the effects of God) but we can't measure the uncreated.
Since we can't physically harness God it is something we can't really measure, and if we can't measure it it's not something we would classify as material. So because of this problem per say, we need another category for whatever it is we can't measure, hence immaterial.
The religious world makes up their own terms for the distinction between the material and the immaterial, you may hear terms like soul, spirit, disembodiment, spiritual, life force, consciousness ect ect... basically it's simply a classification of what we experience between two seemingly contrasting observations. We can physically see and touch one and not the other. So determining things through sense perception there appears to be a distinction, even if it some level there is none.
This brings me to how all things are interconnected and the processes by which God brings things into existence (which I won't get into yet), and the reality of God's existence and the processes by which all things are created are the only real distinction we are looking at between what we label as being material or immaterial.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
I am a 'bit rigid, about my view of the world, though in view, not conversation of it.I've thought before, how I might try going about changing my view, of disbelief in the paranormal, supernatural, anything 'more than what I'm expecting.Only method that comes to mind is a solitary road trip of every location I can lay ears on, that's claimed to 'be such,But I expect such a search would come to naught.Other than that, for me it's just asking people's view on souls, now and then, listening to what they say.
Well I wouldn't expect you to change your world view to prove you are open-minded, perhaps we all are a bit rigid after we accept a worldview. The first step is to consider information and knowledge, once you have good knowledge you can weigh that information against reality and your own intuition.
A lot of people believe they can't trust their intuition or instincts, they seem to believe they have access to objective truths and perhaps there is some truth to that. The problem with that is objective facts may only correlate with one particular nature of experience, for example facts about nature or the material world are only true about the material world and they don't exceed those boundaries. They don't reveal what's true beyond the threshold of the material experience, and you could end up believing that's all that exists.
What people might not consider is that intuition is not a conditioned process, whereas other people's thoughts about reality can be. But because there are indeed objective truths about reality, it's good practice to consider your intuition as a means to come to terms with what body of knowledge is true.
If I can give you information that makes sense to your rational mind, you should consider and in that alone you are being flexible and open-minded rather than just fluffing it off or mocking me.
The reason it's good that we expand on any discussion about spirituality is so you can see how it all fits together and works. Not anybody can do that, actually the majority of religious people are fixated on a particular dogma and they really don't care whether or not you understand the mechanics and more than not, they can't get to the mechanics anyways because their ideology cannot connect to reality.
Here's an objective fact for you, there's more evidence and experience for spirituality over the course of human history than any other single topic. As a matter of fact human experience and spiritual phenomenon are so intertwined together they are nearly inseparable as a pair. If you were to take that fact at face value without having any preconceived ideas about it, you have a solid starting point to consider that there is indeed a transcendent reality.
NDE's for example, are flat out evidence that the soul exists independent of the physical body. Yet, you don't have to believe that and can make up all kinds of excuses for why people could leave the confines of the brain and body and have clear conscious experiences but it doesn't change the fact that we have evidence in favor of the proposition of a soul. Now if we add in paranormal encounters that take place all over the world the evidence is incredibly overwhelming that souls exist outside the domain of the material construct, and we can get into the mechanics of how that works.
The tendency to assert that people are just imagining crap will stem from the assumption that the material world is all that exists, and God is just a product of wishful thinking. Let me remind you how foolish that is to sweep mounds of evidence under the rug just for a false worldview. The truth be told, atheism has no way of accounting for the full scope of human experience and to believe it's a superior way of life is nonsense.
But as I said earlier, at some point you're going to begin to rub shoulders with your spiritual nature because that is what you truly are. Time is not an issue here though, you can play the material world game as long as you like because your spiritual journey is endless. The downfall is that your own beliefs will determine your experience, your canvas will never take on new images as long as you keep painting materialism all over it. You can't experience something beyond what you believe. The best way to be open-minded and take on new experience is to keep your canvas fresh and new, ready to be painted over with reality that extends beyond your current beliefs. This will probably happen several times over because spirituality is a cultivation, the reality of creation and God are so vast and dynamic you will always encounter fresh knowledge.
When you leave this world you want to have gathered and considered as much useful information possible, it's more fun when you can control your own journey rather than just blowing in the wind. It's not all just about gathering info either, there's many things for you to apply and experience.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Bro D is smarter than you might think.
Lol doubtful, I've seen enough of his posts to get a good idea of what a dumb fool he is. Perhaps you're not that bright to begin with and that's why he appears "smart" to you. Your idea of smart and my idea of smart go in two different directions.
Even still, it has nothing to do with the fact he's a weirdo. And it doesn't surprise me you would think highly of one.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
If you're used to the assumption that souls don't exist and accepting that your material body somehow creates consciousness I can imagine what I'm writing comes across as very foreign but since there's a very good chance what I'm saying is true then on the other hand it should also be somewhat innate to you.
But please feel free to expand on the discussion or ask me anything about it. If you're open minded (which I get the sense you aren't a rigid jerk) at the very least I'll give you some legit things to consider. This part of the site could use a lot more normal and mature exchanges as well.
Created:
Posted in:
What is a soul to you,Your definition of it,Or gist of what you consider it?
Soul itself is simply consciousness, at least that is the nature of it. It's the you that is observing everything that you experience through the physical body. It's more than what you just observe through the physical body though, but because your soul is confined to the physical body it creates the illusion that you are one with the body lol, or that the body is you. It's a neat trick, but that is what it is supposed to do.
Your perceptions are filtered through the conduit of the brain like electricity through any component, and like electricity and energy consciousness exists independent of any component, appliance or form. The job of the brain and body are to filter your conscious experience through the conduit of the material body and confine your experience to its location, and as you entered the body through the womb your soul was caged to the brain and nervous system as it was developed, and all your perceptions as an individual were developed through those components.
But you as the soul exist independent of those factors, and we clearly see the soul leaving the confines of the brain and physical body during NDE's, which of course presents evidence that the proposition of the soul is a real factor, not just something someone made up.
The soul in a nutshell, is the immaterial self, the observer, the inner man that makes up who you really are. You aren't just a wad of neurons firing lol, your brain is simply a conduit that confines your conscious experience to a body. Neurons fire because your energetic soul needs a proper current and component to conduct its presence. As you exist within the body, the brain measures activity just like reading an electrical current through a circuit board, but the circuit board simply conducts the flow of electricity, it doesn't create it. Likewise the body and brain never create your conscious inner being, you were there before them and you will be there after them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
It's possible that materialism is direct contrast to what we truly are,But it does not seem so to me.
Your soul is subject to all that the material body suffers because that is the vehicle in which you interface with this world. When the material body suffers injury, especially to the brain it's like looking through a warped image, even though the soul is untouched the vehicle cannot properly be operated. Say you were operating a car with a limp tire, well your steering will be effed up right? does that mean you as the driver will walk with a limp once you exit that car?
Imagine yourself operating any piece of machinery that suffers damage, only the machinery (physical body) will malfunction not the operator himself. As long as you are operating that machinery though, the damage will be noticeable.
To my definition of the soul it exists 'quite materially, despite one's hopes is 'not unconquerable, free from the evil of mortal men.All one needs do is interact with another in this material world, and the individual is affected.
The soul is certainly affected by the material world, as only an influence to act accordingly. I do not doubt that. Spirituality shows you the distinction of such influences, to where you as a soul can walk through this world as one just observing it.
The soul is not forced to react to any material influence, it chooses to, whether in a right state of mind or not. Whether in a strong state of mind or weak state of mind. Whatever state of mind though is how you will react or be influenced. The will of the conscious soul exists independent of the material body and material world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
In a materialistic sense,One can still view their soul as existing,Though hardly possessing the robustness of some religions.
Materialism is in contrast to the existence of a soul. It's an ideology that is direct contrast to what you truly are. Now, we also don't need to regurgitate religion to discuss such a topic either.
But it becomes instead, their sense of identity, personality, memory, aspects of oneself in behavior, preference, reaction, self.If I define a soul as I can best define 'ME,I think psychology works well enough.
I respect your beliefs, I won't push the issue beyond what I've said unless you are interested.
For the afterlife, other than my actions reverberating, my energy continuing, there's not much of an afterlife, none at 'all, to my way of thinking.Defining myself more by the existence of my 'particular being, shape, existence.The energy just animates me,The shape could be duplicated perfectly, but that copy wouldn't be 'ME, though being me in 'near every which way.
Your conscious soul generates energy, energy itself isn't what you truly are. Energy isn't animated, consciousness/souls is. As long as you are within creation, your conscious soul will be confined to form that emits energy. Your energy continues because you continue, not the other way around.
I'm rambling,
I like that, it helps me get to know who you are and what you believe about yourself.
A point though, of psychology.Humans commonly 'have the need to believe in an after, give meaning to their existence, a fear of cessation, or a disbelief that it can end.Through psychology, one can understand this, and offer various outlets of expression.
Spirituality opposes the mind, the emotions and what we wish to be the case. So you should consider being open to the possibility that our fears have nothing to do with what exists beyond the physical senses.
That's part of the problem with psychology, they make excuses why people believe the way they do lol. They never consider it is an objective reality, they play on confirmation bias. In other words they will never get you to the truth of the matter.
. . .
My contentedness varies.But I see that variation as part of the human condition.
Okay. But like I said, at some point your inner man will want to come to terms with much more. When that happens, the door will be open to you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
To myself, psychology well enough 'explains aspects of spirituality, though itself does not fulfill them, it does point to various options which can.
Psychology only operates at one level, it's not nearly sufficient for a guy like me but I appreciate that you are currently content. As long as you are content we can't really go there, at a level that surpasses a superficial layer.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
As I don't believe in an afterlife, or the soul, in terms more than psychology, or times I wax poetic.
Can you explain what you mean here. Psychology has no real relevance to the soul or an afterlife other than trying to come up with artificial reasons why people believe and rely on it. In other words, the field of psychology can give you no real objective truths regarding it. They play on confirmation biases, it's a useless game of the intellect that you will not profit much from.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Still, it's more a pastime, than a pursuit.
At some point in your spiritual journey you will need more, much more. More than anything this world can offer you because it's a fraction of what exists and your soul resides at a much deeper level. And when the door opens upon your approval the floodgates of all that you want to learn will wash over you and flood every part of your being but spirituality goes at the pace you dictate it. Me personally, I opened the door at a very young age and it has been a subject matter that fascinates me more than any other topic. I've learned quite a lot in my lifetime, everything you want to know is right at your fingertips. When you are ready the right person will come along and you will know and understand the reality of what they give you.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Spirituality is a bit of a vague term, I 'think.
Good, only in the sense that the term doesn't invoke a particular religious flavor but expresses the relationship between you and a possible transcendent reality.
Personally, I view it a bit as wisdom of the human condition.
Yet it's much more specific than that. The human condition has a lot of baggage to it that has no relevance to spirituality and its purpose. Perhaps the term is vague to you, because you see no objective value in its usage as it pertains to your soul.
Individuals can be wise, without receiving any great education, but their knowledge can be lacking of objective truth at times, seems to me.An example of this could be someone who reads the Bible, by their reading of it, thinking on it, they might come to clever realizations or interpretations.But if the Bible is history in places, needs context for what certain parts mean, then the laypersons wisdom, though valid for themself, others, many situations, is 'still not the truth of the book.
It depends on what you want here. I can play Mr. Christian and play along the dotted lines because I've been around that all my life. But if you want something that is realistic, and that also reflects only the truthfulness of the Bible and the truthfulness of spirituality as a whole I can expand beyond the limits of the Bible as well. All in all, I wouldn't personally trust any Joe Shmoe either about anything related to the Bible. But I would trust someone with experience that can show how things work through their words and knowledge. In other words they have to prove they know what the hell they are talking about, and it begins with logical thought processes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
It really is a shame, that there's so many weirdos in the religious section.
It is, the irony is that the weirdos are usually the ones that are protesting lol. They are obsessed with whatever they are targeting.
Personally, if I wanted to make a serious effort at learning more about religions, I'd reach out to scholars, religious teachers, church leaders, and such.
Well, the interesting thing about spirituality is that it doesn't take a scholar, religious teachers and church leaders to give you something real you can digest and learn from. It's a nice sediment and a lot of those kinds of folks have something to offer, but how deep can they take you is the question? I've put a lot of time, application and observation to bring something of value for anyone who wants to know some things. And I'm not going to feed you dogma or indoctrination, unless its dogma that is useful. So feel free to engage me in any subject, I'm a normal guy entertaining a topic that many find abnormal lol, my passion is guys like you and folks that aren't obsessed with preaching their beliefs and that don't care about learning anything.
Even when I try and engage the normal members, it's the weirdos that target my posts mostly, pretty much like in this thread.
But myself, my minds made up, that learning about religion, is 'not a serious effort for myself.
What about learning about spirituality? as it pertains to you personally?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@aaaa
Let me know if you wish to discuss anything further, or have any questions about what I wrote. We need more normal people in this forum to have discussions, there's a few weirdos with obsessions here.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Even iff you were a completely disembodied spiritghostangelgod, you would still be INFLUENCED and CONSTRAINED by your own EXPERIENCES, MEMORIES, AND DESIRES AND OR GOALS.
I don't see how this negates the fact that the will of the conscious soul is independent of the physical body and it's needs. The physical body only dictates certain aspects of our experience, and that is because it is the vehicle in which you navigate and interface within this world.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@aaaa
But would indifference to God be punished?
Nah, your feelings about God really make no difference one way or another. Now, this is between me and you and not about what religious people say. As you can see there are people here fixated on the Bible, so be careful what you write lol.
What if I believed that God was real but I didn't really adore or praise him
Well I have to admit I don't really understand what would keep you from feeling reverence towards God but beliefs are irrelevant and you are not forced to feel any one way or another. You will always be within God anyways, everywhere you go God is there so it's not like you will ever be separate from God. You're much closer to God than you might think.
and didn't accept Jesus as my lord and savior and all that, would I be sent to hell?
You may not be permitted to enter the Christian Kingdom of Heaven, but no, hell is a prison for crimes against creation. It simply helps keep order among the peaceful, you don't want to leave earth only to be a victim of renegade souls lol.
There's many options within creation of where you may go other than hell or the Bible's version of heaven. The Kingdom of Heaven is only but one single planet among endless other created beautiful places within the God worlds. Just be a good lad and you will have lots of fun. You have a very long journey ahead of you, and along that journey your feelings about God may change in many directions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@aaaa
Is it ever talked about in the Bible?
Again, to "worship" God is simply an attitude or position of respect....
John 15
4Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
9As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
10If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
5I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.
9As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love.
10If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@aaaa
Some people have a bizarre idea of what it means to worship, did you know it basically means reverence and adoration? so the question you are asking is "does God want to be reverenced and a recipient of adoration?" The question for me is why wouldn't you? who wouldn't reverence and adore their own Maker, a Being that far surpasses any other being in every single way? do you have any idea who God is?
But to answer your question, it's more of an attitude or positioning in such a relationship as one of the student and the Master. We should always be aware of the reality that we really are of no comparison to God in the sense that we are in a position of frailty, and there's nothing wrong with that so we look to God with adoration and respect knowing that we are on the receiving end of learning and growing.
Even if we are ultimately in unison with God at the soul level, while in these bodies and in creation we submit ourselves to the higher consciousness because we are confined to a limited state of observation. So again, it's about knowing what positioning we are in as being the lesser half.
But it's not a forced state of mind to adore and reverence God, honestly it should simply come naturally. Anyone who looks to God with disrespect or has a snot nosed attitude is either just too immature or they really have no clue what God means and how that relates to them.
Created:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
This is actually the Hellenistic Pagan view (Greek Paganism). From the texts the first thing was Chaos (not really a god per se) in which is the 'first thing' which the various primordial gods come from (and some primordial gods come from the very first of the primordials), and it is through these gods that everything exists.
Sorry, but there is a huge gap between the first thing being chaos to various primordial gods. I mean seriously, there is no connection to reality or any connection to each proposition. This is disorganized at best, perhaps there's more to the texts itself. It in no way demonstrates anything I propose. I tend to lean towards the view that consciousness is the first reality, it poses as the universal, infinite and ever-pervasive fundamental reality out of which all things arise. But I don't represent any particular religious source I look at them as a whole and evaluate what they have to offer.
I think Vedic Hinduism, Eckankar and Buddhism have a decent grasp on the order of existence. It's well known in Hinduism also that there are various incarnations or gods that come out of a universal Reality. Brahman is a good starting point in describing this way of thinking.
But again, I'm piecing things together adding all things into the equation coming from all fields of knowledge not just one. So pardon me if you get the impression that my views are a tad spread out, but they are indeed tight and organized and I've paid my dues and put the time in to present to you what I observe as most accurate propositions. Religious knowledge and information is based upon what their practitioners and founders understood about reality and spirituality, and that being the case there are levels of understanding.
Not everything one source claims is correct and not all things are incorrect within that sphere of learning.
You won't really find many people presenting you with both Mono and Poly Theistic knowledge with the added bonus of tying in what we understand about the material world. It is indeed though one massive portrait where all these things fit together in harmony and it does begin with a singular Reality. It has to be that way, because as you break down the nature of energy and consciousness apart from creation there is only one way you can go. It's not a bad thing, it is not confrontational, it is easy to understand and absorb. And anything easy to absorb should also be innate to yourself, once you get the mind out of the way lol, where conditioned thoughts and confusion pervade.
Created:
I would like to say that there is good, sufficient reasoning to the suggestion that consciousness (awareness) is the fundamental principle of our existence. It answers for why energy and processes within the universe act as an intelligent force. To accept otherwise would be to accept that inanimate forces can begin to produce intelligent processes, which boils down to an absurdity.
This is why I resent the idea that to believe in a Creator is the stupid option, the irony is that it is nonsense to believe that inanimate forces could ever create anything at all, much less begin to generate processes using inanimate materials and creating intelligent results lol.
So I'm not just aimlessly proposing such a thing, just to support my own worldviews. The indication (evidence) that the universe is a product of awareness is probably the most solid proposition that exists, and there really are only two options. Either consciousness (God) is the fundamental principle or God does not exist (materialism). And only one of those propositions fit with the evidence.
Created:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
This is actually the Hellenistic Pagan view (Greek Paganism). From the texts the first thing was Chaos (not really a god per se) in which is the 'first thing' which the various primordial gods come from (and some primordial gods come from the very first of the primordials), and it is through these gods that everything exists.It is, itself, an interesting idea, and it is one of the reasons why polytheism is apriori more likely than monotheism, as polytheism can become true even if there is a single 'grounding'/god but monotheism cannot become true if there are multiple.
Well because in essence, multiple gods are the expression of a single Platform. So it's basically a single Platform expressing Itself in various ways through various incarnations. So while it appears there are various gods, rulers and demigods they come from the same Source. If you wish to maintain that monotheism can't be true because of that I don't really care as long as you can see how both concepts could be compatible. The issue is whether or not you truly understand what I'm saying, and how it works.
Lets pretend you are the original Platform, and you are an eternal, conscious creative force that exists alone and you decide to create a game (creation) or a simulation to have an experience apart from the alone state. So you create the game (simulation), and within the game you can download yourself into characters within the simulation to have the experience of living in that game. Since you are the creator of the game, aren't you going to want to create as many characters in that game you can play roles in? you're eventually going to get bored per say just incarnating into one being, so you create many beings...boss's, kings, rulers, gods or whatever...the point is to make the simulation as interesting as you can.
Even though you are one single Creator of that game, you can invent many personalities and beings you can incarnate into. And even though within that game there are many beings, they ultimately are just expressions of your own creativity. In polytheism, only the various beings exist within creation or the "game", and they all have various roles within creation but they all originate from a single Creator. Does that make sense?
Now within this concept there exists a hierarchy which involves every single being. And within this game there are real objectives, progressions and climaxes. This all is revealed through the various and vast forms of spirituality in each of our worlds. This of course means that there is a spiritual journey for each person, and to ultimately understand who and what they are, where they come from ect ect.
I actually disagree. Just as under monotheism the single god is a necessary existence there is no reason to think that there cannot be multiple necessary existences which ground the single reality. Think of it as when you look at a skyscraper, you can trace back its history and find multiple sources in which are responsible for creating it. So to with the universe.
This basically goes back to the nature of consciousness, what it is and how it exists. I went over a lot of this and showed how it works. Comparing consciousness as the fundamental reality to energy is the best way to articulate what I would want to you catch here. Once you strip away creation and form there can only be a singular Reality. Above, I compared that Reality to a body of water. Separation, duality, contrast, forms and opposing forces come into play only in creation, outside of that there is only one fundamental principle out of which all things arise. Now, this falls in line with what we know about energy and the evolution of processes within the universe which means it's not just logical to start with a single premise but it stays true to the evidence. Even if we just look at the process of evolution as a concept, starting with something very simple perhaps a single thing and then becoming various things.
I don't see any real reason to approach this azz backwards.
You misunderstand, the Unified Theory of Everything is a concept in physics and mathematics that there can exist one fundamental equation/theory in which all scientific understanding can ultimately boil down to. Just as you can rewrite chemistry concepts using only physics, and theoretically the same can apply with biology to chemistry, the idea is that all science can be expressed through one theory/formula.
I did, I got ahead of myself. However what I wrote is very relevant. I would posit though that creation and a Creator as it stands by itself is a universal idea and one that works within all Theistic propositions. It would just be a matter of creating a bridge between the Monotheistic concept and Polytheistic concept and I did that. All of religion and spirituality can be expressed through one theory that consciousness precedes matter, that intelligence precedes creation. The general idea of creation is simplistic, in other words there are basic universal concepts. I personally don't think it is that complicated if we remove dogma from the concept of Creator.
It is not ipso facto tied to theism, I proposed a connection. If there is one single theory in which can explain how all the universe itself operates it becomes easier to say that there is a single 'grounding' for the universe (which, as pointed out, still wouldn't necessarily mean monotheism is true, just would be useful when arguing for it), but if this is not the case then it can be argued that there are many.
I went out of my way to tie not only the universe with a Creator, but also the concept of creation to our understanding of scientific theories together as a whole lol. I understand there are many ideas involved outside of what I proposed but I've put the time in to bring to you a universal, solid explanation of how everything works and I haven't even really elaborated on it yet. You may not know it yet, but I worked in monotheism, polytheism and scientific theory all in one seamless package, where else will you find that? I made it easy to digest.
And as it is a concept within science, specifically physics, I thus took the argument from physicists that such a thing likely doesn't exist.
I'm not sure about that, perhaps I need to brush up on quantum mechanics and physics. Perhaps you're just taking a particular side for the sake of your argument here but my understanding of quantum theory and looking at the Big Bang theory I don't see how you can confidently arrive at such a conclusion. To me, it just seems sloppy.
As for your arguments about energy and consciousness, how only a single god can exist before creation, etc. I need to reread it again as, to me, it isn't necessarily clear at first read what is trying to be said.
Yeah do that please, it's hard to chop a dynamic topic into a few short paragraphs but feel free to ask me or argue anything I wrote about it. It's pretty simple really, once you fully understand what consciousness is and the nature of it you can put the pieces together. Consciousness as a fundamental reality exists independent of form and matter, so if you remove form and matter (creation) then there is no separation or contrast, it's simply a single Reality. That's why I like to compare consciousness to energy or a body of water so you can conceptualize how everything that exists, exists within that body of water.
Like energy, consciousness (awareness) is the fabric of our existence and within that fabric arises form and processes (many various things). But if we start with form we go backwards to process, components, energy and then consciousness. Or starting with consciousness (intelligence) we then go to energy, components, processes and then form. The only time you have consciousness distinct from itself is when you have an incarnation or a form, embodiment per say which can create separation from itself. This is how souls are created, consciousness is isolated within form and through embodiments. But just like energy, consciousness exists within form but also independent of form but there was first no form, just a single consciousness.
Created:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
First, I appreciate the thought you put into this and even though I'm going to put forth some of my theories it's more or less a collaborating ordeal. This would be to help you connect some of the dots you have spread out here.
What I say initially will basically create a whole new problem for you, and I must say that it is certainly unorthodox. We all are familiar with the two seemingly opposing concepts of Mono and Poly Theism but what if I told you they are both compatible? For instance lets say that there is a Platform (God) out of which everything in existence arises and we can call that Platform Mono. Now lets say that out of this Platform arises a myriad of various platforms (gods), and we will call them Poly. Essentially we could say that there is indeed an original Platform, but the reality is that there exists many platforms.
The interesting thing here is that while we normally perceive both concepts to be an either or proposition, there really is no need or justification to do so. Not if we fully understand that one concept originates with the other concept, or that one concept arises from the other and scratch the idea that only one could work. So while I did mention that this is an unorthodox approach it really isn't. This idea or proposition can be found in many different religious sources. A spiritual writer and author by the name of Paul Twitchell put forth this idea very cleanly in many of his works such as "The Tiger's Fang" among a few others. I will say however, that some Polytheists have never considered this and some Monotheists have never considered it because to them they are conflicting concepts at first glance.
Now while I admittedly support Polytheism I will also agree with the reality that all things arise from a single unified original Source (Monotheism). Logically speaking, it does makes sense that we would only have to account for one single original source rather than many original sources. Why? because you should be able to trace everything that exists back to where it began at some point, and from that one point show how from that one origin all things tie together. As we know it, creation is much like an expansion that expanded from one direction into many directions of processes. So, logically speaking we should be able to hit the rewind button and reveal how it all originated. And we can do that conceptualizing Mono Theism.
We can't really do this starting with the presumption that all things began with many origins, it wouldn't logically follow as we would inevitably have to account for each source and how each source could exist. But we can start with the presumption that all things began with a single original source that begat other sources. I would also have to side then with the same idea about the universe without a God as we trace all things back to where they inevitably took place.
Which then brings me to your objection that Theism has no unified theory of everything. It certainly does actually. As a matter of fact it is much like what is recognized in theories like quantum mechanics, except that with Theism it takes you a step further. And that extra step sheds better light on why anything exists at all and why it (creation/universe) operates as an intelligent force.
Consciousness (awareness) is what I propose as a single unified theory of everything (religion may label that "soul"), but you must step over into an eastern philosophical idea of consciousness as it exists independent of matter and form. Much like beginning with the proposition that energy is a unified theory of everything as you break all things down prior to any process of events, so beginning with awareness as the fiber and foundation of everything as we break all things down prior to any process of events is our platform out of which all things arise.
Now remembering that the Big Bang theory generated a myriad of alternative elements (principles) as creative forces out of a single event, and prior to that event was a single unified platform not many. So while we can trace processes back to a myriad of elements they arise from a single event, and that single event generated many components. I posit energy as that single event or original platform.
This is where we as Theists gain the advantage over any other proposition that attempts to account for existence. And originating with consciousness AKA intelligence we can account for why any processes occur, and we do that by correlating intelligent productions (universe) with thought and mind (intelligence). The materialist can only account for the process, but they have no foundation or answer for why such processes would ever occur. As you pointed out already, that would be like accounting for a building but without the builder, a production without a producer, a construction without a constructor and that would be insane of course. We carry over that same principle with the products of the universe.
So how do we tie together energy with the proposition of Theism? did you know that both energy and consciousness as put forth by religion have the very same attributes? coincidence? no not at all. Both energy and consciousness (awareness) are omnipresent, they both exist within form and independent of form and they are both uncreated and indestructible, in other words eternal. How are they distinguishable from one another? they aren't because the reality is, is that they co-exist.
I put forth that energy exists because conscious activity exists, in other words conscious activity generates energy. So if consciousness exists energy exists, and everywhere there is energy there is awareness, everywhere you find awareness you find energy. Basically you can't have one without the other. Energy then is the first principle arising in order after consciousness.....so you have consciousness then energy then creation.
Before the Big Bang you have two co-existing principles that operate as a single unified platform, don't be confused by me saying "two" existing principles because they act as one force only one is generated by the other, one is animate the other inanimate....one is the effect of the first cause yet the one cannot exist without the other. Consciousness precedes energy but it is the very activity of consciousness that generates it.
So what we have is an omnipresent conscious Reality that generated megatons of energy across an infinite platform. The Platform condensed this massive field of energy at an isolated single point and it was then released to create what we call the Big Bang. It was out of this single expansion that generated a myriad of elemental principles through the fusion and combustion of chemistry transformation and manipulation. Out of this "soup" of chemical properties exists the creative principles that originate the processes of events to establish the order of the universe. However it first began with the unified single platform being consciousness/energy. Then consciousness/energy as the medium which manipulates and originates intelligent processes that occur within the universe.
At this point I want to say that we shouldn't really invoke the "design" theory because it tends to focus on perfection and perfection here is irrelevant. We want to focus on function not design, it may sound like a trivial objection but it eliminates the tendency to see flaws (imperfection) within a "design" (perfection). I do think it is proper to correlate processes with intelligence though, but in a physical universe that was created to experience death and decay perfection is out of the equation, at least in this physical plane of existence and yes, I'm a proponent of the multiverse theory or Buddhist cosmology which observes various planes or layers of experience. But for this topic focusing on the physical layer is sufficient for now.
But back to Monotheism and Polytheism being compatible and them both being relevant in creation....Monotheism is first relevant to the original event, and Polytheism would only become relevant to what takes place after that initial event. If you strip away creation before any processes occur you can essentially only have a single reality, because there has been no action which has created any separation within that reality. Like energy per say, once you strip away form (duality) you have only that which preceded form and to create form that energy must be isolated and confined to create the appearance that you have two distinct things.
Consciousness, co-existing with energy is the same thing....if you were to isolate consciousness within form you would create the appearance of two distinct consciousnesses but once you break down that form you again have a single platform.
So for there to exist more than one god, consciousness must be isolated and confined within separate forms. And this can only take place within creation where duality exists and contrast can be created and separation can be experienced. For now, I won't get into why the original Platform would create other platforms but lets just say it's definitely possible. So while the events that took place to originate the first sources of creation to begin creating originated with a single Source, other gods can utilize those same sources to create worlds within the reality that was first established.
In order for the first Source to become multiple sources It must first have the option of separating into distinct forms, and of course that can only occur within creation where form and duality exist. To isolate Itself, It must create a form that consciousness can experience being confined through and create the experience of being distinct from Itself.
Say for example you were a body of water and you wanted to create something distinct from that body of water but that body of water is all that exists, and it exists as a whole. The only way you could do that is to create a form within that water, to create the appearance of having something distinct from that body of water. So while it's true that any form that exists, exists within that body of water, that form isolates and confines the water to create separation. This is how creation works, all things exist within a single unified Reality and within that Reality all form and separation occur. So basically you have one reality and within that reality many other realities. This is how Monotheism and Polytheism work together because gods are created within one God.
The original Platform expresses Its creativity and power through other incarnations, and those incarnations can create worlds and interact with those worlds through embodiments. So creation is much like a simulated game, where the simulator must have a character to experience and interact within that game as one inhabiting it. The characters experience everything as being distinct from the original Source while the original Source experiences everything through all channels of form and embodiment. It's purely ingenious. The original Platform created what can be experienced as many platforms through created form and each character can develop their own personalities, perspectives and unique experiences.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Your "ability to control yourself" is a function of your ability to delay gratification for the promise of greater gratification (or the promise of "freedom" from desire) in the future.This is learned behavior that has been imposed on you by your experiences.AND,Even if you were a completely disembodied spiritghostangelgod, you would still be INFLUENCED and CONSTRAINED by your own EXPERIENCES, MEMORIES, AND DESIRES AND OR GOALS.
Lol, this world is just a simulation of types where your physical body is how you (the controller) interface with this reality (game). Your body is simply a vehicle to navigate and interact within this created world, it's much like playing a video game really....your character (physical body) within the game is subject to all that the game simulates, but you (the controller/conscious soul) is simply observing what you are playing. You are no more that character in that game than your physical body in this world. It can easily be demonstrated, and I went over that. The ability to control oneself is the nature of your will as a conscious being that inhabits a body that "needs" things. This should be so innate to you as you read this you might as well slap yourself on the forehead.
You have a warped idea of your own sense of self.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@3RU7AL
Your "will" is a slave to your desires and instincts.
The physical body is a slave to everything it desires, craves or needs but consciousness as it exists independent of the physical body runs parallel to that fact. That's why you can resist such urges and stretch the body to its limits....albeit you can only resist for so long before the physical body can no longer sustain itself. But you can see for certain how consciousness is free of the limits of the physical body, there's many ways you can demonstrate this. Mind over matter has been displayed time and time again. The point here is to cast light on the reality and distinction between the physical body vs the soul (consciousness).
If there was no distinction you would have literally no ability to control oneself, constrain, restrain, discipline, wait, resist, abstain or be patient. All those factors show how your will is separate from any mechanical instincts.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
So just looking at the illustration, I see no reason why the the lever puller couldn't leave the pulley after each pass of the trolley and untie one person run back to the lever, switch tracks and repeat until all the persons are free.
However, if this is not an option and the lever puller did not create the circumstances, cannot change the outcome or save anyone....then I would say he should wait until all the victims were asleep and allow the trolley to swiftly pass over them while they lay in an unconscious state. I mean, I understand that the illustration says they don't "need" to sleep but it didn't say they can't sleep.
Alright, third option. The attendant dislodges the track pulley and uses the device to derail the trolley hoping it would work on the first try lol.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Wylted
@zedvictor4
@Dr.Franklin
@Sum1hugme
@Bones
The term free will is a philosophical concept used in opposition against the assumption that all our choices our predetermined because of the assumption of God's omniscience. We're not arguing against the idea that the choices we make have preceding factors. The point here, is that we are "free" to decide what we want to do regardless if there was a reason we chose it, not that there is some mechanical influence somewhere that predestinated it.
Even in the line of reasoning that says there are causes for our decisions it's not 100% certain what we will do. For example, there might be reasons that made me do something as a reaction to an event however the options of how I choose to react are endless. In this sense, we are "free" to decide how to react and in what way. This doesn't negate the reality there was a cause for my reaction.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
We have our "own" will, which is not always "free". Don't let them trip you up with semantics.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
Please explain.
What is there to explain? while we are certainly programmable, at least from an average human state of existence we also have a lot of genuine original things to offer as individuals simply because we aren't just robots. Each soul has a unique perspective that exists outside the confines of the conditioned mind.
Created:
-->
@3RU7AL
ARE HUMANS UNDECIPHERABLE ENIGMAS OR PROGRAMMABLE BLACK BOXES?
Both
do you believe that people tend to adopt general strategies to deal with challenges they encounter ??
Perhaps.
do you believe these strategies are identifiable ??
I would say it's a very complex system.
(1) do you think a person should get their sense of self-worth from within themselves or from what other people think of them?
Both, you always hear people say "don't care about what others say or think about you"....but in some cases it's probably something to consider, especially if someone is either delusional or unrealistic about what they are.
(2) do you prefer to be spontaneous and go out and travel and do things "IRL" or do you prefer to think about doing things and lose yourself in movies and television shows and books ?
Both
(3) do you think people should generally trust their gut or do you think people should generally think things through ??
Both
Gut instinct has less baggage than thought, because thoughts are conditioned processes. Thinking doesn't always lead to truth, perhaps vice versa but I would say a good blend of both is preferable. Sometimes, just simple observation without interference of the mind is the best way to approach being non-biased.
(4) do you think people should follow a strict core code of laws or principles no matter what, or do you think that people should follow different rules in different situations ??
I think being fluid and flexible (mixed with compassion) is a great idea, as long as one follows the basic idea of Karma which is basically the spiritual principle of cause and effect.
Jeeze, such black and white markers here....do you view people and the world with such a rigid categorization? I think there's a lot more grey area involved in some of these questions, or more of a combination of things to consider.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Timid8967
There is no need to be churlish.
Maybe you should examine what you say on this forum as indirect insults pointed towards a belief that God exists. When you ignore intelligent and thought provoking discussions just to preach your assumptions within a forum tailored for spiritual thought you might get the hammer from time to time. I'm not a mean person at all, what I find rude is how you express your opinions about belief in a Creator. My objective is to give you real discourse you can take and ponder on.
There is no need to call my opinion ridiculous.
That is in fact the tone you parade about Theistic beliefs in this religious forum. I always find it rather ridiculous that the very ones that are the most insulting towards Theistic beliefs are the ones most obsessed with stalking religious forums lol.
You have your opinion. I would not call your opinion ridiculous. I am not parading around on this forum.
You're parading your assumption over and over that God does not exist without justification. Because I've dealt with everything you've given me easily and we haven't even cracked the door yet. You just decided my answers were not sufficient because your mind and thoughts have been hijacked by a foreign ideology, not because my answers didn't deal with your assertions.
God does not exist.
And here it is again, this is called an assertion. There is no reason to believe that.
I prayed to God and he did not answer.
I gave you an analogy in a previous discussion about the nature of consciousness, radios and channels of receptions to consider. You would readily admit any person claiming to hear God audibly would be an insane person, yet here you are acting like an insane person. Rather I would like to give you some clear ideas how that works in reality.
I told him to put up or shut up. I suggested to God that if he loves me then he should reveal himself to me. God did not answer me. He did not put up. He did not reveal himself to me. Either God did not hear me or he chose not to answer me or he does not exist. If God did not hear me, then I suppose he is not omniscient. If God chose not to answer me, then he is very rude. If he does not exist - then his non-response is entirely consistent with not hearing from him.
There are objective steps within the arena of spirituality, one of them is not giving God ultimatums, in fact it is your attitude which is directly in the forefront. Once we deal with your snot-nosed attitude the rest is easy. Spirituality is a give and take relationship, if you give nothing you get nothing. Once you put your attitude on the alter, you will find you will get more than you ever asked for.
To suggest that I have no basis for not believing in god is the reality for me. I don't particularly care that it does not convince you. I have seen no compelling evidence that god exists.
Sure, maybe correlation is not something you understand. And maybe your preconceived ideas about spiritual experience gets in the way? The indication (evidence) that a transcendent reality exists is so much in our very faces it could only be a stupid ideology that could blind us to it. If you believe and think it's stupid to believe in God then you will never see evidence for it....period.
I remember you talked about this distinction. And for the sake of our discussion I am prepared to accept that there are two separate concerns. Nevertheless, unless someone actually believes in god then sin is not something that they will care about. I have indicated that I do not believe in god. I have attempted to see if god exists - by what most religious people would consider to be an appropriate medium, prayer. And yet I still have not been convinced. I think it is disingenuous of you to suggest that I have no basis to make such a claim.
Your claim that God does not exist has zero basis.... you can't even prove it yet you keep saying it lol......That's why agnosticism is superior to atheism. If you wanted to maintain intellectual integrity you would take a position of ignorance on this issue. You don't know anything, many others do.
Perhaps you are correct - yet it seemed the OP posited both cause and creator as possibilities - leaving open a non-clear conclusion.
The Creator would BE the cause.
Created:
Posted in:
And I agreed with you.
Good, then stop prattling on in every topic about how others are wrong because you're fixated on the Bible (along with the other freak). People can have their own views that might not concur with that book, grow up.
Did you assume that he wasn't talking about the biblical god?
Why don't you learn how to read? I didn't assume anything, it's irrelevant to the OP and irrelevant to my answers.
Now don't start derailing this guys thread with your nonsensical obsessions. If I wanted to talk to an idiot I would have addressed you personally.
Created:
Posted in:
But that is entirely up to the OP and not you to tells if he is talking the biblical god or not.
That was the point I was making, go back to bed.
But the OP mentions "god" enough times
So you admit you made the assumption.....?
Created: