To Immanuel Can

[Immanuel Can]

As long as you continue to reject nondual understanding for what it is, then you'll never understand that non-existence IS existence...and all I can do is keep pointing this out to you.

Totally silly.

I can't be bothered.

[Dontaskme]

As long as you continue to reject nondual understanding for what it is, then you'll never understand that non-existence IS existence...and all I can do is keep pointing this out to you.

Totally silly.

I can't be bothered.

Just admit it, you cannot understand nonduality, no one will judge you, no one will think any less of you. You're not alone, it's one of the hardest things for the mind to fully grasp.

All you can say is that you cannot be bothered, and yet can be bothered to ram home your own bs. And that's fine because everything you know has come from you only. Not from any concept you know to exist beyond yourself, but from you alone, what you know is sourced only within you. Not in me, or other, or some concept called god or jesus, but from YOU.

Also, if your claim to know is authentic and real, then everyone elses claim to know will be real and authentic too...because their source of KNOWING would have come from the exact same place as where yours comes from.

You really are some arrogant little cock aren't you.

.

[Immanuel Can]

As long as you continue to reject nondual understanding for what it is, then you'll never understand that non-existence IS existence...and all I can do is keep pointing this out to you.

Totally silly.

I can't be bothered.

Just admit it, you cannot understand nonduality,

Yeah...that's the problem, eh? It's that I can't understand the profound wonders of a belief so stupid it cannot even keep faith with its own suppositions.

Right you are...the problem's mine, not "Non-duality's".

[Dontaskme]

Totally silly.

I can't be bothered.

Just admit it, you cannot understand nonduality,

Yeah...that's the problem, eh? It's that I can't understand the profound wonders of a belief so stupid it cannot even keep faith with its own suppositions.

Right you are...the problem's mine, not "Non-duality's".

Your falling into the trap of pointing the blame at the messenger. I do that sometimes, it's ok.

Listen to the message, the conceptual narrative, notice where it's coming from...it's not coming from I because I is also the message.

[Dontaskme]

It's that I can't understand the profound wonders of a belief so stupid it cannot even keep faith with its own suppositions.

Right you are...the problem's mine, not "Non-duality's".

The I is a concept known, and concepts know no-thing. No more than a tree can know it's a tree, because a tree just is.

You cannot know you know without splitting into two, the knower and the known...and yet the known is inseparable from the knowing. That's what non-duality is, it's both non-and dual at the same time, and yet neither within the reality that is timelessness.


Nonduality is not a belief system, it's that which does away with all belief systems. It's reality before it's conceptually painted as a thing by the naked reality itself. It's a picture of no thing...appearing as if it's a thing.

Nonduality is not stupid...it's the fundamental truth of reality and you are that...but you got to be prepared to listen to it.

The religious book that is the Bible is a story, it's the dream of separation that is in reality nondual.

The story is real IC...no one is blaming the author of the story that everyone can read. The story is all that can be known, by the same one reader that is all of us..every single one of us is the same one knowing reader of the many authors that appear in this knowing.

It's about understanding...I personally understand what the bible is standing for, what it represents....because I am prepared to listen..but the ultimate knowledge we are all reading ..is just that, it's just a story...

Where are stories sourced?

The answer is also the story.

[Dontaskme]

IC..you cannot know yourself, you cannot know you know..because in knowing you know that would alter the ever flowing real story as it is being written in realime. It's only through memory that is always of passed tense does the knowing appear to know itself now as and through the replay or repost of what's already happened..Real Knowing is always in the immediate flowing moment that never flows backwards upon itself ..else it dam up the flow.

I know this is all just word salad..but so is the Bible and the Koran...and most poetry. Real reality does not need a story to be, no more than a cat makes plans for it's future, a cat is just living in the moment, the only place that is real.

[bahman]

But you will not have the choice of evil when you are in Heaven. So what is happening with your free will?

Nothing at all.

Once you get married, you no longer have the choice of sleeping with every woman you meet. Does that mean you were not free in getting married?

We could marry God in Paradise.

Atheism isn't always a moral failure: but it is always a failure of logic.

Aha, now you are not making sense at all.

Explain.

You are claiming that all atheists are dishonest.

Genetics dictate a tendency toward certain behavior.

A "tendency" is not an "inevitability." And there's nothing "certain" about what a person will choose.

True but what makes people different is their tendencies.

The Bible says they are. I think they are.

But okay, I'll play: let's see if I can please you.

If there were an evidence for God, what would it look like? What would you accept as evidence of God's existence? If I can provide you with it, I will.

You cannot help me.

Well, then, you cannot complain that I have not provided you with evidence for God. There is, quite simply, then, nothing you will allow to BE evidence for God.

I want to see God. More than that I want to see God create another universe to believe in.

If there is a God who is all-powerful, why He does not come down from Heaven and show everybody that He exists. As simple as tha

t.
The answer, Biblically speaking, is that because if He did, you would have no choice at all but to believe in Him. And all the people who were born afterward would also be without any choice. The personal presence of God is overwhelming...so powerful, that He said to Moses and to Elijah as well, "No one can see my face and live." And as for those people who even after had a vision of God (like Isaiah and John), the Bible says they "fell on their faces like dead men." That's pretty overwhelming: if God shows up, there's no choice anymore.

But God desires us to have the choice. He does not force us to love and know Him. He offers it freely.

But we are face to face with God in Heaven? Don't we? More than that this is just an excuse to me from the all-powerful God.

[bahman]

"You cannot help me. If there is a God who is all-powerful, why He does not come down from Heaven and show everybody that He exists. As simple as that."

If 'god' provided direct proof of 'his' existence, this would change the nature and terms of the choice. You have to be able to chose to take a leap of faith in believing in something that can't be proven.

That's a typical apologist response. Okay, but what's the difference in choosing to believe in x and choosing the 'good' therefore, and directly experiencing and knowing x, and choosing the 'good' therefore?

Ah, I see. This in fact isn't an essential feature and 'god' could have excluded it and saved us a lot of trouble.

The reason for the commitment to the 'good' has less to do with the veracity of the proof that 'god' exists or not, and more to do with the existential consequences of bisbelief. Pascal had to have thought of this.

Really the motivating force to do the 'good' is that effort to avoid the punishment, damnation, eternal torment, separation from 'god', etc., promised by the religion.

So 'god' could just as easily have revealed himself, indisputably, and the terms and conditions of the compulsion of humans to choose, would be the same. They'd be deciding for the same reasons.

'Faith' has absolutely no necessary function in the mechanics of Christianity... and, in fact, can create all kinds of unnecessary confusion and frustration in its believers.

Not only that, but there's also the proof that a claimed revelatory experience of 'god' was not an imposter, that's a problem.

Moreover, 'god' would know about this problem, so we'd expect 'him' not to hold us accountable for our skepticism toward revelatory knowledge of 'him'. In other words, 'god' wouldn't do it that way. Ergo, Christianity would have to be false cuz 'god' don't be trippin like that.

Hell yeah. See you in Hell!

[promethean75]

I'm tryna tell you there is no 'hell'. There's only France (FZ).

The christian 'god' is a boogeyman because real 'gods' wouldn't behave like that. Seriously. Know how to select your 'gods'. The abrahamic 'god' is a buffoon bro. We ain't tryna hear all that.

Instead what you got is a symbol for all the collective confusions of man's most progressive forms of neuroses. Man's most concealed, most sacred lie to himself (to avoid the plunge into niheelism); that all this is for something, anything. Please don't tell me all this was for nuthin.

[promethean75]

It's a paralyzing thought you know, and one of the hardest things to do in life is get to the intellectual maturity level of a guy like Epicurus, in your attitude toward death. It really can't matter. it's only the dying process that might be bad. But total oblivion involves no experience whatsoever, least of all bad experience.

What makes life existentially absurd is that we have to know this as we live out our lives. Knowing one day you gotta die.

Like why'd we even have to become self-aware in the first place. Other animals don't trip on their own mortality like we do. They ack like they'ont even know they're gonna die. Shit man that's half the struggle right there. It's the whole impending doom thing that makes life suck, essentially. It really does suck tho. Like I'm not even tryna be pessimistic and all that shit. Ax Nietzsche. Even he said that wise men of every age have agreed alike; that life is no good.

[Immanuel Can]

We could marry God in Paradise.

Nope.

Aha, now you are not making sense at all.

Explain.

You are claiming that all atheists are dishonest.

No, I'm claiming that some are honest...honestly wrong.

But Atheism itself -- the ideology, that is -- is never rational, and cannot be articulated in a rational way.

Genetics dictate a tendency toward certain behavior.

A "tendency" is not an "inevitability." And there's nothing "certain" about what a person will choose.

True but what makes people different is their tendencies.

Their "tendencies" describe only what they "may feel they prefer" to do, but may not actually ever do.

Their actual choices...that's the thing that really separates them from each other, because those are the things they actually do.

I want to see God.

Then what evidence would you accept?

But we are face to face with God in Heaven? Don't we?

Indeed. And when we do, there won't be even one of us that will have a doubt left. So we have only this brief span of time here to decide what we shall choose, freely, of our own volition.

[Immanuel Can]

Nonduality is not stupid...

It's so stupid it cannot even keep its own story straight.

[Immanuel Can]

Hell yeah. See you in Hell!

In Hell, nobody sees anybody. It's a place of separation, not of relationship.

You don't want to be there. In fact, you don't even want to joke about being there.

[bahman]

We could marry God in Paradise.

Nope.

Why not? Remember. That is the all-powerful God.

Explain.

You are claiming that all atheists are dishonest.

No, I'm claiming that some are honest...honestly wrong.

But Atheism itself -- the ideology, that is -- is never rational, and cannot be articulated in a rational way.

It seems to me that you also cannot articulate a rational view too so what is left?

A "tendency" is not an "inevitability." And there's nothing "certain" about what a person will choose.

True but what makes people different is their tendencies.

Their "tendencies" describe only what they "may feel they prefer" to do, but may not actually ever do.

Their actual choices...that's the thing that really separates them from each other, because those are the things they actually do.

True, so you agree that people are different based on their nature?

I want to see God.

Then what evidence would you accept?

Don't take me wrong. I am a spiritual person. Spiritual beings are tremendously strong. Anybody can claim that She/He is God by performing miracles. To know the truth of the matter one needs to witness the act of creation. Only in this case, one can say that she/he witnessed God.

But we are face to face with God in Heaven? Don't we?

Indeed. And when we do, there won't be even one of us that will have a doubt left. So we have only this brief span of time here to decide what we shall choose, freely, of our own volition.

That does not satisfy me. I need to see that act of creation to ensure that I am witnessing God.

[bahman]

Hell yeah. See you in Hell!

In Hell, nobody sees anybody. It's a place of separation, not of relationship.

How do you know? Did you witness the Hell?

You don't want to be there. In fact, you don't even want to joke about being there.

I am not sure. The eternal life even in Heaven will eventually turn into a Hell since you get used to the things you enjoy. You will see that I am right if you think thoroughly.