Philosophy Now Forum

attofishpi wrote:Im not sorry about anything. There is no better 'background story' to hearing it direct from the source - something everyone on this site is lacking, you included.

You state i dont know what i am talking about - so how about you set me straight and explain what you actually KNOW because there is a vast difference to believing and knowing.

1) Jesus referer to God as his father, not as himself.

2) Jews and Muslims sees Jesus as a messiah/prophet, not son and certainly not God.

3) many faction of Christianity sees Jesus as son of God, that be the Lutheren which I have been taught, even putting myself above the bias of being Lutheren, then no legal scriptures says that Jesus is God.

Dalek Prime wrote:People talk about God and the universe like its the biggest and best thing ever. Well, guess what encompasses it? What it's expanding into? The void. Perfect void surrounds God and the universe. God and the cosmos are irregularities in it.; small pointless subsets of a perfect void. Now, one can avoid thinking about it because none of us will ever experience the void. But that doesn't change that it's there, encompassing that which one thinks is important.

*Edited for generalisation.*

It is my understanding that the universe is not expanding into a void, the universe isn't expanding into anything. There is no void, no emptiness, nothing to expand into, it's just expanding.

HexHammer wrote: 1) Jesus referer to God as his father, not as himself.

2) Jews and Muslims sees Jesus as a messiah/prophet, not son and certainly not God.

3) many faction of Christianity sees Jesus as son of God, that be the Lutheren which I have been taught, even putting myself above the bias of being Lutheren, then no legal scriptures says that Jesus is God.

My church (Lutheran) teaches that Jesus is both the son of God and God. I think this verse is a legal scripture,

John 10:30 King James Version (KJV)
30 I and my Father are one.

thedoc wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:People talk about God and the universe like its the biggest and best thing ever. Well, guess what encompasses it? What it's expanding into? The void. Perfect void surrounds God and the universe. God and the cosmos are irregularities in it.; small pointless subsets of a perfect void. Now, one can avoid thinking about it because none of us will ever experience the void. But that doesn't change that it's there, encompassing that which one thinks is important.

*Edited for generalisation.*

It is my understanding that the universe is not expanding into a void, the universe isn't expanding into anything. There is no void, no emptiness, nothing to expand into, it's just expanding.

What's it expanding into then? Void is the best guess. It's not expanding into concrete. Void is not even a vacuum. Vacuum is something; void just is. It's a label, not a thing. So to say there is no void is to say you have determined what a void actually is, beyond the label. And as anything at peak expansion could not gain the momentum to cross over, its impossible to know what void is, beyond a label.

thedoc wrote:John 10:30 King James Version (KJV)
30 I and my Father are one.

When he was on the cross it was a different tune "Eli eli, why have you forsaken me" if he was really his father, he wouldn't ask his father, but himself. So ..yearh.

thedoc wrote:My church (Lutheran) teaches that Jesus is both the son of God and God.

Problem is, in the past decades most churches has changed doctrins, in the start Lutheren least here in Denmark said that there's no absolution! Only God can give absolution, therefore you should not sin! In these modern times, they preach that just believe in God and all of your sins are forgiven.

So you thought this would be easy did you Reflex? Heh heh heh. The idea of the fallen human condition and how it relates to a realistic conception of God is so difficult because of the emotion involved. Yet as we've seen, with attempts like CIRET cooperation is possible. Just consider people of high intellect, emotion, and mechanical strengths getting together knowing they each have a piece of the puzzle and consciously strive together towards a higher quality of being in which their strengths are balanced in pursuit of the truth. Such cooperation is usually denied in favor of argument. But the point is that it is possible and we need more of them. Whatever you can contribute to the cause of awakening through meaningful questions helps.

attofishpi wrote:

Greta wrote:

attofishpi wrote:There is no better 'background story' to hearing it direct from the source - something everyone on this site is lacking, you included.

In other words, you had a peak experience and interpreted according to the usual religious beliefs of your culture. You don't have to be a Jesus freak to have these experiences which, to be fair, defy description.

What do you mean by a "peak experience". I have had 19yrs of direct interaction with God.

From Wiki:

The concept was originally developed by Abraham Maslow in 1964, who describes peak experiences as "rare, exciting, oceanic, deeply moving, exhilarating, elevating experiences that generate an advanced form of perceiving reality, and are even mystic and magical in their effect upon the experimenter".

attofishpi wrote:Sure. However you are failing to understand, no fault of yours, you probably havent been following my posts over the past five years so ill sum up a little in relation to your statement.

My bad. I assumed you were referring to peak experiences. Based on your description of "heaven and hell", your journey appears to be a struggle for personal growth, and perhaps some pretty harsh self-judgement. The second peak experience I had was pure bliss and accompanied by an all-encompassing and unaccountable (other than by dopamine levels) sense of unconditional love.

attofishpi wrote:A sage contacted me from the aether after an incident many years ago ...

A near death experience?

Nick_A to Reflex wrote:Just consider people of high intellect, emotion, and mechanical strengths getting together knowing they each have a piece of the puzzle and consciously strive together towards a higher quality of being in which their strengths are balanced in pursuit of the truth.

Do you think people can do this with each other if they don't see the same "truth"?

Nick_A to Reflex wrote:Such cooperation is usually denied in favor of argument.

Does that happen when some want to insist on knowing the ultimate truth for all? If we could agree that there are many truths, and many paths, could we find areas to cooperate amidst our diversity -- or is the driving reasoning or platform too exclusive and too interwoven into every thought and action?

Lacewing wrote: Do you think people can do this with each other if they don't see the same "truth"?

Yes, that is the idea. Intellect, emotion, and the senses is how we take in the eternal world. We are incapable of experiencing the truth the heart searches for since our parts are out of balance. Some are humble enough to admit it

Does that happen when some want to insist on knowing the ultimate truth for all? If we could agree that there are many truths, and many paths, could we find areas to cooperate amidst our diversity -- or is the driving reasoning or platform too exclusive and too interwoven into every thought and action?

There can be only one truth; one “Good.” Existence consists of devolutions of this truth into subjective conceptions; unity into diversity. There are many paths that lead to the “Way” but there is only one Way. Some people have a high intellect, others have emotional intelligence, and others have the physical strengths to carry out the will of the mind and the emotions. Some sense the value of recognizing the importance of each quality

This is an ancient idea. For example Gene Roddenberry was a man of understanding. The original Star Trek was based on knowledge of the human condition. Mr. Spock represented the intellectual man. Doctor McCoy represented the emotional man and Capt.Kirk represented the physical man. Together they operated the Enterprise which represents the totality of the human organism. A minority of people understand that they only have a piece of the truth and sense the importance of experiencing the other pieces in pursuit of the ever unchanging Source.

Fugedaboudit.

Nick_A wrote:So you thought this would be easy did you Reflex? Heh heh heh. The idea of the fallen human condition and how it relates to a realistic conception of God is so difficult because of the emotion involved. Yet as we've seen, with attempts like CIRET cooperation is possible. Just consider people of high intellect, emotion, and mechanical strengths getting together knowing they each have a piece of the puzzle and consciously strive together towards a higher quality of being in which their strengths are balanced in pursuit of the truth. Such cooperation is usually denied in favor of argument. But the point is that it is possible and we need more of them. Whatever you can contribute to the cause of awakening through meaningful questions helps.

Like I told uwot, who said: "Your critics are asking what do you "know" about this god, and how do you know it?"

Then I suggest they take a course in reading comprehension and find the courage within themselves to posit a narrative that informs them about who they are, where they come from and how they should live. Anyone can be a critic; not everyone has the wherewithal to posit such a narrative.

Five-time prime minister Giovanni Giolitti (1842-1928) supposedly said when asked by a journalist whether governing Italy was difficult: “It is not difficult, but it is useless.” The situation here is similar.

Dalek Prime wrote:

thedoc wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:People talk about God and the universe like its the biggest and best thing ever. Well, guess what encompasses it? What it's expanding into? The void. Perfect void surrounds God and the universe. God and the cosmos are irregularities in it.; small pointless subsets of a perfect void. Now, one can avoid thinking about it because none of us will ever experience the void. But that doesn't change that it's there, encompassing that which one thinks is important.

*Edited for generalisation.*

It is my understanding that the universe is not expanding into a void, the universe isn't expanding into anything. There is no void, no emptiness, nothing to expand into, it's just expanding.

What's it expanding into then? Void is the best guess. It's not expanding into concrete. Void is not even a vacuum. Vacuum is something; void just is. It's a label, not a thing. So to say there is no void is to say you have determined what a void actually is, beyond the label. And as anything at peak expansion could not gain the momentum to cross over, its impossible to know what void is, beyond a label.

Why should the Universe be expanding into something, even a void? There is no reason to expect that the Universe will conform to human expectations. The Universe will do as the Universe does and human expectations have no control or determination of it. It is extremely provincial to assign human experience as the limiting factor to what the Universe can or cannot do.

HexHammer wrote:

thedoc wrote:My church (Lutheran) teaches that Jesus is both the son of God and God.

Problem is, in the past decades most churches has changed doctrins, in the start Lutheren least here in Denmark said that there's no absolution! Only God can give absolution, therefore you should not sin! In these modern times, they preach that just believe in God and all of your sins are forgiven.

It doesn't matter what churches taught in the past, what matters is what they teach now, and my church teaches that Jesus and God are one being along with the Holy Spirit. Three in One.

thedoc wrote: Jesus and God are one being along with the Holy Spirit. Three in One.

We can see a modern variation of this principle in the retailing technique of "buy one, get one free". Perhaps, in return, the Church should adopt the retailing practice of taking their products off the shelf after they've reached their sell by date.