Putting ''Immanuel Can'' In The Religious Spotlight Part 2

[Dontaskme]

I agree more with him than with you in relation to how you view this existence as to how he views this existence.

I understand, the candyman is enticing. Up until that moment the game turns rather dark and evil. ( When Chitty goes bang )

Where we part company is that I do not see the world as you do.

Oh ok, no worries, but just so you know, you can hang out with me anytime you like, as long as you respect my love for solitude.

Therefore when I superimpose the idea of a 'creator mind' onto that, I do not have feedback from that action, that the creator is a monster. This is because, unlike you, I do not see the creation as a monster.

What do you see the creator as? do you have a particular preference in mind?

In saying that, I do appreciate creation is very scary...even insanely so...but in that, I tend to get the giggles which spoils the whole effect...

It's only giggly until it's not anymore, and then it just gets plain ugly. Especially when you are literally gasping for your last breath, when your bodily fluids are seeping out of the corners of your mouth, like a foaming gurgling mess, so undignified, but when that time comes for me, I will choose to do my death in private. I will not be demanding an audience for that event, that's for sure.

[VVilliam]

It was not intended to be. It was merely a response on the same level of what was offered me.

"God is [just]an idea," isn't an argument; so why would my response to DAM's claim be?

God is an idea.

So you say, and so I deny.

It doesn't become an "argument" when you say it, anymore than it was when she did. It's just a gratuitous wish, on your part. And you're going to find out it's wrong.

But maybe not today.

When the best one can do is offer some future promise that evidence will come, that in itself is not actual evidence that God is 'more than an idea".

I myself have no problem accepting that we exist within a creation and therefore there is a creator. I think that the Middle Eastern idea of god [from which came the Christian idea of God] is a great set of stories [biblical] which inspires me to think of the idea of a creator in a specific way. In that, if the bible is inspired by this god called "God", then I too am inspired by this God.

But in saying that, my personal idea of The Creator is far more inspiring that the simplistic one presented in the Bible.

[Dontaskme]

I'm not forgetting it at all. You're the "dreamer." You're responsible for all evil. It's your dream, and you're aware you are dreaming. But evil is happening in that "reality," which means you're the cause.

Yes, that's right, within the dream of duality of cause and effect space and time. I am the cause of my effect.

Therefore, only I am responsible for my good or bad actions. For what I do to others, I also do to myself, because I have first hand witness account of the knowledge of good and bad.

There are no others. There is only you. You are the dreamer. This is the dream, and you see that there is evil in it. You are the evil, then.

Yes, that's right, I am solely responsible for my own actions. In knowledge I can know the difference between good and evil.

I've seen evil happen, I thought the 911 event was an evil act, and the only reason I could know it was evil, because I also know what is good, and the 911 event wasn't exactly a good event in my understading of the event. It wasn't something that I could rejoice at or get pleasure from. That's the bonus of having knowledge, it is gifted to one within the dream of separation, the realm of knowing.

Before my apparent separation I was ignorant of any knowledge, so the separation was a good thing, but then it was also very bad too.

.

[Immanuel Can]

God is an idea.

So you say, and so I deny.

It doesn't become an "argument" when you say it, anymore than it was when she did. It's just a gratuitous wish, on your part. And you're going to find out it's wrong.

But maybe not today.

When the best one can do is offer some future promise that evidence will come...

You mistake the case. This is not an argument. See above.

I'm just telling you how it's going to be. I'm not expecting you to believe anything but what you do. So far as I can see, you don't seem open to any argument. So I'm not giving you any.

[VVilliam]

Therefore when I superimpose the idea of a 'creator mind' onto that, I do not have feedback from that action, that the creator is a monster. This is because, unlike you, I do not see the creation as a monster.

What do you see the creator as? do you have a particular preference in mind?

Wheew! The books I could write!

But to remain succinct, one thing I see is that the creators mind is awesome.

[Immanuel Can]

Yes, that's right, I am solely responsible for my own actions.

There IS only you, apparently, according to you.

So you're responsible for ALL actions that take place. Even the 911 ones. You're "dreaming" them.

Time to wake up, I guess.

[VVilliam]

So you say, and so I deny.

It doesn't become an "argument" when you say it, anymore than it was when she did. It's just a gratuitous wish, on your part. And you're going to find out it's wrong.

But maybe not today.

When the best one can do is offer some future promise that evidence will come, that in itself is not actual evidence that God is 'more than an idea".

I myself have no problem accepting that we exist within a creation and therefore there is a creator. I think that the Middle Eastern idea of god [from which came the Christian idea of God] is a great set of stories [biblical] which inspires me to think of the idea of a creator in a specific way. In that, if the bible is inspired by this god called "God", then I too am inspired by this God.

But in saying that, my personal idea of The Creator is far more inspiring that the simplistic one presented in the Bible.

You mistake the case. This is not an argument. See above.

I'm just telling you how it's going to be. I'm not expecting you to believe anything but what you do. So far as I can see, you don't seem open to any argument. So I'm not giving you any.

[Dontaskme]

Yes, that's right, I am solely responsible for my own actions.

There IS only you, apparently, according to you.

So you're responsible for ALL actions that take place. Even the 911 ones. You're "dreaming" them.

Time to wake up, I guess.

Yes, I've already explained all this to you previously in another post I wrote only today in fact. I guess you didn't bother reading it, no matter, it's no skin of my nose. I keep my nose clean usually, it's the only nose I follow, so I always make sure I look after it very well.

I've got good eye too, need it sharp to be able to report my surround, that will give an acurate account of what's happening, the external world is my self sustaining feedback loop.

[Immanuel Can]

I've already explained all this to you previously in another post I wrote only today in fact.

I couldn't make heads-or-tails of what you said in that post. It didn't make any sense at all, so far as I could tell. But if you want to try again...

[Dontaskme]

I couldn't make heads-or-tails of what you said in that post. It didn't make any sense at all, so far as I could tell. But if you want to try again...

Ok I'll try again...

It's ok not to be able to make sense of what is being read.

I've discovered, apparently, as a sensor sensing( that's what I call myself lately ) ..that there is no thing trying to make sense anyway - and also, if there is the sense that some sense is being made of what is being read, that is still no thing making the apparent sense .
Same applies to the reader, there is no thing reading, there is only the apparent sense of a reader reading.
Same goes for writing, there is no thing writing, there is only the apparent sense of a writer writing.
All these apparent senses are being actioned by no thing, and at the same time, they appear, apparently as if they are being actioned by a sense of 'a someone' actioning...but that 'someone' is only a contracted form of what is always the same one energy appearing as a reflex response reaction, to the same one sensing energy.

But what is known for sure, is that everything that happens, is just what's happening,... senses are only known to be happening because they have the capacity to be reflexive. For example: the sensor and the sensation have to be both present in the exact same moment, so both the sensor and the sensation are without doubt or error inseparably one and the same action appearing as an apparent reaction, the sensor knows sensation because it is also reflexive..( a sensation known is an effect of the cause) Both cause and effect are instantaneously one and the same thing, they are reflected mirrors of each other, identical.

Do you understand so far?


.

[Dontaskme]

What do you see the creator as? do you have a particular preference in mind?

But to remain succinct, one thing I see is that the creators mind is awesome.

But does it ever occur to you, do you ever think about why you have been born as a human being and not something else?

I personally think about the idea a lot, and it really creeps me out. I know there are other sentient beings just like me. As an example: I know other sentient beings exist, and that those other beings have been born in the form of a cow. I know that a male cow's life will most likely be bred for a specific reason only, and that reason is to sire the female cow to give us milk, but for the bulk of excess male cows, their life seems to end in what I can only see as a most horrific end, by being left to hang upside down on a metal hook, having had it's throat slit open with all it's blood spewing from it's body onto some abattoir floor.

I think about how I could have been born a bull cow instead of a human. . It's breaks my heart to think about being born as a cow and having to endure that sort of experience.

So, what I am trying to say is, it freaks me out that I cannot know, nor can I ever understand why something is born as a human being, and something else is born as a cow. I think about what if I was a cow and not a human being. I do not think there is anything awesome about a male cow hanging upside down in some slaughterhouse.

There are many more examples I could give, but one will hopefully be enough for you to get the gist of what I mean.

.

[Immanuel Can]

...actioned by no thing...

How can one suppose there is an action if there is no actor? I can make no sense of "there was a running" if there was no runner. I can make no sense of a "painting" that had no painter. Actions don't exist in the way that actors do...they exist only in the dynamics of the actor. So, if anything, one would have to say we could doubt the actions exist, but never that the person alleged to be doing an action exists, so long as the action exists.

We could say, "There's Tom, the painter; but he's not painting right now." But we could never say, "There's the action of painting, but there's no Tom doing it." We could say, "There's a DAM, but she's not typing right now," but not "There is a typing, but neither DAM nor any other person doing it."

Do you understand so far?

My first question is as above.

[VVilliam]

What do you see the creator as? do you have a particular preference in mind?

But to remain succinct, one thing I see is that the creators mind is awesome.

But does it ever occur to you, do you ever think about why you have been born as a human being and not something else?

No. I prefer to deal with "being human" and in that, have come to the realization that I am not the skin I am in.

I personally think about the idea a lot, and it really creeps me out. I know there are other sentient beings just like me. As an example: I know other sentient beings exist, and that those other beings have been born in the form of a cow. I know that a male cow's life will most likely be bred for a specific reason only, and that reason is to sire the female cow to give us milk, but for the bulk of excess male cows, their life seems to end in what I can only see as a most horrific end, by being left to hang upside down on a metal hook, having had it's throat slit open with all it's blood spewing from it's body onto some abattoir floor.

I think about how I could have been born a bull cow instead of a human. . It's breaks my heart to think about being born as a cow and having to endure that sort of experience.

So, what I am trying to say is, it freaks me out that I cannot know, nor can I ever understand why something is born as a human being, and something else is born as a cow. I think about what if I was a cow and not a human being. I do not think there is anything awesome about a male cow hanging upside down in some slaughterhouse.

There are many more examples I could give, but one will hopefully be enough for you to get the gist of what I mean.

Yes - thanks for that. Only half and hour ago I was writing about this subject in another forum [Christian Debate] - in relation to blood sacrifice.

This is part of what I wrote in that thread;

From The Story inspired by YHWH:
Genesis 2/21
Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

YHWH cannot have killed and skinned the animals he got the skins off, without himself wearing form to do so. This then became the first blood sacrifice, and this blood sacrifice can be seen repeated within many of the biblical stories as symbolic tradition related to those ones commitment to YHWH.

With this initial sacrifice, YHWH would have taught the pair something that they would have to do in order to survive the harsh reality outside the gated Eden. Eat other animals and use the left overs for clothing and other tools/devices.

The next story we have of YHWH involved with humans is with Adam and his Wife's Children, Cain and Able.

In this we see clearly that meat and humans killing other sentient beings in order to eat and thus survive the harsh conditions we are experiencing, is interwoven in this [and in many other] religious writing. The act is simply interwoven with humanity.

For me, I think of myself differently than being "a human" and also wrote this a few minutes ago;

I understand that humans are not who they think they are, and it is this identity crisis which leads to incorrect understand as to the nature of reality.

Humans are just 'skins' or "suits" which are worn by entities who created this virtual reality. We are possibly or even probably those entities who created this VR and the mistake made is that - not knowing this - we mistake ourselves as the experience rather than those who are having the experience ...and this notion is further reinforced by beliefs that our consciousness emerges from brain-matter.

This is the same thing as your referencing "Mistaking the map for the terrain"

[Dontaskme]

...actioned by no thing...

How can one suppose there is an action if there is no actor? I can make no sense of "there was a running" if there was no runner.

''actioned by no thing'' simply implies a unitary action, in the context there can be no action without an actor, and no actor without an action, both action and actor are inseparably happening simultaneously in the exact same moment as one unitary action.
Knowing the action has taken place is an appearance of duality where the mind of knowledge, aka consciousness splits what is happening as one unitary action into two things, namely, the actor and the action. This mental splitting is an illusion created by the brain as it attempts to make sense of what is happening as and through knowledge of experiences.

I can make no sense of a "painting" that had no painter. Actions don't exist in the way that actors do...they exist only in the dynamics of the actor.

But the concept 'actor' can only be known in relation to the concept 'action'. Drop the dualistic relative concepts, and it can be seen that there is simply ''actioning'' happening, or put another way, there's just 'what's happening' which is always and ever one unitary action.

We could say, "There's Tom, the painter; but he's not painting right now." But we could never say, "There's the action of painting, but there's no Tom doing it." We could say, "There's a DAM, but she's not typing right now," but not "There is a typing, but neither DAM nor any other person doing it."

[Dontaskme]

This is the same thing as your referencing "Mistaking the map for the terrain"

Thank you for your reply, I did read it all, I understand what you are saying, because I too have believed in what you have said here to be the way things are. I used to believe that we are not our body, and that the body is just a vehicle for spirit. I beleived this for a long long time, but was never really satisfied with it because of the pain problem.

If like you say we are the ones that created ourselves, how could we possibly believe this VR would be a good idea. To me, it's an absolutely preposterous idea, to create sentient organisms to endure millions of years of pain and torture, ending in death anyway.

Unless it's all just the result of random unintelligent crude forces, and chemical molecules mindlessly replicating themselves for no reason or puropse or meaning, and no knowing of how to stop it. It's all just a bad mindless idea in my opinion.

Then there's the Christians hoping and petitioning their god for eternal life...which never made any sense to me whatsoever, for all that is known is what's happening here in physical flesh and blood, I mean who would want to live forever in this torture chamber. Religion doesn't make any sense to me.



.