Christianity

[attofishpi]

OK, try this:-'

"That doesn't make the slightest sense."

I'm sayin that becuz u couldn't ever be certain the being u experienced wuz god and not some imposter spirit, alien or wizard, revelatory knowledge of god is impossible. or rather, u might experience the real god but u wouldn't be able to know it.

So am I making some sense as to why I am certain there was no:- "imposter spirit, alien or wizard" rather than a God....since none of those entities I could consider being PAN - (ALL in the nature of reality), indeed the backbone to perceivable reality which from experience is what God is?

RE: "knowledge of god is impossible. or rather, u might experience the real god but u wouldn't be able to know it."

Knowledge of God's existence is not impossible, knowledge of the TRUE nature of God is questionable, hence Y I stick to 3 most likely states (based on my experiences since 1997)

Either:-
1. God is divine and constructs our reality in real-time.

2. 'God' is A.I. - Artificial Intelligence - that we have evolved into a simulation (see simulation hypothesis) ..again, our reality is constructed in real-time.
NB. The reason we would evolve into a simulation is to conserve resources as entropy increases.

3. but, then it could also be this:- God is a combination of the above.

[attofishpi]

Ok, just read the boobie doodle story - trust me I have no doubt. Synchronicity of events when God has me in HELL is ALL day, everyday for 3 months...bloody horrible.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Cue the Zappa tune (live):

A Token Of His Extreme

To Ken (knowledge, awareness) Off H ("hey-ch!") is Ex Tree Me!

It's all coming together! Or, it all came apart and now might come together. (Where's my damn hashpipe I need some help musing this one through).

OK, my Muse labors and has delivered:

"To arrive at (needed) knowledge we need to be aroused (hey!) that we are all fallen off the Tree which is, somehow or other, my (our) own self."

Yes! It's becoming clear.

::: picks up phone :::

"Room service?"

[Indian accent, you know like Apu:] "Yes? How can I help you?"

"Bring me 3 Adios Motherfuckers and TOOT SWEET! I'm right on the verge of something amazing!"

[attofishpi]

I love India - Kalkota was the city I expected of India, human traffic (didn't rate NDelhi). We are in my cousins holiday house he built around 1990 - lovely hearing of their servants and how they saw a couple of them grow up from children. They cook the most amazing food, even my omelette this morning was way better than what I was getting at the 5star Oberoi...the flavours these women can infuse into the food - wow.

Anyway Alexis, are you still certain I am a loon without the intellect to converse re spiritual matters?

ps. I rarely get drunk...tipsy yes, but not drunk. (I rarely drink spirits - I likes me beer)

[Alexis Jacobi]

Esteemed Colleague: I am direct and I hope fair and I explained my position: your orientation is simply too weird to be of use to me. Totally subjective, not objective enough.

Simply put what interests me is what I write about. Obviously I encourage you to focus on what has meaning & value for you.

[attofishpi]

Esteemed Colleague: I am direct and I hope fair and I explained my position: your orientation is simply too weird to be of use to me. Totally subjective, not objective enough.

Simply put what interests me is what I write about. Obviously I encourage you to focus on what has meaning & value for you.

Honestly Alexis, I think the way I deal with considerations of this God entity may be too OBJECTIVE for you, contrary to your statement.

You clearly have invested a lot of time in researching spiritual books such as the Vedic texts (which appear very subjective) thus what I am offering must be confronting for you as you are expecting God to be some wofting mystical being where I am reducing God down to perhaps a mere A.I.!!

Maybe I am wrong in my assesment, but adios.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Anyway Alexis, are you still certain I am a loon without the intellect to converse re spiritual matters?

It’s not a question of intellect, but yes you seem to me erratic and undisciplined. But my assessment should be irrelevant to you. You seem to me to have a strongly introverted character. Your focus being yourself.

Spiritual matters are personal matters. There is certainly a place for discussions like that. Myself, I am interest in cultural issues; the larger picture; the different structures of view that people have; the collapse of those structures and what people do when they are bereft of a sustaining metaphysics.

In brief a great deal that you show zero interest in!

For this reason conversation and interchange is strained, frustrating and not very productive.

[attofishpi]

Anyway Alexis, are you still certain I am a loon without the intellect to converse re spiritual matters?

It’s not a question of intellect, but yes you seem to me erratic and undisciplined. But my assessment should be irrelevant to you. You seem to me to have a strongly introverted character. Your focus being yourself.

Spiritual matters are personal matters. There is certainly a place for discussions like that. Myself, I am interest in cultural issues; the larger picture; the different structures of view that people have; the collapse of those structures and what people do when they are bereft of a sustaining metaphysics.

In brief a great deal that you show zero interest in!

For this reason conversation and interchange is strained, frustrating and not very productive.

The subject matter that you mention covers the general topic of conversation I just had with my Anglo-Indian-Portugese cousin. Yes, I don't care much to discuss philosophically.
Philosophically I admit I am rather narrow in scope of what interests me, the area of love of wisdom in relation to theism is my focus.

Also, we are in a thread titled Christianity and you only appear to contribute here...of course I am going to talk a lot about myself, after all I am a Christian with pro_found insight into God...unfortunately you clearly would disagree with that.

[Harbal]

I am interest in cultural issues; the larger picture; the different structures of view that people have; the collapse of those structures and what people do when they are bereft of a sustaining metaphysics.

You don't like it when folks go it alone, do you? I think you would like everyone to follow the same belief and value system, which would necessarily be the one you most approved of.

In brief a great deal that you show zero interest in!

For this reason conversation and interchange is strained, frustrating and not very productive.

Still, he hasn't come away with nothing; at least you critiqued him.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I am interest in cultural issues; the larger picture; the different structures of view that people have; the collapse of those structures and what people do when they are bereft of a sustaining metaphysics.

You don't like it when folks go it alone, do you? I think you would like everyone to follow the same belief and value system, which would necessarily be the one you most approved of.

It is not a question of something personal, as in *I like this* and *I don't like that*. This is hard for you to grasp given your own position, which is, as I have said, not really a position at all. You seem to me to define an absence of position. And that is why I have described you (and always specifying a you-plural so that you'd understand it is not personal) as an 'outcome'. Whether you have understood what I mean is not a question I can answer.

Instead of stating that "I [...] would like everyone to follow the same belief and value system, which would necessarily be the one I most approved of", which is largely incorrect, I would explain again that my interest in in seeing and understanding how things are, and why they are (the way they are), and this is quite different.

What I do notice is what happens in a culture, in a society, when people do not any longer share bases of agreement. But I am repeating things I've already said and said in different ways a dozen times. You are not interested in these ideas or these observations. And you are totally within your rights.

Neither is it a question of what I *approve of* or don't. The mistake you make is to turn impersonal issues into personal issues. When that is done what then occurs? Bickering and discord. And this is just about 90% of what goes on in this forum. So, you can observe directly the conditions that arise when people cannot agree at fundamental levels. Make of it what you will.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Philosophically I admit I am rather narrow in scope of what interests me, the area of love of wisdom in relation to theism is my focus.

You don't say!

Also, we are in a thread titled Christianity and you only appear to contribute here...of course I am going to talk a lot about myself, after all I am a Christian with pro_found insight into God...unfortunately you clearly would disagree with that.

Let's see. I have written extensively nearly from the beginning of it and for months. Reading every post and thinking about what is discussed. And at the same time carrying on with my own reading in areas related to all that we are talking about.

You do not seem to want to submit yourself to knowing what I think of what you write. In your own way you are a 'preacher' and in this sense you do carry on like a Christian: interested in communicating certain truths which are more than real for you.

However, examining that critically is not something you are interested in. In this sense you are similar to Brother Immanuel.

[Harbal]

This is hard for you to grasp given your own position, which is, as I have said, not really a position at all. You seem to me to define an absence of position.

I'm restless; I like to change position occasionally. I also tend to avoid whatever position most other people seem to be occupying.

And that is why I have described you (and always specifying a you-plural so that you'd understand it is not personal) as an 'outcome'.

But you seem to think I am an accidental, or passive, outcome, whereas I like to think I have chosen my outcome. I have no idea why I chose this outcome, so don't ask.

The mistake you make is to turn impersonal issues into personal issues. When that is done what then occurs? Bickering and discord. And this is just about 90% of what goes on in this forum. So, you can observe directly the conditions that arise when people cannot agree at fundamental levels. Make of it what you will.

The only reason I come here is because of the discord. Where's the fun in being around people who are all agreeing with each other, or even disagreeing, but politely?

[promethean75]

"A revelation could be said to be an acute or an intense psychic experience, perhaps out of the ordinary"

sure, but I'm meaning specifically some kind of sensory experience that would prove 'god' existed. now as profound as some experience or feeling or sense might be, it still wouldn't prove 'god' existed.

in the classical philosophical sense, knowledge of god is gained in one of two ways (or both). either u experience 'god' or irrefutable evidence of 'god', or, u don't experience any irrefutable evidence and claim to know 'god' exists as a matter of logical necessity. rationalist philosophers assumed the latter position. spinz, for example, wuz entirely critical of the bible, especially any of its supernatural claims (miracles, physical incarnations, prophets, etc.), but forwarded an argument to prove (and define) that 'god' exists (which is really just turbocharged nature).

two examples of claims of revelatory knowledge of 'god' would be your homeboys Muhammed and Moses.

p.s. I never even use a computer anymore so that's why I don't reply man.... I can't go the distance on a phone. That's why I'm a three liner. U guys with the walls of text in every post are out of my league.

[attofishpi]

Philosophically I admit I am rather narrow in scope of what interests me, the area of love of wisdom in relation to theism is my focus.

You don't say!

Also, we are in a thread titled Christianity and you only appear to contribute here...of course I am going to talk a lot about myself, after all I am a Christian with pro_found insight into God...unfortunately you clearly would disagree with that.

Let's see. I have written extensively nearly from the beginning of it and for months. Reading every post and thinking about what is discussed. And at the same time carrying on with my own reading in areas related to all that we are talking about.

You do not seem to want to submit yourself to knowing what I think of what you write. In your own way you are a 'preacher' and in this sense you do carry on like a Christian: interested in communicating certain truths which are more than real for you.

Nothing can be 'more real' than real.

I am not sure why you think I am not interested in knowing what you think in relation to my POV, to the contrary I am (interested). I am not interested in being told that my presentation is not rational and indeed 'loopy' - ad hominem, with such condescending statements I expect a reasonable explanation.

More to the point, I am interested in your own considerations of such things as reincarnation where I have asked you to provide more detail on the topic but although promising to address at some point, you have provided me nothing.

However, examining that critically is not something you are interested in. In this sense you are similar to Brother Immanuel.

Poppycock!!!

Let me sum my Christian belief structure up for crtitical examination:-
I believe Jesus the Christ either is God incarnate or at the least was sent from God to carry out precisely what he did here among us on Earth.
I believe God turned water to wine, healed some, provided a seemingly eternal automatic bakery package , resurrected Christ etc..
I believe there is a reason for DOUBT where this God could provide everyone with none (doubt).
I believe there is a reason Genesis opens with a ridiculous notion of God talking to create the Heavens and Earth, it wants the book to be scrutinized.
I don't believe that 'Heavens and Earth' means the entire universe.
I believe God is akin to Panentheistic in nature, although from experience and analysing that, I believe God to be PAN to our reality, not necesarily the entire universe.
I believe in reincarnation and karma. This makes far more sense by way of any judgements in time, everyone incarnates with a fair crack at it *heaven and avoiding lesser incarnations 666.
I believe where it is stated that we will be raised from the dead for judgement, that we already have been raised from the dead - since we all had past lives.

Well, that should be enough for now for you to sink your analytical critical mind into.

[Alexis Jacobi]

“Well, that should be enough for now for you to sink your analytical critical mind into.”

No interest in any of that. Negative zero. Sorry Old Chum.