Philosophy Now Forum

Age wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:56 pm

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:57 pm

Age wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 12:32 am WHY, in the days when this is being written, some of you still refer to human beings as "men" and to God as a "he"?

One of the main reasons WHY 'you' have still not found thee ACTUAL Truth of things is because of the falsehoods that you consistently persist with.

Actual truth, such as?

Regards
DL

God could NEVER be a "he", nor ANY male gendered thing.

Restrictive.

I am more of an esoteric ecumenists and am more open minded.

This might help show my view. I like his thinking, but the the goof ends in idol worshiping Jesus, while ignoring the poor morality in him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkZg1ZflpJs

I don't think we are thinking that differently. I just have looser terms.

Have you ever noted how Yahweh was portrayed as androgynous before Christianity took the feminine out of the Jewish god?

That is also why Christians had to invent the rib woman for Adam.

Now Adam could go fuck himself. Joking.

Sorry. I could not help that last.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:54 pm

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:43 pm

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Wed Oct 20, 2021 5:41 pm

Are you saying God is supernatural?

I have lost track of what you claim as a label for yourself.

If so, if one supernatural realm exists, it opens the door to many supernatural realms and Gods.

I see us as creating all of our gods, basically as a wish list that has many wanting and adoring a genocidal p**** of a god.

Regards
DL

I am saying God expresses God through man thus man is God as an extension of God. As God man determines his fate and reaps the consequence of his actions as his actions have consequences with these consequences being the creation of reality. The creation of reality is beyond Good and Evil.

Weird language. Poor English.

If you would have just answered the fucking question, we would not have to go through this shit.

I have no clue as to who created who by the crappie way you put it.

Man created all his/the gods. Right?

Man controls God and Gods do not control us. Right?

Regards
DL

Man is Gods will and man acts through God's will thus man creating God is God creating himself through his proxy known as man.

Correct.

The esoteric Gnostic Christian view as well as the main Jewish lesson.

That is why we should be quick to kill the evil ones like Yahweh/Jesus.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:58 pm

Age wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 7:56 pm

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 6:57 pm

Actual truth, such as?

Regards
DL

God could NEVER be a "he", nor ANY male gendered thing.

Restrictive.

In regards to 'what', exactly?

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:58 pm I am more of an esoteric ecumenists and am more open minded.

What is the 'mind', to you, exactly?

Greatest I am wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:58 pm This might help show my view. I like his thinking, but the the goof ends in idol worshiping Jesus, while ignoring the poor morality in him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkZg1ZflpJs

I don't think we are thinking that differently. I just have looser terms.

Have you ever noted how Yahweh was portrayed as androgynous before Christianity took the feminine out of the Jewish god?

That is also why Christians had to invent the rib woman for Adam.

Now Adam could go fuck himself. Joking.

Sorry. I could not help that last.

Regards
DL

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:39 pm

Age wrote: ↑Tue Oct 26, 2021 8:02 pm
Obviously, from your perspective, only.

Which by the way, "your truth" here is NOT consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things.

Bore off with your dead horse flogging. And Stop looking through the wrong end of the telescope. It's like you're in this constant super hyper state of rinse and repeat mode.Wake up, the bleeding parrot is as dead as a doornail, can't you see.

If what you say is inconsistent, then it is just inconsistent.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 3:19 am
If what you say is inconsistent, then it is just inconsistent.

Which by the way, "your truth" here is NOT consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things.



I guess we both just proved the art of parrot talking.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 9:05 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 3:19 am
If what you say is inconsistent, then it is just inconsistent.

Which by the way, "your truth" here is NOT consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things.

How could that not be consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 9:05 am

I guess we both just proved the art of parrot talking.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 7:16 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 9:05 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 3:19 am
If what you say is inconsistent, then it is just inconsistent.

Which by the way, "your truth" here is NOT consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things.

How could that not be consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 9:05 am

I guess we both just proved the art of parrot talking.

How long is a piece of string?

All truths are Absolutely relative, in other words, there can only be a relative perception of truth, never the absolute ACTUAL truth...which is SILENCE

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 7:20 am

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 7:16 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 9:05 am

Which by the way, "your truth" here is NOT consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things.

How could that not be consistent with thee ACTUAL Truth of things?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Oct 28, 2021 9:05 am

I guess we both just proved the art of parrot talking.

How long is a piece of string?

Twice as long as half its length.

But what has this question of yours got to do with what I asked you?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 7:20 am All truths are Absolutely relative, in other words, there can only be a relative perception of truth, never the absolute ACTUAL truth

But this does not logically follow.

Just because ALL truth is relative this in no way infers that there can never be absolute ACTUAL truth.

Also, is the fact that all truths are Absolutely relative mean that that is just a relative truth or is in fact an absolute ACTUAL truth?

Could that truth that 'all truths are Absolutely relative' be refuted in ANY way.

If yes, then how?

But if no, then WHY is it NOT an absolute ACTUAL truth?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 7:20 am ...which is SILENCE

Can you see the amount of CONTRADICTIONS in what you have said and written here?

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:05 am
WHY is it NOT an absolute ACTUAL truth?

You are Absolute Truth, one without a second.

You cannot KNOW yourself as absolute truth without splitting yourself in two, into the knower and the known.

In reality, there is nothing known that is separated from the knower. Knower and known are one in the instantaneous moment of knowing.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:05 am
Can you see the amount of CONTRADICTIONS in what you have said and written here?

The contradiction is absolutely necessary.

There is both silence and noise. The two are inseparably interconnected, as this immediate alternating phenomena, whereby can't have one without the other. There is no one because there is no other than one.

A divine contradiction indeed, thanks for the compliment.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:35 am

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:05 am
WHY is it NOT an absolute ACTUAL truth?

You are Absolute Truth, one without a second.

But as was agreed previously the word 'you' implies or infers there is an "other".

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:35 am You cannot KNOW yourself as absolute truth without splitting yourself in two, into the knower and the known.

The word "your-self" is used to refer to one, but is, literally, split into two.

Now, how could there even be a 'you' AND a 'self'?

Who is thee actual 'one' who could possess a 'self'?

Thee ACTUAL answer is Truly revealing.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:35 am In reality, there is nothing known that is separated from the knower. Knower and known are one in the instantaneous moment of knowing.

Okay if you say so.

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 10:54 am
Okay if you say so.

There was no 'if' about it, I actually did say so.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:48 am

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 9:05 am
Can you see the amount of CONTRADICTIONS in what you have said and written here?

The contradiction is absolutely necessary.

There is both silence and noise. The two are inseparably interconnected, as this immediate alternating phenomena, whereby can't have one without the other. There is no one because there is no other than one.

A divine contradiction indeed, thanks for the compliment.

But thee one and only One does NOT compliment Itself.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 10:57 am

Age wrote: ↑Fri Oct 29, 2021 10:54 am
Okay if you say so.

There was no 'if' about it, I actually did say so.

Good point.