Philosophy Now Forum

Now you Explain what the second coming of christ means?

Not my religion.

I've done it up thread.

I don't care.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:21 pm

How does a dead man come back to life. He comes again in the form of see men, he comes from a body that is alive, and therefore was never actually dead, was he? He was alive the whole time, in the body that housed him.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:26 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:21 pm

How does a dead man come back to life. He comes again in the form of see men, he comes from a body that is alive, and therefore was never actually dead, was he? He was alive the whole time, in the body that housed him.

And she tells me anyway...

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:24 pm

Now you Explain what the second coming of christ means?

Not my religion.

I've done it up thread.

I don't care.

That's weird, for someone who says it's not his religion, and does not care. Yet spends most of his time playing on the Christianity thread with his sidekick IC. Yeah, we know Henry, we know you like to have a larf at other peoples expense, we know, just like we all do.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:27 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:26 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:21 pm

How does a dead man come back to life. He comes again in the form of see men, he comes from a body that is alive, and therefore was never actually dead, was he? He was alive the whole time, in the body that housed him.

And she tells me anyway...

Well you were the one who put on the thinking face.

You would never know you had egg on your face, without me to make you aware of it...I am your mirror.

You were nicer when you were Roy's flunky.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:06 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 2:07 am
Hang on is "biggy" on this forum? - I've just crawled out of bed so brain running v slow (as usual), I can't place the nickname?

I could be wrong but it could be referring to the head.

Don't be a head.

It's exactly what Advaita Vedanta Non-dual literature is saying. Except IC rejects Nonduality.

Maybe because he thinks two heads are better than one. The 'no head' and the 'a head'. . and he wouldn't be wrong about having two heads. Every earthly man has two heads. And one is usually ''bigger'' than the other, unless he's a very lucky boy...and he has two big heads. One called ''biggy'' and the other called ''bigger still''


.

ROFL

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:26 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:21 pm

How does a dead man come back to life. He comes again in the form of see men, he comes from a body that is alive, and therefore was never actually dead, was he? He was alive the whole time, in the body that housed him.

No "he" does not. There is no "he". Non dualism does not imply life after death and certainly not transmigration of souls nor reincarnation.

Not every sperm or every egg is fertile, and even if they were all fertile each human is unique. Even
a pedigree puppy is unique.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 4:05 pm

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:26 pm

henry quirk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 06, 2022 12:21 pm

How does a dead man come back to life. He comes again in the form of see men, he comes from a body that is alive, and therefore was never actually dead, was he? He was alive the whole time, in the body that housed him.

No "he" does not. There is no "he". Non dualism does not imply life after death and certainly not transmigration of souls nor reincarnation.

Not every sperm or every egg is fertile, and even if they were all fertile each human is unique. Even
a pedigree puppy is unique.

I agree.

I was just story telling, about things, just playing the role of my imagined narrative as I have contructed and authored it...in my mind...whatever and whereever that is...I've no idea!

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 3:33 pm According to Christianity, God is all powerful and all good. Yet the God of the Bible allegedly did/does things that I, personally, do not think are good (for example the flood and telling Abraham to sacrifice his son). In addition, the world itself, which God allegedly created, is full of too much that I perceive as evil. It's so difficult for me to reconcile Christianity with my reality that it causes me to feel like I ought to just give up and call myself agnostic once again. I tried to be a Christian but the shoe just doesn't fit me. I don't know if I'll go to Hell or not but I just can't follow the God of the Christian Bible. It's too difficult. The bar is set too high and I'm just not seeing any real reward or utility in being a Christian. All the fun seems to be in doing sinful things, I have yet to see where doing things pleasing to God bears any kind of enjoyable fruit for me.

A few of my own thoughts . . .

Just as we need a realistic perspective (i.e. political realism) in order to best make sense of our world, so too we need a non-idealistic, non-hallucinatory, realistic perspective in our approach toward our spiritual reality.

Let me begin by saying that when I mention political realism I am talking of perspectives like those of John Mearsheimer:

Mearsheimer is best known for developing the theory of offensive realism, which describes the interaction between great powers as being primarily driven by the rational desire to achieve regional hegemony in an anarchic international system. In accordance with his theory, Mearsheimer believes that China's growing power will likely bring it into conflict with the United States.

I would assert that all of us would benefit tremendously from taking on a realism perspective and at the very least becoming aware that no matter how idealistic we might wish to be, the fact of the matter is that *the world* operates according to strict realism principles.

For this reason, and some pages back, I ran once again into conflict with Harry Baird who is a total idealist. This form of idealism seems to me to be a terrible handicap. To oppose his sentimental and idealistic position with one of strict realism is tremendously angering to him (and to people who think in sentimental-idealistic terms) and conversation comes to a quick end.

Similarly, we can talk about Christianity as being also sentimental, idealistic, hallucinatory, inclined to fantastic theories that are completely unrealistic, as well as offering an explanatory model of *the world* that is simply, and flatly, false. But I do not say that this is entirely bad. But it does involve 'false impositions' on the world and in a sense against the world. Much that is good comes from this (and from idealism generally). But idealism has to be sober.

So to this: "According to Christianity, God is all powerful and all good" we could only say that if the World and the Universe is taken as a creation of God, the nature of God cannot, in truth (realistically) be anything like the false and idealistic image of God that standard Christianity holds to. Once this has been seen it is hard to un-see it!

The actual fact of the matter -- seen through a realism lens -- is that if there is a God overseeing this world that god is a mixture of both *goodness* and *sheer horror*. Just like life. Just like the natural world.

In regard to: "It's so difficult for me to reconcile Christianity with my reality that it causes me to feel like I ought to just give up and call myself agnostic once again" what is obviously implied as being needed is a spiritual and metaphysical realism! We have to be able to accurately *see* the world that we are really in, both politically (in all the senses connoted), but also metaphysically.

Metaphysical ideas can be either realist or irrealist. They can help us to better *see* our real situation or they can confuse us and distort how we view the world. I must say (and most will agree with me) that a great deal of Christian worldview is obviously based on the projection of an hallucination. Christianity, generally speaking, and if it is not corrected by a more sober, realistic viewpoint, leads one to a false-grasp of reality that amounts to mind-fuck. It ties one up in knots.

I tried to be a Christian but the shoe just doesn't fit me. I don't know if I'll go to Hell or not but I just can't follow the God of the Christian Bible. It's too difficult. The bar is set too high and I'm just not seeing any real reward or utility in being a Christian. All the fun seems to be in doing sinful things, I have yet to see where doing things pleasing to God bears any kind of enjoyable fruit for me.

First, and I base this on what you generally write and what I take from your description of your own situation, there will be no Hell to go to because you are aware that you are right now in a Hell. I do not mean in any sense to be mean-spirited here, quite the opposite. You therefore have an advantage that you do not seem able to exploit.

Not only is it that the ethics of Christianity do not fit you, the fact is that those ethics were developed, mostly, when there were tremendous restraints placed on people and life was, often from day one, and endless series of painful episodes. People lived with very real physical pain day in and day out. How could they not be expected to long for a 'better world' in a *beyond*?

But realistically things have changed! In the last 100 years all sorts of advances have made it possible to live relatively well within our bodily frame. Instead of life being short, painful and brutal, one can actually plan to have a relatively pleasant and pain-free life and do all manner of different things. This is new. We have returned to the body and to life in a body.

As to the issue of what is 'sinful' let's be realistic. When we lived in sheer pain (when people's lives were circumscribed by painful experience and existence) the longing for pleasure became obsessive. The seductions of pleasure were very powerful. But with a realistic philosophy, and some level of self-understanding and self-control, we can avoid getting mired in those cages that passion and lust quickly become. We have at our disposal entire arrays of possibilities to enjoy life in healthy ways. But if we fall into addiction and are seduced by lust and pleasure -- well, there is where the *sin* is.

I have yet to see where doing things pleasing to God bears any kind of enjoyable fruit for me.

Again, let's be realistic. If one can get to a place where one is *situated* realistically, then one can make sane and realistic choices about what is good and needed. For example we have right at our fingertips all that we need to be healthy of body and in good shape physically. There has never been a time in the world's history when this has been so for the majority.

So where does all the anguish come from? I suggest it is (often but not always) psychological. But it is our psychology that we can work with. That is, we can modify our bad habits of mind and become less consumed by anguish.

Where is God then in all this? God in this sense could be seen as a 'free spirit' existing, mysteriously, outside of our experience of confinement -- outside of our anguish. God would then be saying "Come out of anguish and make the best possible choices as you are able". "Don't fall into traps, don't make unnecessary mistakes, but take steps right now to lift the psychological dark veil that you yourself have become invested in." "You are blocking your own path".

This popular song sums up some part of this:

"Now you may have observed, that if you walk into a wall, you get a certain sensation of reality . . ."

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 3:53 pm When in fact the OT as you point out has the other side of God portrayed. THE TRUTH!! ...that God is not ALL GOOD, it has reasons for the other side.

Now true Christianity is understanding that above point. But also, believing the the true good man Christ and what he did to instill faith of love in us - beyond what is the universal TRUTH to God (that IT AINT ALL GOOD).

..as I can account for over 25 years of experience of both sides of God.

Gary asks: "What are the "reasons" for the bad side of God?"

Why is it, I take you to be asking, that the natural world, the ecological world of natural systems and biological entities within a terrible, and yet also beautiful, wondrous & cruel system, have come to exist? The world of nature, the world of the jungle, is horrifying when it is examined realistically.

Take your grandmother on a picnic in the tropical rain forest. Set up the blanket and lay out the potato salad, the cold fried chicken and the lemonade. Then leave for a second to take a piss. Come back and a swarm of army ants have devoured her down to the bones! That is the world we live in . . .

The *real* world is just as we now see it. And we see it now with a very real sharpness.

What is God? What do we mean by this question? We could mean two very distinct things. One (as I have said) is that the God that created this *world* if the world is a reflection of that God, is not 'good'. That God is terrible! And yet within this world we exist.

But then there is a God if *imposed idealism*. The Hebrew God is a shifting figure, no doubt, but that God is also the God of Amos and Hosea.

Hosea: For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. "Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests; because you have ignored the law of your God, I also will ignore your children."

"Come, let us return to the LORD. He has torn us to pieces but he will heal us; he has injured us but he will bind up our wounds."

Amos: Hear this word, you cows of Bashan on Mount Samaria, you women who oppress the poor and crush the needy and say to your husbands, "Bring us some drinks!"

"I hate, I despise your religious festivals; I cannot stand your assemblies."

Woe to you who long for the day of the LORD! Why do you long for the day of the LORD? That day will be darkness, not light.

That is, of an idealistic imposition as against the world, and as against man's (natural) inclinations. If that God exists, that God is outside of this world and outside of manifestation. That God can only be an angelic God who exits on some other sort of plane.

To the degree that one perceives a 'real God', the other God -- the ideal God who exists outside of this system -- can only be seen as 1) an idealistic fantasy of man, or 2) as quite literally what some religions actually propose: a God who beckons you to leave this world and to reside, eventually, in a heaven-world.

So which is it? Right there is the 'religious conflict'. You either invest in this world, and accept the way it is through realism, or you put some part of your bet in a 'future world' and a 'world beyond'. You sacrifice life here for a life there.

So what's it going to be?

I find that I believe that I can understand Attofishpi at least to a degree. Attofishpi lives in and *sees* the real world, but he lives, I would say realistically, with one foot in the world of other possibilities. What are those possibilities? That we have 'magical powers' and we can use them.

We are not absolutely 'determined animals' nor are we absolutely determined natural forces. We can visualize entire other realms of possibility. And there is a degree to which we can impose our vision on things.

[error]

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 08, 2022 2:58 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 3:53 pm When in fact the OT as you point out has the other side of God portrayed. THE TRUTH!! ...that God is not ALL GOOD, it has reasons for the other side.

Now true Christianity is understanding that above point. But also, believing the the true good man Christ and what he did to instill faith of love in us - beyond what is the universal TRUTH to God (that IT AINT ALL GOOD).

..as I can account for over 25 years of experience of both sides of God.

Gary asks: "What are the "reasons" for the bad side of God?"

Why is it, I take you to be asking, that the natural world, the ecological world of natural systems and biological entities within a terrible, and yet also beautiful, wondrous & cruel system, have come to exist? The world of nature, the world of the jungle, is horrifying when it is examined realistically.

Take your grandmother on a picnic in the tropical rain forest. Set up the blanket and lay out the potato salad, the cold fried chicken and the lemonade. Then leave for a second to take a piss. Come back and a swarm of army ants have devoured her down to the bones! That is the world we live in . . .

The *real* world is just as we now see it. And we see it now with a very real sharpness.

What is God? What do we mean by this question? We could mean two very distinct things. One (as I have said) is that the God that created this *world* if the world is a reflection of that God, is not 'good'. That God is terrible! And yet within this world we exist.

But then there is a God if *imposed idealism*. The Hebrew God is a shifting figure, no doubt, but that God is also the God of Amos and Hosea.

Hosea: For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.

My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge. "Because you have rejected knowledge, I also reject you as my priests; because you have ignored the law of your God, I also will ignore your children."

"Come, let us return to the LORD. He has torn us to pieces but he will heal us; he has injured us but he will bind up our wounds."

Amos: Hear this word, you cows of Bashan on Mount Samaria, you women who oppress the poor and crush the needy and say to your husbands, "Bring us some drinks!"

"I hate, I despise your religious festivals; I cannot stand your assemblies."

Woe to you who long for the day of the LORD! Why do you long for the day of the LORD? That day will be darkness, not light.

That is, of an idealistic imposition as against the world, and as against man's (natural) inclinations. If that God exists, that God is outside of this world and outside of manifestation. That God can only be an angelic God who exits on some other sort of plane.

To the degree that one perceives a 'real God', the other God -- the ideal God who exists outside of this system -- can only be seen as 1) an idealistic fantasy of man, or 2) as quite literally what some religions actually propose: a God who beckons you to leave this world and to reside, eventually, in a heaven-world.

So which is it? Right there is the 'religious conflict'. You either invest in this world, and accept the way it is through realism, or you put some part of your bet in a 'future world' and a 'world beyond'. You sacrifice life here for a life there.

So what's it going to be?

I find that I believe that I can understand Attofishpi at least to a degree. Attofishpi lives in and *sees* the real world, but he lives, I would say realistically, with one foot in the world of other possibilities. What are those possibilities? That we have 'magical powers' and we can use them.

We are not absolutely 'determined animals' nor are we absolutely determined natural forces. We can visualize entire other realms of possibility. And there is a degree to which we can impose our vision on things.

All i see is U and your hairy bear on da phone of a private convo possibly with the only human you comprehend to actually have gnosis,

SO FUCK U. until you show some respect, and tell the other fucking dickead to comply.

Alexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 08, 2022 1:52 pm I must say (and most will agree with me) that a great deal of Christian worldview is obviously based on the projection of an hallucination.

Your views are your own, of course, and you are entitled to them. But "most" Christians might disagree, and maybe "most" others too?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Sep 08, 2022 3:11 pm All I see is U and your hairy bear on da phone of a private convo possibly with the only human you comprehend to actually have gnosis.

SO FUCK U. until you show some respect, and tell the other fucking dickead to comply.

Huh?