Philosophy Now Forum

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 11:26 pm Btw, there have been plenty of female goddesses: Aphrodite, Athena, Hera, Persephone.......

Yes, I pointed that out to you.

What are you going on about?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:06 pm You to me are a very silly naughty funny girl in the nicest possible way.

That fits.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:06 pmI know your heart and I know you mean well, in your own unique jokey sort of mannerism.

I do! My playfulness is thoughtful, though.

I think spirituality and philosophy without humor is like some kind of dead meat that an ego feasts on. (Wow, that was graphic...but it seems to fit.) Dynamic thoughtfulness that is ALIVE must surely recognize the tremendously amusing entanglements and justifications that we humans come up with for plodding along in (and maintaining) well-worn grooves. And the logic we ignore to maintain our philosophical towers is astounding! Devising ever-more-clever defenses for one's well-worn grooves does not demonstrate introspection or a love for wisdom -- it only demonstrates a love for "claiming to know", and a preference for a particular self-serving fantasy.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 10:06 pm I know we don't always see eye to eye, but the more I get to know you the more I like you. In a kind of frenemy's sort of way (joke!!)

Yep, I'm really not an enemy. It's a completely different experience having these wild discussions in person. I'm not quite so naughty, and the smiling way I communicate helps put it all in the right context. I have very good friends who share and appreciate such playfully challenging discussions. This online medium seems to bring out extremes from all directions for no holds barred discussions -- and perhaps that's facilitating our further evolution and broadening of awareness.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 11:01 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 8:30 pm

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 7:48 pm How very PC. God is a character in a book, and I'm pretty sure it was a male character (hence Jebus being also a male character).

Authors can name their fictional characters whatever gender they want, they can just write it in, however the reader of it's own written story has no image of itself, nor has any notion of a gender, the reader can only identify itself via association with the character written within the book that no one is writing.

.

God is a male in the same way that Voldemort is a male, and I'm glad you agree that God is a fictional character in a fictional book.

God to me is just another label for everything and nothing which is just another label for this mysterious yet familiar immediate present IS-ness. A magical sound and light show of constantly changing variables what I commonly refer to as the fictional characters within the book no thing is writing, there is here a ghost writer in action expressing itself as translated and interpreted and perceived as and through the manifestation of every thought, feeling, word, emotion, and symbol.
For me, the contents of the book are inseparable from the book itself. the book is one huge His-story book, because knowledge can only be known on reflection of what's already been written, albeit unwritten, since we are only ever reading into a fiction...hence why the book is labeled His-story

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Thu Aug 29, 2019 11:01 pmEven if God was a factual character instead of a fictional one I would prefer it to be a male. Women with power are the biggest bitches--especially when it's power without talent or natural ability.

I don't believe men and women are born bitches. I think all human behavior is learnt behavior. The best thing they can do is just to empower their selves with the actual real truth of their being, rather than feeling inferior to others and feeling like they need to have artificial or superficial power over others to make them look bigger and better, I believe that any narcissistic tendencies come from low self esteem they picked up along the way during their upbringing, in other words they mimicked their conditioning rather than had the courage to stand alone apart from the crowd and be the masters of themselves rather that try to be the masters of others, but this is just my opinion.
When men and women wake-up, to their real true nature, is when they see the bigger picture and realise we're all in the same boat here, in that what we do to other we are only doing to ourselves. We just need to learn to treat each other as we would like to be treated ourself. It seems we have a long way to go before we evolve to that kind of quality and status of being with each other.

For me,the way I vision reality is that God has no conceptual image of itself,yet can appear as every image,name,label and form etc.

That's what the nothing and everything means to me. In the story, God is a S/he, meaning both ying and yang combined. In the philosophical sense, everything has both yin and yang aspects (for instance, shadow cannot exist without light)
I also think that we are God infinitely experiencing and knowing itself as and through individuation aspects of it's same one self. And that to experience anything at all God the unlimited had to limit itself by trying on as many space suits as it possibly could think of. So in order to get in on all the action, in order to be able to act our every possible scenario that could possibly be, is why there is so much diversity. For me, the body of every living walking breathing sentient creature on earth is just God wearing a different mask as and through each of those action figures. As for the rest of nature,the non-animate props, albeit still living substances. they too are just part and parcel of this whole enchilada that is God's kingdom.

Just my ramblings...sorry for the sermon. But if you made it through, thanks for reading and good day to you woman.

.

Does I that does not believe God exists exist?

It cannot not believe that God exists if it does not exist.

IF I do not exist then I cannot not believe that God exists.

is equivalent to :

If I can not believe that God exists, then I do exist.

Because : If P then Q is equivalent to If not-Q then not-P ,

Either I do not exist or I do not believe that God exists, but not both.