1 2 3 >  Last ›
 
   
 

The God Question

 
Yahun
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahun
Total Posts:  486
Joined  24-10-2007
 
 
 
23 November 2007 22:01
 

I was joking in the other thread about the proof of God and the truth is, I take the God question very lightly. I’ll explain why in here:

If God does exist and God is somehow outside of our universe/multiple universe/multiple dimension system then either:

A. God exists within a greater totality than God
B. God is the totality and all exists within God


If God does not exist and the universe/multiple universe/multiple dimension system is infinite with no beginning or end, then God is either:

A. The monistic unity and oneness connecting this infinite existence of space and time
B. Does not exist at all

Either way, our capacity to comprehend this “God” simply is not an actuality. We cannot possibly fathom what is the totality of a system that we are so minute within. Whatever we are, we are either:

A. Because this God created us the way we are
B. Because the system this God created made us the way we are
C. Because it is all just a freak occurrence which we can never really grasp

If we are meant to know this God, and are incapable of it, then this God is to blame for creating us incapable. Therefore to be held accountable for being what we are created to be would be irrational and nonsense.

All of the religions agree that God cannot be understood with the mind. Atheists agree that if God does exist, we cannot possibly understand God.

So, the God question is meaningless because we cannot know that God is commanding us to do something if we cannot know God.

The question is a waste of time . . .“Does God exist?”
It cannot be answered. So, let’s answer the questions that we can answer, such as:

1. Can we live in peace with one another?
2. What is peace?
3. Does peace start from outside of ourselves or from within ourselves?


If God does not exist then either:

A. We go on after this life, eternally, taking on different forms or we exist until it ends, whenever that may be.
B. We cease to exist after this life.

If God does exist then either:

A. This life is all there is, there are more lives to come which will ultimately end in non-existence, or it goes on forever.
B. This life is a test to see how good of a person you can be and at the end of it you get to go to heaven and God will punish the bad people.

So be nice to each other, love one another, take care of one another and enjoy being together. Enjoy life. Enjoy this moment. Relax. If you are good to one another, will God punish you (if God exists)? If God doesn’t exist then this life is all we have so there’s no point in fighting over meaningless ambitions, egos and goals. If God does exist then all God wants you to do is love each other.

It’s so simple. It really is.

Chill out.

 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
25 November 2007 10:46
 
Yahun - 24 November 2007 03:01 AM

Atheists agree that if God does exist, we cannot possibly understand God.

My position has been described as “soft” atheism because I don’t rule out the possibility of deity. However, I disagree with your above statement. A more accurate statement would be this: “Many atheists agree that if the Judeo-Christian god exists, we could not understand that God because that is how the doctrine defines that god.” It’s possible that a god would be understandable and knowable by humans, but one would have to reject Abrahamic concepts of God to acknowledge that possibility.

Yahun - 24 November 2007 03:01 AM

If God does exist then all God wants you to do is love each other.

If a god does exist, it doesn’t automatically follow that the god would want that. There is no reason to make such an assumption.

 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
25 November 2007 10:48
 
Yahun - 24 November 2007 03:01 AM

the truth is, I take the God question very lightly.

But many believers do not, and millions of them honestly believe that their gods want them to act in ways that have nothing to do with human happiness and suffering. Not all believers, but mostly the fundamentalist ones, and the latter group is the one causing harm to society through their beliefs.

 
Yahun
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahun
Total Posts:  486
Joined  24-10-2007
 
 
 
25 November 2007 12:10
 
Carstonio - 25 November 2007 03:46 PM

My position has been described as “soft” atheism because I don’t rule out the possibility of deity. However, I disagree with your above statement. A more accurate statement would be this: “Many atheists agree that if the Judeo-Christian god exists, we could not understand that God because that is how the doctrine defines that god.” It’s possible that a god would be understandable and knowable by humans, but one would have to reject Abrahamic concepts of God to acknowledge that possibility.

What is the Abrahamic concept of God? Did he believe in one god or did he merely worship one god? Abraham was a dualist.He would have been a Zoroastrian . . . at least until he encountered Melchizedek (King over Salem/Jerusalem) and the Pharaoh of Upper and Lower Egypt. Then his views may have mutated, but there is no way that he was anything but a Dualist Zoroastrian.

If God is the Tao then the human mind cannot fully comprehend it. Something within a totality may be able to glimpse it’s unity with all others within that totality, but it cannot possibly see the totality from within, as a whole, and understand its intricate working.

It is the arrogance of modern man to think that he can understand what brought him into being, in its totality.
That arrogance is the cause of all mischief on earth.

If a god does exist, it doesn’t automatically follow that the god would want that. There is no reason to make such an assumption.

A dualistic god would want war. A Monistic God wouldn’t care.

So, we merely have to look into Monism and Dualism and see which is false and then we will know which is true.

 
Carstonio
 
Avatar
 
 
Carstonio
Total Posts:  3135
Joined  26-04-2007
 
 
 
26 November 2007 03:39
 
Yahun - 25 November 2007 05:10 PM

If God is the Tao then the human mind cannot fully comprehend it.

Your logic may be correct, but I see no basis for that premise. The concept of Tao seems incompatible with Abrahamic doctrine. (By “Abrahamic” I mean Judaism, Christianity and Islam.)

If a god does exist, it doesn’t automatically follow that the god would want that. There is no reason to make such an assumption.

Yahun - 25 November 2007 05:10 PM

A dualistic god would want war. A Monistic God wouldn’t care.

Again, that’s a logical conclusion, but there is no evidence for either a monistic god or a dualistic god so there is no basis for assuming either way. The Abrahamic religions seem to define their god as pseudo-dualistic.

 
Yahun
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahun
Total Posts:  486
Joined  24-10-2007
 
 
 
26 November 2007 13:44
 
Carstonio - 26 November 2007 08:39 AM

Your logic may be correct, but I see no basis for that premise. The concept of Tao seems incompatible with Abrahamic doctrine. (By “Abrahamic” I mean Judaism, Christianity and Islam.)

It’s better to refer to them as Western doctrine because Abraham had nothing to do with it. His name is used but beyond that he was pretty much irrelevant.

The Muslim philosophy comes entirely from Judaism and Christianity. The Christian philosophy comes from Judaism and the surrounding non-Judaic religions (from Hinduism to Buddhism to Taoism to Germanic Fertility worship, which all trace back to branches off of Ancient Egypt). The Judaic philosophy is a mixture of Babylonian (and Mesopotamian) traditions and Ancient Egyptian (mostly Ancient Egyptian).

The problem with the evolution of religion is that until the Pharaoh Akhenaten there was numerous gods in Ancient Egypt (which also shifted into Babylon and India). However, after Akhenaten rose to power with his Queen Nefertiti he began Monotheism and tried to destroy Polytheism in Ancient Egypt. The priests killed him. But, his philosophy of the inner realm (as well as his poetry, artwork, etc) spread to India’s Krishna (Brahme) and Buddha (Enlightenment) tales, to China as Lao Tzu (The Sage) and eventually into Rome with the concept of Mashiach Yeshua (Anointed Salvation).

Whether the people were real or not is irrelevant. The message was the same and they all stem from Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV) and Nefertiti. Archaeologists have proven it and now the Western Religions are interfering once again to cover up the fact that he was the first Monotheist/Monist, by slandering his name. Mosis (Thutmosis) himself was from the Thutmosis family who was intertwined through marriage with the Amenhotep (think King Tut) family. Mosis was a follower of Akhenaten’s (historically). Of course biblically he was the originator, but we all know that the Bible is creative non-fiction (basically factual events rewritten and hyped up).

Again, that’s a logical conclusion, but there is no evidence for either a monistic god or a dualistic god so there is no basis for assuming either way. The Abrahamic religions seem to define their god as pseudo-dualistic.

The “Western” religions define their god as Pseudo-Dualistic because there are two concepts of God in the Bible. There is El (in the 99 variant forms such as Elohim, El Shaddai, El Olam) and there is YHWH (E-Yah-Hu-Wah) or YHYH (E-Yah-Hu-Yah). People like Richard Dawkins make the mistake of connecting YHWH to the Canaanite Yah (Volcano God) when it is really connected to the Ancient Egyptian god Iah (E-Yah) which was represented the energy in life which reflected off of the moon. The Canaanites used the word Yah and turned it into an idol. They did the same thing with the word El, only they pronounced it Allah instead of Eloah. Ignorant modern Archaeologists oversimplify it and call it the moon God because the moon was used as its symbol. Later Akhenaten used the Sun to symbolize it and so Atenism is confused with Sun-Worship (understandably so).

But, if one takes “Iah” and joins it with “Aten” then you get “Iahaten” (The moon and the sun/balance/Yin and Yang/Star of David). Amenhotep IV changed his name to Akhenaten or Ikhenaten because it was a variant of Iahaten or Iahenaten.
The Hebrew variant of Iahenaten is Yahonatan (Jonathan) and connects to the Old Testament Prophecy of the coming King Messiah (born of the young woman/virgo). He is called the Lion of Judah because that was the symbol of Akhenaten’s family (thus Tut had a lion head on each arm of his throne). The Sphinx has the body of a lion (Leo) with the head of the Young Woman (Virgo) and the wings which signify swiftness and transcendence. It is a Sphinx prophecy of the coming Messiah and the return of Ikhenaten. That is why it is written that David said: “The LORD said to my lord, sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a foot stool for your feet.” This was a poetic prophecy that David’s best friend, Prince Jonathan (David’s lord/king) was killed in battle and taken to Yah until David’s offspring established the Kingdom on Earth (at which time he would return).

Atheists have very little understanding of the scriptures (as most Atheists never actually studied them and merely belonged to the religions which never explain these things) and so they don’t understand how deep in our history it is. There is going to be a King Messiah, whether Atheists want it or not. Human beings will not evolve as a whole until he does his part. Is he really different from anybody else? Only in the sense that he is evolved and will bridge the gap into a new era. Other than that, he’s just a man . . . like anybody else and one day humanity will evolve to the point where he will be forgotten and another will arise. Next time it will be a woman.

The reason there are two gods is because the Priests of Amen Ra (thus Amen is in every prayer) created Judaism and Christianity. Islam is a religion off of Judaism and Christianity.

The organized religions of the priests incorporated the truth into their lies and that is why the truth is not being understood because it is being associated with the lies. Thus the saying of the prophets: “The devil (the corrupt man) hides his lies between truths.”

[ Edited: 26 November 2007 13:52 by Yahun]
 
J.C.
 
Avatar
 
 
J.C.
Total Posts:  231
Joined  18-10-2007
 
 
 
04 December 2007 14:16
 

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 16:21 by J.C.]
 
Unbeliever
 
Avatar
 
 
Unbeliever
Total Posts:  861
Joined  04-12-2007
 
 
 
04 December 2007 15:10
 

If God does exist then all God wants you to do is love each other.

This argument is a faulty one.

The concept is a major problem within especially the monotheistic religions of today. I’m perfectly comfortable to, in a philosophical sense discuss what-if scenarios. I often talk with people in conversations that goes along the lines of “what if the god of Abraham would exist” etc.

What strikes me, and this is especially with religious people is their ability to not only assume the existence of this being, but in a complete lack of evidence or suggestion, extrapolate the desires of this being.

In your example, you are stating a profound assumption that if there was a supernatural deity that created everything, this beings would only want us to love each other.
Although a beautiful thought, its completely meaningless because if there was such a deity, you could in no way know whether this is its desires or not.

People who assume the existence of god are making a huge leap of faith, people who assume to know the mind and intentions of god are arrogant beyond this world (no pun intended).

 
 
Yahsene
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahsene
Total Posts:  139
Joined  13-11-2007
 
 
 
05 January 2008 13:42
 
Unbeliever - 04 December 2007 08:10 PM

If God does exist then all God wants you to do is love each other.

This argument is a faulty one.

Yes, it is.

It is the responsibility of the religious to define God. One cannot believe or disbelieve in a word that has no agreed upon meaning.

 
Yahsene
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahsene
Total Posts:  139
Joined  13-11-2007
 
 
 
05 January 2008 14:12
 
Joel Armstrong - 04 December 2007 07:16 PM
Yahun - 26 November 2007 06:44 PM

...There is going to be a King Messiah, whether Atheists want it or not. Human beings will not evolve as a whole until he does his part. Is he really different from anybody else? Only in the sense that he is evolved and will bridge the gap into a new era. Other than that, he’s just a man . . . like anybody else and one day humanity will evolve to the point where he will be forgotten and another will arise. Next time it will be a woman.

Hi Yahun, I somewhat admire the optimism you present here, in terms of saying a person will someday arrive to help humans evolve to a “new era”, though I myself don’t see any evidence for it.  You seem pretty open about your belief system, so I have some questions for you about it. 

1).  Instead of putting all of your faith in one man or woman who has yet to reveal herself, don’t you think it might be more productive to work together as humans to create a more sustainable world?

Well, my views have changed slightly since I made that post and I no longer agree with myself on numerous statements that I had made previously. But, I will attempt to answer your questions according to where I am now. If you reply, please reply to what I am saying now and not what I stated before (as I don’t wish to shift through all of my statements from before and correct all of them).

Yes, the world will have it’s King and Queen Messiah figure, but they will only be symbolic in the sense that they will introduce human beings to themselves (open them up to discovering the truth on their own without a dependence on individuals). They will have to come together, be together and work together and represent both sides of humanity, not because a God or Goddess ordained it, but because human beings have manufactured the need for it and so it must happen before human beings will mature and stop waiting for it to occur.

They will be two people who move as one toward the same goal, together, and together they will uproot all of the world’s religions and establish a way of life based on what is and not what is not.

2).  Do you think there is a possibility that the person you are speaking of is already on this planet, maybe as a child?

What does thinking matter on this subject? If they are then they are and if they are not then thinking that they are will mean nothing. The world will know when it is complete and then it will no longer matter. Those who stop and speculate will miss the train. 

3).  How do you know that your version of history is the correct one?

It is the only version that fits with what we know archeologically.

4).  How certain are you of your beliefs?  100%, 99% , 90%?  Does your faith in your unique belief system ever waver?

If this question were answered before then I would have said 100% and I would have been wrong, as I was wrong then. Now the only appropriate response is that belief is meaningless if it cannot evolve into knowledge and knowledge is worthless if it cannot be transcended.

My belief system went through many transformations until it was realized that the my in the equation was the problem. The truth does not waver, though some forms of it are in a constant state of flux.

5). Do you consider it a religion?

Is what a religion? 

6). Do you consider yourself anti-religious?  I at first assumed you were an ally in The War on Religion, when you posted anti-Christian ideas on the Christians, I call you out thread, and then in your prayer thread also.  After reading this thread I am no longer sure.

This is how the mind functions, isn’t it? Have you observed your thoughts as they rise and fall and seen the dualistic approach to life which the mind takes? “Are you a foe or a friend?” This is the black and white, right or left, this or that approach to life which is destroying our communion with one another as human beings. It has divided us into nations, states, religions, political parties, doctrines, dogmas, philosophies and other sorts of nonsense.

I am not your ally and I am not your foe and we are not battling enemies, we are trying to wake ourselves up and awaken our brothers and sisters around the world.   

7). Do you feel inspired in any way by any source other than yourself to spread this message you are espousing?

What do you mean by yourself? Do you mean my mind, my identity (which my mind has manufactured using the past experiences), the name attributed to the body and mind…? What is the self that you are referring to? I (as total person, being mind-body-identity) will do what I do because it needs to be done. Is there a source outside of my mind, body and identity pushing this forward? Yes, there is. It is the same source which is pushing everything else throughout the infinite and eternal expanse of space and time to do what they do.

8). Do you believe in any type of a afterlife?

Afterlife? Break the word down and you have the answer:

After-Life

How can something live after life? That’s similar to asking, “Do you believe in beforelife?” What life can be before life? If it is living it is living and if it is not then it is not. No, there is no next life. There is this life and it is precious and fleeting within every breath we take. We should embrace it and be in it totally and refrain from escaping into future fantasies and past memories. 

9). According to your belief system, are we supposed to do anything to prepare for the arrival of the Messiah?

There have been many Messiahs, Buddhas and Awakened Ones throughout human history and there will be continue to be Messiah’s, Buddhas and Awakened Ones so long as people remain asleep. The King and Queen Messiah will merely begin the mass awakening and each individual Messiah who awakens from them will join in with them in awakening the rest of the world and then the Kingdom that humanity has been awaiting will be established. Only when that kingdom is established within us can we establish it outside of ourselves in our societies. We create our societies. The societies which we form are a formed according to what we are. What can be done? One can be awake and see that the time is at hand or they can be asleep and not see it.

10). Do you feel you have inherited this belief system partly from your family or culture, or is it something you have arrived at completely on your own?

We are the product of the past and we will be the product of the future. Nothing is independent from the whole. It is impossible to exist without interaction. 

You may have already addressed some of my questions in other threads, I have not seen all of your posts. Thanks for you time,

Joel

No problem. It took a while to respond to this because much has been going on offline, but hopefully this helped answer your questions.

 
J.C.
 
Avatar
 
 
J.C.
Total Posts:  231
Joined  18-10-2007
 
 
 
05 January 2008 19:25
 

-deleted-

[ Edited: 07 March 2011 16:21 by J.C.]
 
Yahsene
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahsene
Total Posts:  139
Joined  13-11-2007
 
 
 
06 January 2008 00:26
 
Joel Armstrong - 06 January 2008 12:25 AM

What exactly do you mean when you say they will represent both sides of humanity?

Male and Female.

Your new approach sounds like a more rationalist approach, is that a correct description of the way of life the two Messiah’s will establish?

Could you clarify what you mean by “way of life”? Are you referring to a global government law upon which society and the world’s infrastructure functions or are you referencing a way of life in regards to a person discovering the truth for themselves? If it is the former then yes, it would have to be a rationalist approach. If it is the latter then not necessarily. An artistic mind cannot approach the truth through science and a scientific mind cannot discover the truth through art. They are very different types of thinkers and would require very different approaches, though the end result would be the same.

Do you claim to know what these two Messiah’s are going to do to get people to listen to them?  How will they get every one’s attention?

How would I know that? (Not being rude, just curious as to how you would speculate that one could know such a thing.)

Have you found any archaeological evidence that gives us clues to these questions I ask?

Well, there are mathematical equations everywhere and in everything. History is laced with patterns and since everything moves in cycles, and in 2012 it will be 3,350 years since Ikhenaten and Nefertiti ruled side by side in Ancient Egypt and began the revolution towards science and enlightenment, I’d say that if it is going to happen then it will have to take place during these next few years.

2).  Do you think there is a possibility that the person you are speaking of is already on this planet, maybe as a child?

I guess I just thought you might know this, based upon the certainty you displayed in some of your opinions.

Yes, they are in the world today. My entire existence rests on this belief. If it turns out to be wrong then everything I am saying is utterly meaningless to me.

OK, that’s fine.  But you now say above on question #1 that the King and Queen Messiah will come together, when before you said one would come before the other.  You also say they will have to work together.  What archaeological evidence did you find that changed your opinion on this?

You and I both know that archeology deals in the past, not the present or future. Events that happened in the past can be studied and patterns can be found in them and applied to the present, but archeology itself cannot tell us anything about the present or future.

I understand that you are looking for a religious motivation in me, and you suspect that it involves some sort of cult or party of some sort . . . but, it doesn’t. I’m talking about the real deal and I understand completely why you are suspicious of this subject. The best thing to do is to just drop the entire subject and let it happen as it is set to happen.

Let me clear it up for you. I am against organized religions, cults, political parties, individual nations and states and all forms of elitism and human dualism. I find the belief in gods and goddesses to be completely ridiculous and childish (unless of course they are merely poetic, allegorical, artistic expressions of nature which would be fine so long as that is stated) and I do not believe in God (in the Greek sense of Zeus or the Egyptian sense of Amen Ra). IF the word God is to mean the “monistic process of all energy and matter throughout the infinite and eternal expanse of space and time” then sure, I accept that…but, we both know that the religious literally believe in a HE God, otherwise they wouldn’t attribute all of these ridiculous human attributes and emotions to “HIM” such as Anger or Love.

I admire your honesty with yourself in being able to admit you were wrong before.

We are all wrong from time to time. That is how we learn. Nobody gets through life without being wrong and those who reach further than others will miss more often than others. The only reason they go further is because they don’t mind missing. It is said that Babe Ruth often either struck out or hit a home run and he struck out many more times than he hit homes runs, but nobody remembers him for striking out.

Any ideas on how we transcend knowledge?  Just by embracing the truth?  Or could it involve some type of a spiritual experience, perhaps?

Spirit is just another word for Energy. Every experience is an experience with energy, we just don’t see it because our senses are all focused on the matter which the energy manifests.

Your belief system.  The way that you sometimes exhibit certainty, the way in which you seem eager to share your ideas, the way that you talk about Kings and Queen Messiah’s, and your mention of Kingdoms certainly makes it sound religious.  Maybe it isn’t; maybe you are just using terminology that makes it seem religious to me.

The word religious stems from religio which originally meant superstition. Being confident in your views is not superstitious unless your views are formed off of nothing more than an overactive imagination. When I speak to people I actually prefer to speak to them on a 1-on-1 basis for this reason. I speak quite often to religious people and religious people use religious terms and can only think in religious terms so I’m accustomed to using religious terms. Whenever I challenge the religious views I do so through religious terms and that is why you are struggling with what I say. I am speaking their language to them. If you would like to speak the language of science with me then we can do this, but then I will only be speaking to you, in your language and some religious person will object and interject and then I’ll have to re-explain myself all over again. Message boards are a drag for this reason.

You could also send me a PM on this site if you’d like and ask me whatever you like and then ignore everything that I say on the board to other people if that helps. 

I guess I do somewhat view those who are anti-religious as being allies of mine, but I don’t have a black and white approach on the issue.  I have friends who are Christians, so I don’t just look at people as friends or foe, and I don’t judge people based completely on their religious beliefs or their level or anti-religiosity.  I guess you could say we are all brothers and sisters to a certain extent, since we all share the planet together as our home, and because we are all related at some level.

Yes, I am an Atheist in the sense that you are asking. I do not believe in a He/She God or Creator separate from that which is created and destroyed. 

I do agree with the sentiments of your thoughts in those two paragraphs.  Thanks for waking me up smile

hahahahah

I’m not under the illusion that I’m waking anybody up. I’m not there yet and one who is not there cannot be helping others to get there. That would be similar to Mini Me teaching Michael Jackson how to box. Would be wrong on so many levels. We’re just talkin, bro, nothing more. (BTW, I know that you’re being sarcastic)   

I like your description of the source, and how we are related to it.  This is what you call God, correct?  Or are you no longer using the term?  Are you now an atheist or post-theological, or do you simply call yourself nothing and confront irrationality and the lack of truth wherever you see it?

There is a story about Buddha which answers this question well: One day Buddha was walking with hid disciple Ananda and a man approached and said, “Lord Buddha, is there a god?” Buddha looked into the man’s eyes and said, “No, there is not a god.” The man dropped his head and walked away. Ananda noted this in his mind. Later a woman approached and said, “Lord Buddha, is there a god?” Buddha looked into her eyes and said, “Yes, god is.” The woman dropped her head and walked away. Ananda became furious and said, “You hypocrite! I cannot follow you now. How can god be and not be?” Buddha laughed and replied, “The one believed in god but his view was wrong and so I told him no and the other believed that there is no god, but her view also was wrong and so I told her yes. How can I answer two different minds in a similar way?”

 

More good thoughts, Yahsene.  Maybe I should have asked: “Are you open to the idea of any type of after-life?”  It doesn’t sound like you are.

I’m not concerned with a next life. This one is difficult enough. We go on plotting and planning for another life and miss the one in front of us. 

I liked how you started out here, but you lost me when you started talking about Kingdoms.  What is your definition of this Kingdom you mention?  You also state:  “One can be awake and see that the time is at hand…”  The time is at hand for specifically what?

Kingdom = A global human government of peace

The time is at hand for peace. It is now. If peace cannot happen now, within us first, then peace will not happen in the future because the future is only real when it is now and if we stay focused on the future then we will miss the future when it becomes the present and it will slip into the pass and we will look back and say, “Remember so and so and how he/she taught that the kingdom is within? They were a man/woman-god, we should worship them and receive salvation.” That is what Christians have done. Yeshua said, “The kingdom is not some far off place to be found, nobody will say ‘Here it is!’ or ‘There it is!’ for the kingdom of Yah is within you.” Now Christians say, “Heaven is in a next life and we go there by accepting Jesus as a human sacrifice.” This is the stupidity of human beings. Heaven and Hell are a present state of mind. They are not places that we go to or get put in, we carry them with us everywhere we go.

That seems reasonable.  It reminds me of more eastern philosophy.  Ya been studying some Buddhism?

I’ve been studying all sorts of beliefs. The truth has to be in there somewhere. If it isn’t then we’re screwed. 


I enjoy these conversations, I’ll answer as long as I feel I can. If you ask me something that I don’t feel I can answer then I’ll say, “I don’t know.” If you ask me about chemistry or astronomy then I’ll have to say that I don’t know because I know nothing about either one. My focus (as of now) has been solely on the inner world.

[ Edited: 06 January 2008 00:34 by Yahsene]
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15915
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
06 January 2008 09:30
 
Yahsene - 06 January 2008 05:26 AM

I’ve been studying all sorts of beliefs. The truth has to be in there somewhere. If it isn’t then we’re screwed. 


I enjoy these conversations, I’ll answer as long as I feel I can. If you ask me something that I don’t feel I can answer then I’ll say, “I don’t know.” If you ask me about chemistry or astronomy then I’ll have to say that I don’t know because I know nothing about either one. My focus (as of now) has been solely on the inner world.

But you are projecting expectations onto the outer world. 

If the instrument of study is biased can it ever find truth?  If the instrument is clear it won’t need to.

 
Yahsene
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahsene
Total Posts:  139
Joined  13-11-2007
 
 
 
06 January 2008 12:26
 
burt - 06 January 2008 02:30 PM

But you are projecting expectations onto the outer world.

What expectations do you feel that I am projecting onto the outer world? 

If the instrument of study is biased can it ever find truth?  If the instrument is clear it won’t need to.

Interesting way of wording it. We are in agreement on this. If I (as the mind) am clear of all bias and am seeing only what is and refrain from projecting ideals (which themselves are a product of the past) then I (as the mind) will not seek truth, but will be truth.

The question, perhaps, is “Can one be aware if one is completely one with the process of life around them?” If the answer is no then our journey for truth is not an intellectual endeavor at all, but is itself an extinguishing of the intellectual persuits and a submission to the existential. This would be transcendence. However, if the answer to that question is yes, then one last question remains . . . what is aware of the brain, mind and identity? Is awareness as we think of it in the West entirely flawed? Is it possible that true awareness has absolutely no connection to thought whatsoever?

This is where I am currently at and I have arrived at only one conclusion and that is that I am not. But, how can this be? If I am not then what is aware of this? If there is one final leap to take, a letting go, then it is a letting go of the “I” which means that the awareness, consciousness, enlightenment or total inner peace which we are all seeking in our various ways is not of the mind at all, but consists of what scientists refer to as pure intuition and instinct.

[ Edited: 06 January 2008 12:29 by Yahsene]
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15915
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
06 January 2008 23:10
 
Yahsene - 06 January 2008 05:26 PM
burt - 06 January 2008 02:30 PM

But you are projecting expectations onto the outer world.

What expectations do you feel that I am projecting onto the outer world?

Two messiahs??????? That’s a theoretical projection, not necessrily something that will actually occur.  To quote the song: “Que sera que sera.”

 
Yahsene
 
Avatar
 
 
Yahsene
Total Posts:  139
Joined  13-11-2007
 
 
 
06 January 2008 23:36
 
burt - 07 January 2008 04:10 AM

To quote the song: “Que sera que sera.”


Indeed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTm4T2xp13o

[ Edited: 07 January 2008 00:10 by Yahsene]
 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›