The reason why shit talking Islam has exactly the opposite effect

[attofishpi]

As a former Christian, I lavishly spit, pee, and shit on Christianity. I find Christianity to be a detestable scam, suitable for illiterate peasants only.

"Shit talking Islam" - there is so much SHIT in Islam to talk about - that's nobody's fault but a paedophile warlord

Sounds like you are feeling somewhat uneasy about your choice to reject Christ, the religion where GOD had your soul born.

[godelian]

As a former Christian, I lavishly spit, pee, and shit on Christianity. I find Christianity to be a detestable scam, suitable for illiterate peasants only.

"Shit talking Islam" - there is so much SHIT in Islam to talk about - that's nobody's fault but a paedophile warlord

Sounds like you are feeling somewhat uneasy about your choice to reject Christ, the religion where GOD had your soul born.

God knows that I will never subscribe to the fake divinity of a hominid and his single mother.

[Ben JS]

What is your objective?
And is it served by feeding animosity?

There are plenty of unhealthy folks out there.
Is attacking them for their unhealthiness constructive, or destructive?

Building bridges, or placing mines along the path to common ground?

Ought you be attacked? No.
People have clearly been disrespectful to you.

But if you bite, whose interests does it serve?
You? Or those who demonize you?

[attofishpi]

As a former Christian, I lavishly spit, pee, and shit on Christianity. I find Christianity to be a detestable scam, suitable for illiterate peasants only.

"Shit talking Islam" - there is so much SHIT in Islam to talk about - that's nobody's fault but a paedophile warlord

Sounds like you are feeling somewhat uneasy about your choice to reject Christ, the religion where GOD had your soul born.

God knows that I will never subscribe to the fake divinity of a hominid and his single mother.

But "Islam", at least a thousand years after the Torah, and 666 years after Christ - via Mohammed still claims to be an Abrahmic religion - thus stemming from Judaism - where GOD stated He created man in his own image (a man)

..irony or wot?

[godelian]

"Shit talking Islam" - there is so much SHIT in Islam to talk about - that's nobody's fault but a paedophile warlord

Sounds like you are feeling somewhat uneasy about your choice to reject Christ, the religion where GOD had your soul born.

God knows that I will never subscribe to the fake divinity of a hominid and his single mother.

But "Islam", at least a thousand years after the Torah, and 666 years after Christ - via Mohammed still claims to be an Abrahmic religion - thus stemming from Judaism - where GOD stated He created man in his own image (a man)

..irony or wot?

I prefer the Quran's take on the matter:

Qur'an 42:11. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.

In Islam, God does not look like a man.

My own understanding of God, is that God is an active Platonic abstraction, while in Plato's original take on the matter, God is a passive abstraction:

The Form of the Good (τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἰδέα)
Plato’s most “God-like” concept is the Form of the Good, which he describes in The Republic:
It's the highest of all the Forms (abstract, perfect ideals of things like justice, beauty, etc.).
It is the source of all reality and knowledge.
Just as the sun enables sight and life in the visible world, the Form of the Good enables intellect and existence in the intelligible world.

So in a way, the Form of the Good is:
Eternal
Unchanging
Perfect
The ultimate cause of everything

I understand that people want God to look more like a man because that makes him more relatable. However, since it also opens the door to impersonating him, I reject that approach.

[attofishpi]

God knows that I will never subscribe to the fake divinity of a hominid and his single mother.

But "Islam", at least a thousand years after the Torah, and 666 years after Christ - via Mohammed still claims to be an Abrahmic religion - thus stemming from Judaism - where GOD stated He created man in his own image (a man)

..irony or wot?

I prefer the Quran's take on the matter:

Qur'an 42:11. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.

In Islam, God does not look like a man.

From 28 years of extremely personal experience of this GOD entity - GOD is PANTHEISTIC in nature - ALL reality IS GOD.

My analysis brings me to believe that it (its intelligence operates at or below the Planck scale) <-- so in that sense, no GOD is not a man.

However, GOD can form, incarnate into a man - as IT - GOD did via Jesus the Christ.

[accelafine]

But "Islam", at least a thousand years after the Torah, and 666 years after Christ - via Mohammed still claims to be an Abrahmic religion - thus stemming from Judaism - where GOD stated He created man in his own image (a man)

..irony or wot?

I prefer the Quran's take on the matter:

Qur'an 42:11. There is nothing like unto Him, and He is the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing.

In Islam, God does not look like a man.

From 28 years of extremely personal experience of this GOD entity - GOD is PANTHEISTIC in nature - ALL reality IS GOD.

My analysis brings me to believe that it (its intelligence operates at or below the Planck scale) <-- so in that sense, no GOD is not a man.

However, GOD can form, incarnate into a man - as IT - GOD did via Jesus the Christ.

There are many people who say something similar but far more intelligently and with mathematical evidence to back them up, but they certainly don't call it 'god'. The whole jebus story is a red herring. A non event. You need to stop confusing the two. I'm sure you did have some kind of 'spiritual' experience, possibly while on psychedelics. You aren't unique in that.

[attofishpi]

I prefer the Quran's take on the matter:



In Islam, God does not look like a man.

From 28 years of extremely personal experience of this GOD entity - GOD is PANTHEISTIC in nature - ALL reality IS GOD.

My analysis brings me to believe that it (its intelligence operates at or below the Planck scale) <-- so in that sense, no GOD is not a man.

However, GOD can form, incarnate into a man - as IT - GOD did via Jesus the Christ.

There are many people who say something similar but far more intelligently and with mathematical evidence to back them up, but they certainly don't call it 'god'. The whole jebus story is a red herring. A non event. You need to stop confusing the two. I'm sure you did have some kind of 'spiritual' experience, possibly while on psychedelics. You aren't unique in that.

Get off my back woman. Oh, well I must apologise for not meeting your standards.

How about finding a scientist that can explain (even if a 14 Century forgery - unlikely) how a 3D grayscale image could have been created upon the Shroud of Turin via some form of RADIATION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA

[attofishpi]

--- ---

Is my Brian avatar back? - I'm working from this shitty tablet o'seas, just re-uploaded even though it showed it's still there. It must be cached on my tablet, because Brian is always displayed on this device.

[accelafine]

From 28 years of extremely personal experience of this GOD entity - GOD is PANTHEISTIC in nature - ALL reality IS GOD.

My analysis brings me to believe that it (its intelligence operates at or below the Planck scale) <-- so in that sense, no GOD is not a man.

However, GOD can form, incarnate into a man - as IT - GOD did via Jesus the Christ.

There are many people who say something similar but far more intelligently and with mathematical evidence to back them up, but they certainly don't call it 'god'. The whole jebus story is a red herring. A non event. You need to stop confusing the two. I'm sure you did have some kind of 'spiritual' experience, possibly while on psychedelics. You aren't unique in that.

Get off my back woman. Oh, well I must apologise for not meeting your standards.

How about finding a scientist that can explain (even if a 14 Century forgery - unlikely) how a 3D grayscale image could have been created upon the Shroud of Turin via some form of RADIATION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA

It's been explained. You just aren't interested because it doesn't suit you to be.

[accelafine]

--- ---

Is my Brian avatar back? - I'm working from this shitty tablet o'seas, just re-uploaded even though it showed it's still there. It must be cached on my tablet, because Brian is always displayed on this device.

Yes it's back.

[attofishpi]

--- ---

Is my Brian avatar back? - I'm working from this shitty tablet o'seas, just re-uploaded even though it showed it's still there. It must be cached on my tablet, because Brian is always displayed on this device.

Yes it's back.

Yippee! Brian prefers the pronoun HE not IT

[tony1244]

This is so stupid. people dont turn to atheisme because they find christianity or islam stupid. they become atheist because thats what they believe in. if your crazy enough to believe there is a creator you shoudn't think people are crazy for thinking there isn't one

[attofishpi]

There are many people who say something similar but far more intelligently and with mathematical evidence to back them up, but they certainly don't call it 'god'. The whole jebus story is a red herring. A non event. You need to stop confusing the two. I'm sure you did have some kind of 'spiritual' experience, possibly while on psychedelics. You aren't unique in that.

Get off my back woman. Oh, well I must apologise for not meeting your standards.

How about finding a scientist that can explain (even if a 14 Century forgery - unlikely) how a 3D grayscale image could have been created upon the Shroud of Turin via some form of RADIATION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT1R2kDPHFA

It's been explained. You just aren't interested because it doesn't suit you to be.

No actually it hasn't. I am not biased in any way. My gnosis of this entity GOD is a one way trip. It was an atheist friend that made me take a second look at the analysus of the Shroud - talk about BIAS, I bet you never even bothered to watch the video in its entirety.

[attofishpi]

I prefer the Quran's take on the matter:



In Islam, God does not look like a man.

From 28 years of extremely personal experience of this GOD entity - GOD is PANTHEISTIC in nature - ALL reality IS GOD.

My analysis brings me to believe that it (its intelligence operates at or below the Planck scale) <-- so in that sense, no GOD is not a man.

However, GOD can form, incarnate into a man - as IT - GOD did via Jesus the Christ.

There are many people who say something similar but far more intelligently and with mathematical evidence to back them up, but they certainly don't call it 'god'.

Here, a ChatGPT version slight improvement perhaps

Version 1:
From 28 years of personal and profound experiential analysis, I conclude that God is pantheistic in nature — that is, all of reality itself is a manifestation of God.

Upon further philosophical and scientific reflection, I propose that the intelligence of God operates at or beneath the Planck scale, the fundamental limit of measurement in modern physics. In this sense, God is not a "man" or embodied being by default, but rather the foundational structure from which reality itself emerges.

Nevertheless, within the theological tradition and as evidenced through historical incarnation, God possesses the capacity to manifest in human form — most notably through the person of Jesus the Christ. Thus, while God's essential nature transcends all physical form, it remains within God's power to enter into creation personally and relationally.


Version 2:
Over the course of twenty-eight years of direct experiential inquiry, I have come to affirm that God is best understood as pantheistic in nature — that is, reality itself is an expression of God’s being.

Upon closer analysis, it appears that the operative intelligence of God functions at, or perhaps beneath, the Planck scale — the smallest meaningful scale of space-time according to modern physics. Consequently, God, in God's essential form, is not anthropomorphic; God is not "a man" in any literal sense, but rather the foundational matrix from which existence unfolds.

Nevertheless, classical Christian theology holds — and historical witness testifies — that God is capable of incarnating into finite form. In the event of the incarnation, God entered human history as Jesus the Christ. Thus, while God’s ontological essence transcends corporeality, it remains within God's sovereign capacity to assume human nature without ceasing to be the infinite ground of reality.

NOW personally I would make some alterations to the above to focus on EMPIRICAL analysis..