Understanding the religious mindset

[Lacewing]

I would like to point out, you asked me the following...

Please explain how the natural universe can have an 'awareness, that KNOWS what it is doing"? - IF there is NOT an intelligence behind it's makeup

I responded to your request, suggesting that the intelligence is within, not behind. That there is nothing separate. That all that we experience and are part of is that awareness. And we can call that 'god' if we want (although that word has been used extensively for other meanings/ideas).

This was a perfectly reasonable response that I offered... but you immediately claimed it was utter nonsense. So, is there any alternative view of 'god' (from your own) that isn't nonsense? Why did you ask the question if you were simply going to be a closed-minded dick about the answer?

[Lacewing]

Monism is the philosophy that asserts oneness as its fundamental premise, and it contradicts the dualism-based theistic premise that there is a creator God that is eternal and separate from the rest of existence. There are two types of monism, namely spiritual monism which holds that all spiritual reality is one, and material monism which holds that everything including all material reality is one and the same thing.

That's interesting.

It inspires me to ask: Is there anything other than ego that claims separateness?

[attofishpi]

I would like to point out, you asked me the following...

Please explain how the natural universe can have an 'awareness, that KNOWS what it is doing"? - IF there is NOT an intelligence behind it's makeup

I responded to your request, suggesting that the intelligence is within, not behind. That there is nothing separate. That all that we experience and are part of is that awareness. And we can call that 'god' if we want (although that word has been used extensively for other meanings/ideas).

This was a perfectly reasonable response that I offered... but you immediately claimed it was utter nonsense. So, is there any alternative view of 'god' (from your own) that isn't nonsense? Why did you ask the question if you were simply going to be a closed-minded dick about the answer?

..you appear to be lost in the semantics - I state - an intelligence behind the makeup of the natural universe. You appear to be insisting, that there is an intelligence WITHIN (the natural universe) - same difference. When I state 'behind' I am insinuating that below the planck scale, indeed at THE most finite point of infintesimally small that we, within out reality can detect/perceive, is an intelligence. WITHIN as you state (is what I am stating by way of what I have just implied.) Yes, it is within - ALL 'matter' - including that which apparently permits our own consciousness.

So if I may ask, what do you think of the concepts of Pantheism or Panentheism?

I'm really not interested in talking to you.

Clearly U R.

[henry quirk]

Monism is the philosophy that asserts oneness as its fundamental premise, and it contradicts the dualism-based theistic premise that there is a creator God that is eternal and separate from the rest of existence. There are two types of monism, namely spiritual monism which holds that all spiritual reality is one, and material monism which holds that everything including all material reality is one and the same thing.

That's interesting.

It inspires me to ask: Is there anything other than ego that claims separateness?

I can only give you my -- a deist's -- view.

I won't talk about, or defend, or criticize, the theistic perspective (or dissect your monistic view).

You still wanna hear what I think?

[Atla]

Theists in general however, even on this forum: what I find funny about them is that they have so wildly different ideas about their Gods, that they hardly could agree on anything in a hundred years. But this somehow never seems to bother them.

Yes! They are unbothered by so many contradictions... and have no desire to explore truth of philosophy. Rather, philosophy (here on the forum) is often about making unprovable claims and insisting they're valid until anyone can disprove them.

I mean, some here think that God is a really nasty 3rd party intelligence, some think that we are nested in some kind of Berkeleyen type God and holograms and all, some here are desperately trying (and failing) to teach humans how to collectively channel the awakening universe-God, some here are tryin to prove some kind of geometrical-observational-thing-nothing God or whatever the fuck, some here are textbook Christians, some here are light workers sent by God. Oh yeah and there's that painfully dry sociopath-"Christian" who is betting on the existence of heaven, and is trying to manipulate God (heh-heh) into putting him into heaven after he dies. etc. etc. there's also that guy who talks to angels and demons, and experiences God too etc.

Or something like that. I mean, how on Earth are these theists going to work out, which one of them has it right?

[attofishpi]

Theists in general however, even on this forum: what I find funny about them is that they have so wildly different ideas about their Gods, that they hardly could agree on anything in a hundred years. But this somehow never seems to bother them.

Yes! They are unbothered by so many contradictions... and have no desire to explore truth of philosophy. Rather, philosophy (here on the forum) is often about making unprovable claims and insisting they're valid until anyone can disprove them.

I mean, some here think that God is a really nasty 3rd party intelligence, some think that we are nested in some kind of Berkeleyen type God and holograms and all, some here are desperately trying (and failing) to teach humans how to collectively channel the awakening universe-God, some here are tryin to prove some kind of geometrical-observational-thing-nothing God or whatever the fuck, some here are textbook Christians, some here are light workers sent by God. Oh yeah and there's that painfully dry sociopath-"Christian" who is betting on the existence of heaven, and is trying to manipulate God (heh-heh) into putting him into heaven after he dies. etc. etc. there's also that guy who talks to angels and demons, and experiences God too etc.

Or something like that. I mean, how on Earth are these theists going to work out, which one of them has it right?

Really? - you've been paying far more attention to these theists than I have. Why not list and associate the who's who of your above statement.

The fact you clearly have experienced sweet f'all from this God\'God' entity seems to you, in your mind, to elevate you to some self belief that somehow, you are more rational than any of these theists. If that's your belief, then good for you.

Just at least don't be a coward, and at least list these individuals and their beliefs (according to you and your such in depth study).

[Atla]

Theists in general however, even on this forum: what I find funny about them is that they have so wildly different ideas about their Gods, that they hardly could agree on anything in a hundred years. But this somehow never seems to bother them.

Yes! They are unbothered by so many contradictions... and have no desire to explore truth of philosophy. Rather, philosophy (here on the forum) is often about making unprovable claims and insisting they're valid until anyone can disprove them.

I mean, some here think that God is a really nasty 3rd party intelligence, some think that we are nested in some kind of Berkeleyen type God and holograms and all, some here are desperately trying (and failing) to teach humans how to collectively channel the awakening universe-God, some here are tryin to prove some kind of geometrical-observational-thing-nothing God or whatever the fuck, some here are textbook Christians, some here are light workers sent by God. Oh yeah and there's that painfully dry sociopath-"Christian" who is betting on the existence of heaven, and is trying to manipulate God (heh-heh) into putting him into heaven after he dies. etc. etc. there's also that guy who talks to angels and demons, and experiences God too etc.

Or something like that. I mean, how on Earth are these theists going to work out, which one of them has it right?

damn, I left out the guy who achieved gnosis via the third, vertical dimension of being..

[bahman]

It is interesting to note that atheists claim that paranormal activities are hallucinations while they don't have a description of how this could happen. They don't even have a solution to the hard problem of consciousness yet they claim that paranormal activities are due to brain activities.

[seeds]

Yes! They are unbothered by so many contradictions... and have no desire to explore truth of philosophy. Rather, philosophy (here on the forum) is often about making unprovable claims and insisting they're valid until anyone can disprove them.

I mean, some here think that God is a really nasty 3rd party intelligence, some think that we are nested in some kind of Berkeleyen type God and holograms and all, some here are desperately trying (and failing) to teach humans how to collectively channel the awakening universe-God, some here are tryin to prove some kind of geometrical-observational-thing-nothing God or whatever the fuck, some here are textbook Christians, some here are light workers sent by God. Oh yeah and there's that painfully dry sociopath-"Christian" who is betting on the existence of heaven, and is trying to manipulate God (heh-heh) into putting him into heaven after he dies. etc. etc. there's also that guy who talks to angels and demons, and experiences God too etc.

Or something like that. I mean, how on Earth are these theists going to work out, which one of them has it right?

damn, I left out the guy who achieved gnosis via the third, vertical dimension of being..

Hey, and don't forget the guy whose ego is so huge that he needs a wheelbarrow to help carry around the overflow.

I'm talking about the person who wrote this:

I have long suspected that I'm the only person left on this forum who is both intelligent and has a clue, but now I'm finally completely certain of it. This isn't even funny anymore so I'm off, I'm just making a fool of myself by being here.

Like I said the last time I pointed this out to you, you definitely got the bolded part right.
_______

[Lacewing]

I have long suspected that I'm the only person left on this forum who is both intelligent and has a clue, but now I'm finally completely certain of it. This isn't even funny anymore so I'm off, I'm just making a fool of myself by being here.

...

I've thought something similar to that before, myself. It's not that outrageous to wonder... and it speaks more of frustration or bafflement than ego. Seriously, how can there be so many people with some kind of psychosis or bizarre idiocy wandering across this forum? The high ratio is perplexing. There's no need to list all their names. However, I will mention Bob Evenson (no longer here)... as one of the first I encountered... whose posts still make me laugh out loud when I run across them. Oh what fun and fury we had!

All of these rabid religious mindsets are astounding. It doesn't have to be so crazy. There is plenty of natural and simple goodness inside and outside religion to gain value from. Why do some people have to get all complex and/or psychotic about it? Do they think the more extreme the ideas, the more impressive it is? Their paths don't seem to demonstrate such rewards/benefits. Rather, they often seem tortured.

[Lacewing]

So if I may ask, what do you think of the concepts of Pantheism or Panentheism?

Why should I answer any more of your questions, considering that you act like a butthead in response?

I'm really not interested in talking to you.

Clearly U R.

That was then, this is now... for the moment. You were probably being obnoxious then too.

[Lacewing]

Monism is the philosophy that asserts oneness as its fundamental premise, and it contradicts the dualism-based theistic premise that there is a creator God that is eternal and separate from the rest of existence. There are two types of monism, namely spiritual monism which holds that all spiritual reality is one, and material monism which holds that everything including all material reality is one and the same thing.

That's interesting.

It inspires me to ask: Is there anything other than ego that claims separateness?

I can only give you my -- a deist's -- view.

I won't talk about, or defend, or criticize, the theistic perspective (or dissect your monistic view).

You still wanna hear what I think?

Sure.

[Age]

I would like to point out, you asked me the following...

Please explain how the natural universe can have an 'awareness, that KNOWS what it is doing"? - IF there is NOT an intelligence behind it's makeup

I responded to your request, suggesting that the intelligence is within, not behind. That there is nothing separate. That all that we experience and are part of is that awareness. And we can call that 'god' if we want (although that word has been used extensively for other meanings/ideas).

What OTHER 'meanings' are you talking about and referring to here?

This was a perfectly reasonable response that I offered... but you immediately claimed it was utter nonsense.

And, WHERE have I heard this CLAIM, BEFORE?

Oh, that is right, from 'you', adult human beings, when one just does NOT AGREE with what "another" says.

So, is there any alternative view of 'god' (from your own) that isn't nonsense?

EVERY view, from one's own, is OBVIOUSLY NOT nonsense.

Why did you ask the question if you were simply going to be a closed-minded dick about the answer?

Because of the ACTUAL INTENTION 'behind', and 'within', the setting up of this actual thread, MAYBE?

[Age]

SEEDS


A universal Creator

Is unknowable.

But it is ALREADY KNOWN, besides being BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS.

The universal Creator IS the Universe, Itself.

It has been, always will be, and IS ALWAYS Creating, NOW.

If such an idea was real and true, if it was known by sentient life known as human, then this universal creator would be able to recreate itself, which would imply two, the creator and created.

WHERE did this OBVIOUSLY RIDICULOUS ASSUMPTION and IDEA come from that the Creator of absolutely Everything COULD Create some OTHER thing, besides from this IDEA HAS TO BE USED, in order to ATTEMPT to "rationalize" and MAKE "true", the BELIEF that The universal Creator can NOT be KNOWN.

Also, thee universal Creator is RE-CREATING Its Self, in the sense that It is ALWAYS Creating or just CONTINUALLY re-Creating Itself, ALWAYS. It does this through the ALWAYS CONTINUAL action/re-action PROCESS.

Which is impossible for one very good reason, try splitting yourself in two, into subject and object.

'you', the 'subject', are; literally, the invisible subjective thoughts and emotions, within the visible physical human body.

'you, the 'object', are; literally, those invisible thoughts and emotions, within the visible physical human body.

AND, thee universal Creator can NOT create "another thing" when, OBVIOUSLY, thee Universe, Itself, is just One Thing, which is, literally, composed of EVERY thing.

You speak nonsense just like everyone else.

And, here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE of WHEN it is ALWAYS the "other" who, supposedly, "speaks nonsense", JUST BECAUSE thee "other", human being, THINKS and SEES things DIFFERENTLY.

ITS OK though, to be stupid is that realisation that you believe you finally know everything when you don’t.

I do NOT KNOW of ANY human being who BELIEVES that they, finally, KNOW everything.

Do 'you' KNOW of ANY human being who even THINKS this, let alone BELIEVES this?

If 'you' do, then will 'you' let 'us' KNOW who that one IS?

[Age]

Atla wrote:

Also, if you want to know, you probably see hidden messages in English words because in psychosis, mental content that should be separate, gets mixed together. The brain starts making connections between things that aren't actually connected. We start to see hidden patterns, hidden meanings everywhere, even where there are none.

Only when the subject is paranoid surely? Paranoid delusion means the subject thinks others intend harm.

What is 'it' called when "others" actually do intend harm?

It is not paranoid to see connections between natural events where intentions don't apply.