100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: My Epiphany | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
what pantheists refuse to see is that God trascends His creation.
Your concept of god is certainly not human,to be sure, and it certainly must transcend its own creations. There is a vast amount of information that went into all the programing of human DNA and evolutionary aspect of life in general on all manner of planets in the universe and probably many creators at work on these things that far surpass anything that mankind is capable of. But if you believe that we evolve spiritually, as pantheist must believe, or that we incarnate and learn and grow, then you must believe that one day human consciousness will transcend to an higher consciousness just as all degrees of consciousness transcend. It is called expansion and growth. JB since mankinds existence his moral character has not improved, take away his percieved advances in the technological field's of space and industry and you still have the same moral man of what he was at the beginning.we are still just as capable of starting wars,raping, pillaging,destroying and all the other immoral acts of his own history. tribo You have a poor opinion of mankind in general, and I disagree with it. Perhaps you have placed your attention on the wrong parts of humanity. I see a spiritual awakening happening in general. (But because incarnations happen in any time line, there will always be ignorance, war etc. on this planet. There will always be a mixture of great and immoral humans in any given time line. That is part of the journey of the human race. What good is it to try and know things we will not know while wearing this selfish flesh? how will this in anyway "improve" who man is at his core? we only have a split second of life -do you really choose to use it to waste your time pondering the un-knowable? search out instead who you are JB - for you are the only thing you can ever really know with full understanding - all else is foolish. Learning "who I am" is part of the journey to truth. That is what it is all about actually. I believe that I am connected to all that is and that I AM THAT. It is not a "waste of time" at all, and it is not "unknowable." Of course no single entity will ever know it all, and we will never stop learning and growing and expanding. The human consciousness is only a stepping stone on the path of awareness. No, it is not a waste of time for me. Life is a joy of discovery, even with the good and the bad. This is where you will find joy. JB it's not a poor opinion of mankind at all - it's a true opinion - hahaha - i'm hopefully optomistic for mankind a pessamistic optimist! i feel though that one must know themselves before they can start to know all else in a meaningful way. especially each other. what i try to do is get man to findout what he truly is first in hope that he will work on himself to become a better moral person, if we all accomplish that - then there is hope for mankind- if not then it will be the same old same old as long as we are here - a quick overview of history readily points this out. i d not think there is anything inherently wrong with what is spoken here - i just believe man spends to much time accomplish nothing for his own improvement. if you enjoy this that's fine and for abra also - and all others - but when all is said and done - at the end of your life - what will this have gained you?  Well one can never tell. Every moment of my life has been a spiritual awakening. I have actually learned a lot in the past few months on this club. What makes you so all fired certain that I am not getting to know myself by getting to know others?
I am not worried about the "morals" or state of mankind in general. We are what we are. I am what I am and I am responsible for that. What will this have gained me? What do you propose it is that I wish to gain? Hell I might discover the secret to the fountain of youth within the holographic matrix, or a door into alternate realities. Who knows? Anything is possible. 
But if you are suggesting that I should shut down my computer and do something meaningful with my life... you are probably right. LOL I don't imagine I will continue this banter until the day I die.
(Maybe just until I convince Abra to meet me for a fun time in Reno or Vegas, or some tropical island.  )
JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what pantheists refuse to see is that God trascends His creation.
Your concept of god is certainly not human,to be sure, and it certainly must transcend its own creations. There is a vast amount of information that went into all the programing of human DNA and evolutionary aspect of life in general on all manner of planets in the universe and probably many creators at work on these things that far surpass anything that mankind is capable of. But if you believe that we evolve spiritually, as pantheist must believe, or that we incarnate and learn and grow, then you must believe that one day human consciousness will transcend to an higher consciousness just as all degrees of consciousness transcend. It is called expansion and growth. JB since mankinds existence his moral character has not improved, take away his percieved advances in the technological field's of space and industry and you still have the same moral man of what he was at the beginning.we are still just as capable of starting wars,raping, pillaging,destroying and all the other immoral acts of his own history. tribo You have a poor opinion of mankind in general, and I disagree with it. Perhaps you have placed your attention on the wrong parts of humanity. I see a spiritual awakening happening in general. (But because incarnations happen in any time line, there will always be ignorance, war etc. on this planet. There will always be a mixture of great and immoral humans in any given time line. That is part of the journey of the human race. What good is it to try and know things we will not know while wearing this selfish flesh? how will this in anyway "improve" who man is at his core? we only have a split second of life -do you really choose to use it to waste your time pondering the un-knowable? search out instead who you are JB - for you are the only thing you can ever really know with full understanding - all else is foolish. Learning "who I am" is part of the journey to truth. That is what it is all about actually. I believe that I am connected to all that is and that I AM THAT. It is not a "waste of time" at all, and it is not "unknowable." Of course no single entity will ever know it all, and we will never stop learning and growing and expanding. The human consciousness is only a stepping stone on the path of awareness. No, it is not a waste of time for me. Life is a joy of discovery, even with the good and the bad. This is where you will find joy. JB it's not a poor opinion of mankind at all - it's a true opinion - hahaha - i'm hopefully optomistic for mankind a pessamistic optimist! i feel though that one must know themselves before they can start to know all else in a meaningful way. especially each other. what i try to do is get man to findout what he truly is first in hope that he will work on himself to become a better moral person, if we all accomplish that - then there is hope for mankind- if not then it will be the same old same old as long as we are here - a quick overview of history readily points this out. i d not think there is anything inherently wrong with what is spoken here - i just believe man spends to much time accomplish nothing for his own improvement. if you enjoy this that's fine and for abra also - and all others - but when all is said and done - at the end of your life - what will this have gained you? Well one can never tell. Every moment of my life has been a spiritual awakening. I have actually learned a lot in the past few months on this club. What makes you so all fired certain that I am not getting to know myself by getting to know others?
I am not worried about the "morals" or state of mankind in general. We are what we are. I am what I am and I am responsible for that. What will this have gained me? What do you propose it is that I wish to gain? Hell I might discover the secret to the fountain of youth within the holographic matrix, or a door into alternate realities. Who knows? Anything is possible.
But if you are suggesting that I should shut down my computer and do something meaningful with my life... you are probably right. LOL I don't imagine I will continue this banter until the day I die.
(Maybe just until I convince Abra to meet me for a fun time in Reno or Vegas, or some tropical island. )
JB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you think that nothing CAN exist... under any circumstances, then please describe it to me. There wouldn't be anything to describe. The very phrase "Nothing exists" is a misnomer. Nothing is the absence of anything. Could no 'thing' exist, thus creating the absence of any 'thing'? Sure, why not? And that's all we mean when we say "nothing exists' We're not trying to claim that 'nothing' is a thing and this thing called 'nothing' exists. The very phrase "nothing exists" simply implies the absence of any 'thing'. Can Zero exist? No, it absolute cannot! In fact, I need to finish writing my book about that. Modern mathematics has zero existing as a valid number! And they indeed do give it properities of existence!!! But they are wrong Zero is not a number. That an erroneous invention of mankind. Zero is the concept of the absence of number. And if you think this is trivial it is not! Because if you change this formal definition of zero from it's current status as a valid number in mathematics, to a definition of the the concept of the absence of number, that actually changes mathematical formalism! And I claim that it does indeed need to be changed. Modern mathematics is wrong. It won't show up in everyday calculations because most engineering and ALL bookeeping just treat zero as the concept of the absence of number anyway. They just use zero as a convient place holder to indicate the absence of number. In words they use correctly. But formally that's not how its defined in mathematics. And when it comes to calculus and the infinite it makes a difference. Oh Jeannie, I've been studying nothing for a long time! 
I know quite a bit about nothing.
You're not going to tell me nothing about nothing that I don't already know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well one can never tell. Every moment of my life has been a spiritual awakening. I have actually learned a lot in the past few months on this club. What makes you so all fired certain that I am not getting to know myself by getting to know others?
I am not worried about the "morals" or state of mankind in general. We are what we are. I am what I am and I am responsible for that. What will this have gained me? What do you propose it is that I wish to gain? Hell I might discover the secret to the fountain of youth within the holographic matrix, or a door into alternate realities. Who knows? Anything is possible.
But if you are suggesting that I should shut down my computer and do something meaningful with my life... you are probably right. LOL I don't imagine I will continue this banter until the day I die.
(Maybe just until I convince Abra to meet me for a fun time in Reno or Vegas, or some tropical island. )
JB Damn it woman! You sound just like me! 
Did you Zerox a copy of my mind or something? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're not going to tell me nothing about nothing that I don't already know.
I asked: "Can zero exist?" You said: "No it absolute cannot!" ***************************************** Now I ask the question: Can nothing exist? and you say: "Nothing is the absence of anything." My answer would be: "No it absolutely cannot!" ************************************ zero = nothing ************************************* (Actually I wrote a book about it. It was called "The Eyes of Infinity.") I wrote and printed it myself a few years back and sold it for $5.00 a copy. Not many people were interested in it. Only two people who read it actually understood what I was trying to say. It was all about the non-existence of nothing, the non-existence of time and space etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The very phrase "Nothing exists" is a misnomer.
misnomer: 1. a misapplied or inappropriate name or designation. 2. an error in naming a person or thing. Note: I did not use the term "Nothing exists." I stated this: "NOTHING cannot EXIST." This appears to be a double negative but it uses NOTHING as a noun. Nothing: a noun: 1.no thing; not anything; naught: to say nothing. 2.no part, share, or trace (usually fol. by of): The house showed nothing of its former magnificence. 3.something that is nonexistent. Now if you look at number three, "Something that is nonexistent" That is a contradiction also because it describes "nothing" as "something that is nonexistent." But can something that is nonexistent exist? I don't think so. Number one, says that it means no thing. That seems to be the best definition. But then you have to know what you are going to consider to be a thing. Is a thought a thing? Hmmmmm. I think it is, and it is a powerful thing. But what is a thought really? A wave? An idea? A notion? A desire? A vibration? JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Thu 06/19/08 02:38 AM
|
|
Jeannie wrote: The following is a quote of Morningsong, a born again Christian. It seems to me she describes the pantheist nature of god in this statement. By the way, the bible says......" even the very rocks will cry out, if man shall not praise God...."
Meaning....even the very rocks are AWARE......meaning...everything that has life is AWARE of God's Presence....... ...and are therefore able to Praise God.
Some more examples in the bible ...of everything being aware and therefore Praising God .... " The stars sing......" " the trees of the field shall clap their hands......" Yep...all Life is AWARE of God..and All Life PRAISE their Creator.....in one way or another. But all Life has been created ,and made ALIVE by God, FIRST..in order to be Aware...and to be able to Praise God. Jeannie wrote: I understand the meaning of "praising god." It is in inner joy of being. 
Ok Jeannie.... since you already KNOW that I am a born again Christian, don't you think that it is a bit ABSURB, for you to go around saying, that I am describing a "pantheist nature of god" in my statement ? Born again Christians believe in the God of the Bible, NOT a pantheistic god....so therefore, it is OBVIOUS, that christians are NOT going to go around making "pantheistic statements about God.
Christians Worship God the CREATOR, NOT God's CREATION!!! BIG DIFFERENCE!! And yes.... I am scolding you Jeannie....but hopefully you will know ,I am doing so in a spirit of love... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I stated this: "NOTHING cannot EXIST." This appears to be a double negative but it uses NOTHING as a noun. Exactly. But that's the whole point. You're using it as a noun! What's a noun? A person, place or thing. By the very act of treating it as a noun you are giving it the status of being a 'thing'. To even talk about 'nothing' as thought it is a noun is wrong. It's the concept of the absence of a thing. Can the absence of a thing exist? Only as a concept. 
So if you can conceptualize the absence of all things, then you have conceptualized 'nothing'.
As far as I'm concerned the fact that any exists at all is a totally illogical impossibility. So from that I've learned two things. 1. Existence is not possible. But we're here anyway, so,... 2. What's impossible is possible. In other words, our very existence defies logic. That's a given. I think it is, and it is a powerful thing. But what is a thought really? A wave? An idea? A notion? A desire? A vibration?
I know there are different levels of thought. I think everything you listed qualifies as a thought. Ideas and notions, are higher-level thoughts potentially requiring logical analysis (i.e. a brain). Desires can be more primitive lacking any logical analysis at all. Of course all three, ideas, notions, and desires, can be analytical or not, depending on what they are. So whether they require a thinking brain or not depends on whether they are analytical in intuitive. When you get down to the waves and vibrations, I think they can be entirely intuitive almost to the point of not requiring any mental faculty at all. So if you want to continue to accept that these are 'thoughts' (and I would certainly accept that), then we could say that lower animals forms and even plants can certainly experience 'intuitive' non-analytical "thoughts". In fact at that level we can even see where rocks can experience 'thoughts'. But clearly they aren't analytical thoughts. Not the typical kind of thoughts that humans normally associate with the word 'thought'. I would also suggest that rocks can only 'experience' thoughts (per this description and certainly not generate thoughts). In fact, it would probably be wrong to suggest that a rock 'experiences' anything. It's probably more correct to just say that the thoughts are in the rocks but not that the rocks are 'experiencing' them. At one level actual 'experience' begins it's hard to say, but I would be willing to guess that it probably begins at the biological cellular level. I think single cells begin to 'experience' at some very primal level. Very primal indeed, but none the less it's probably there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 06/19/08 08:10 AM
|
|
I stated this: "NOTHING cannot EXIST." This appears to be a double negative but it uses NOTHING as a noun. Exactly. But that's the whole point. You're using it as a noun! What's a noun? A person, place or thing. By the very act of treating it as a noun you are giving it the status of being a 'thing'. To even talk about 'nothing' as thought it is a noun is wrong. It's the concept of the absence of a thing. Can the absence of a thing exist? Only as a concept.
So if you can conceptualize the absence of all things, then you have conceptualized 'nothing'.
As far as I'm concerned the fact that any exists at all is a totally illogical impossibility. So from that I've learned two things. 1. Existence is not possible. But we're here anyway, so,... 2. What's impossible is possible. In other words, our very existence defies logic. That's a given. As for the actual word "nothing" ~~it was identified as a "noun" in the dictionary. It, of itself, according to semantics is a "noun" because it is, or described a "concept" which is a "thing." (You can also say this for the word "zero." It is a concept of nothing. ~~It is 'not' a number.) So "nothing" is a concept of no thing. At least from our point of view. Agreed? ************** So 'nothing' is a concept of no-thing or non-existence. This concept presents a problem in the face of no-thing because you can't even have a concept if there is no observer or thought. ************** I have given this some thought and last night I had my own epiphany. If nothing exists, then maybe we are it. (?) Does that make sense. Not really. So we are the observer and the observer does not exist in this reality. It merely observes.... perhaps from somewhere else. WOW, that it!
This reality is an illusion and the observer does not exist in this reality because this reality is an illusion. Now I'm getting nowhere... er I mean ... somewhere..
JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 06/19/08 08:20 AM
|
|
Jeannie wrote: The following is a quote of Morningsong, a born again Christian. It seems to me she describes the pantheist nature of god in this statement. By the way, the bible says......" even the very rocks will cry out, if man shall not praise God...."
Meaning....even the very rocks are AWARE......meaning...everything that has life is AWARE of God's Presence....... ...and are therefore able to Praise God.
Some more examples in the bible ...of everything being aware and therefore Praising God .... " The stars sing......" " the trees of the field shall clap their hands......" Yep...all Life is AWARE of God..and All Life PRAISE their Creator.....in one way or another. But all Life has been created ,and made ALIVE by God, FIRST..in order to be Aware...and to be able to Praise God. Jeannie wrote: I understand the meaning of "praising god." It is in inner joy of being.
Ok Jeannie.... since you already KNOW that I am a born again Christian, don't you think that it is a bit ABSURB, for you to go around saying, that I am describing a "pantheist nature of god" in my statement ? Born again Christians believe in the God of the Bible, NOT a pantheistic god....so therefore, it is OBVIOUS, that christians are NOT going to go around making "pantheistic statements about God.
Christians Worship God the CREATOR, NOT God's CREATION!!! BIG DIFFERENCE!! And yes.... I am scolding you Jeannie....but hopefully you will know ,I am doing so in a spirit of love...
Morningsong, I know what you believe, but the way you and other Christians describe god is the same description of a pantheistic god. I was not saying that you were a pantheist. I was pointing out that sometimes you describe god as walking the earth in a body, and having human emotions, then you also describe god as being everywhere, in everything, etc. These two descriptions are not really compatible except in the pantheistic understanding. "Meaning....even the very rocks are AWARE......meaning...everything that has life is AWARE of God's Presence....... ...and are therefore able to Praise God.
Some more examples in the bible ...of everything being aware and therefore Praising God .... " The stars sing......" " the trees of the field shall clap their hands......" JB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MorningSong
on
Thu 06/19/08 02:45 PM
|
|
Jeannie wrote: The following is a quote of Morningsong, a born again Christian. It seems to me she describes the pantheist nature of god in this statement. By the way, the bible says......" even the very rocks will cry out, if man shall not praise God...."
Meaning....even the very rocks are AWARE......meaning...everything that has life is AWARE of God's Presence....... ...and are therefore able to Praise God.
Some more examples in the bible ...of everything being aware and therefore Praising God .... " The stars sing......" " the trees of the field shall clap their hands......" Yep...all Life is AWARE of God..and All Life PRAISE their Creator.....in one way or another. But all Life has been created ,and made ALIVE by God, FIRST..in order to be Aware...and to be able to Praise God. Jeannie wrote: I understand the meaning of "praising god." It is in inner joy of being.
Ok Jeannie.... since you already KNOW that I am a born again Christian, don't you think that it is a bit ABSURB, for you to go around saying, that I am describing a "pantheist nature of god" in my statement ? Born again Christians believe in the God of the Bible, NOT a pantheistic god....so therefore, it is OBVIOUS, that christians are NOT going to go around making "pantheistic statements about God.
Christians Worship God the CREATOR, NOT God's CREATION!!! BIG DIFFERENCE!! And yes.... I am scolding you Jeannie....but hopefully you will know ,I am doing so in a spirit of love...
Morningsong, I know what you believe, but the way you and other Christians describe god is the same description of a pantheistic god. I was not saying that you were a pantheist. I was pointing out that sometimes you describe god as walking the earth in a body, and having human emotions, then you also describe god as being everywhere, in everything, etc. These two descriptions are not really compatible except in the pantheistic understanding. "Meaning....even the very rocks are AWARE......meaning...everything that has life is AWARE of God's Presence....... ...and are therefore able to Praise God.
Some more examples in the bible ...of everything being aware and therefore Praising God .... " The stars sing......" " the trees of the field shall clap their hands......" JB
Jeannie!!!!!!!!!
We see God IN everything......... But we are NOT NOT NOT saying ,God IS Everything!!!!! JUST because the very rocks cry out, does NOT mean the rocks ARE God!!!!!!! In Fact, if you go re-read my statement,you will SEE that ALL that was being said was ,God's Creation PRAISES GOD!!! Nothing else was even mentioned in my statement!!!!!! And NOWHERE are Christians saying what you are saying about us Christians... YOU are saying what you only THINK we Christians are saying...and thus,you are CONSTANTLY MISINTERPRETING what is being said!!!! 
ASK us next time, if you are unsure about what is being said....instead of giving us your own interpretation every time, Jeannie
And I won't shout at you anymore!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
what pantheists refuse to see is that God trascends His creation.
Your concept of god is certainly not human,to be sure, and it certainly must transcend its own creations. There is a vast amount of information that went into all the programing of human DNA and evolutionary aspect of life in general on all manner of planets in the universe and probably many creators at work on these things that far surpass anything that mankind is capable of. But if you believe that we evolve spiritually, as pantheist must believe, or that we incarnate and learn and grow, then you must believe that one day human consciousness will transcend to an higher consciousness just as all degrees of consciousness transcend. It is called expansion and growth. JB that is when you fail in analyzing my point of view. I don't believe in reincarnation. for me such concept it's a mere utopy. we are not creators we can't do what the Creator does, and if we happen to transcend, it is just to be in our Creators presence as it was at the beginning before we came to this world. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Epiphany I just realized that there can only be two possibilities. Life either arose from spirit, or it's an accident. In other words, the only two choices are either pantheism or atheism. Believers in an external godhead may argue that there is are other choices,... that some external God created us as its pets. However, I just realized that even if that scenario is true, all they are really saying is that their God is pantheistic in its nature, and that they are just pets of this pantheistic being. In other words, they just hold that their God always was and always will be. Well that's just the pantheistic view being applied to their God. So all they are ultimately saying is that their explanation of reality is that the true nature of God is ultimately explained by pantheism. And then they go on to claim that this pantheistic God went on to create is as lesser beings from itself. So even if that's true, then the ultimate true nature of existence is pantheistic, since the God who runs the show is ultimately pantheistic in its true nature. In other words, my epiphany is that all religions that claim to have external deities must ultimately collapse to become the pantheistic picture in the nature of their very deity. So all deity-based religions are nothing more than complex subsets of the pantheistic view. This leaves us with ultimately only two choices for reality. 1. Atheism - we have a non-spiritual essence - Life is all just some sort of accident. 2. Pantheism - we have a spiritual essence - Life arose from spirit. I think I did well.
I got it down to just two possibilities. I'm not saying that this is profound. I'm sure other people have already been aware of this. I just found it rather profound for me. The sudden realization that all ideas of external-deities must ultimately reduce to pantheism. Their deities themselves would then have a pantheistic nature. I should have realized this years ago. Just to clearly,... I have always realized that it's redundant to demand that an external God exists as an explanation for reality, because then we would have no explanation for that God. And those people just kept saying, "But God always was and always will be!" It never actually dawned on me that what they were really saying is, "But my Godhead is pantheistic!" But that's truly what they are demanding. They are demanding the existence of a pantheistic Godhead to use to explain that our existence can't be pantheistic. It's a totally redundant argument. They need pantheism in order for their original Godhead(s) to exist. So it's ever more redundant than I first realized. They aren't just proclaiming that they need a Godhead to explain reality, but in the same breath, they are demanding that the true nature of their Godhead is already pantheistic in its true nature. It's redundancy beyond redundancy. They need to demand the existence of a pantheistic deity in order to deny that our true nature is pantheistic. It's totally circular. There can be nothing other than pantheism if there is any spiritual nature to reality at all. All religions that claim to have godheads ultimately must reduce to pantheism in that this must be the true nature of their Godhead. It's ultimately either pantheism or nothing. I am so sorry abra this was not an Epiphany.....you had a drug induced deranged dream.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
My Epiphany I just realized that there can only be two possibilities. Life either arose from spirit, or it's an accident. In other words, the only two choices are either pantheism or atheism. Believers in an external godhead may argue that there is are other choices,... that some external God created us as its pets. However, I just realized that even if that scenario is true, all they are really saying is that their God is pantheistic in its nature, and that they are just pets of this pantheistic being. In other words, they just hold that their God always was and always will be. Well that's just the pantheistic view being applied to their God. So all they are ultimately saying is that their explanation of reality is that the true nature of God is ultimately explained by pantheism. And then they go on to claim that this pantheistic God went on to create is as lesser beings from itself. So even if that's true, then the ultimate true nature of existence is pantheistic, since the God who runs the show is ultimately pantheistic in its true nature. In other words, my epiphany is that all religions that claim to have external deities must ultimately collapse to become the pantheistic picture in the nature of their very deity. So all deity-based religions are nothing more than complex subsets of the pantheistic view. This leaves us with ultimately only two choices for reality. 1. Atheism - we have a non-spiritual essence - Life is all just some sort of accident. 2. Pantheism - we have a spiritual essence - Life arose from spirit. I think I did well.
I got it down to just two possibilities. I'm not saying that this is profound. I'm sure other people have already been aware of this. I just found it rather profound for me. The sudden realization that all ideas of external-deities must ultimately reduce to pantheism. Their deities themselves would then have a pantheistic nature. I should have realized this years ago. Just to clearly,... I have always realized that it's redundant to demand that an external God exists as an explanation for reality, because then we would have no explanation for that God. And those people just kept saying, "But God always was and always will be!" It never actually dawned on me that what they were really saying is, "But my Godhead is pantheistic!" But that's truly what they are demanding. They are demanding the existence of a pantheistic Godhead to use to explain that our existence can't be pantheistic. It's a totally redundant argument. They need pantheism in order for their original Godhead(s) to exist. So it's ever more redundant than I first realized. They aren't just proclaiming that they need a Godhead to explain reality, but in the same breath, they are demanding that the true nature of their Godhead is already pantheistic in its true nature. It's redundancy beyond redundancy. They need to demand the existence of a pantheistic deity in order to deny that our true nature is pantheistic. It's totally circular. There can be nothing other than pantheism if there is any spiritual nature to reality at all. All religions that claim to have godheads ultimately must reduce to pantheism in that this must be the true nature of their Godhead. It's ultimately either pantheism or nothing. I am so sorry abra this was not an Epiphany.....you had a drug induced deranged dream.... that is not nice!!!!!!!!! i'm very surprised u said such thing. i absolutely disagree with abra pretty much in everything, but disagreeing does not mean to be rude!!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awwwww walker I didn't mean it rude at all...totally in fun.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 06/19/08 03:47 PM
|
|
what pantheists refuse to see is that God trascends His creation.
Your concept of god is certainly not human,to be sure, and it certainly must transcend its own creations. There is a vast amount of information that went into all the programing of human DNA and evolutionary aspect of life in general on all manner of planets in the universe and probably many creators at work on these things that far surpass anything that mankind is capable of. But if you believe that we evolve spiritually, as pantheist must believe, or that we incarnate and learn and grow, then you must believe that one day human consciousness will transcend to an higher consciousness just as all degrees of consciousness transcend. It is called expansion and growth. JB that is when you fail in analyzing my point of view. I don't believe in reincarnation. for me such concept it's a mere utopy. we are not creators we can't do what the Creator does, and if we happen to transcend, it is just to be in our Creators presence as it was at the beginning before we came to this world. Lonely, Well, I wasn't really trying to analyze your point of view, I already know what that is. I was answering from my point of view and belief. One of the problems with conversations between Christians and Non-Christians is that the Christians expect you to converse with them on their level of understanding and within their paradigm's and points of view. Of course I realize that you don't believe in reincarnation, and you believe that your god is the "only creator" and that he "transcends his creation." I do not believe that at all, so I can't respond within that premise. Your statement was: "What pantheist refuse to see is that god transcends his creation." Pantheists don't usually call source "Him" and some don't even use the term "god." Source cannot "transcend" its creation because its creation is a manifestation of Itself. JB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source cannot "transcend" its creation because its creation is a manifestation of Itself. I honestly just don't get it. If creation is a manifestation of its "source," as you call it, thus, it's so easy to understand that the "source" goes beyond its Own creation, therefore, it follows that the "source" transcends its creation. or I'm simply far behind in my understanding of the words "transcend" and "manifestation" and "going beyond." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Thu 06/19/08 04:24 PM
|
|
Source cannot "transcend" its creation because its creation is a manifestation of Itself. I honestly just don't get it. If creation is a manifestation of its "source," as you call it, thus, it's so easy to understand that the "source" goes beyond its Own creation, therefore, it follows that the "source" transcends its creation. or I'm simply far behind in my understanding of the words "transcend" and "manifestation" and "going beyond." I have always understood the term "transcend" to mean to rise above. This is looking at things from the human state of consciousness. Existence probably began a long time before humans came on the scene. Probably all manner of spiritual beings (you may call them angels) existed on many levels and maybe even aliens of different species on other planets or planes existed before humans did. Source is infinite and always existed, or so the common belief seems to be. From that source (god) worlds were manifested in a descending manner. (Descending because of the lower frequency of vibration that makes up the material worlds.) All things in existence are made up of vibration and frequency, at least in our known reality. If you start from human consciousness you would have to ascend to a higher frequency probably to find your source (god). But none of that means that consciousness is stagnant and will never rise, or ascend, or does not change or move through different states, including human consciousness. I understand consciousness to be a moving thing, like a current or like you understand the holy spirit moves through all things with it awareness. JB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I understand consciousness to be a moving thing, like a current or like you understand the holy spirit moves through all things with it awareness. JB
Since i do not discard existance in other planets. I may agree with u to some extent. The point where i don't agree is the fact that a being (spiritual) needs several failure and trials (lives) to transcend. I think we are able to get to that point in this world in this life. that is what we (catholics) call holiness or beatitudo. another thing i don't agree with the idea that angels are in a level higher than ours because somehow they evolved (as you sugest it if i'm right with my interpretation of ur words). TYhey are in a higher spiritual level than as because God created them in that way from the very beginning. Again if there is alien life in other planets (which I think it's absolutely possible), and if they are in higher level of consciousness it's because they were created that way. Somebody posted that human beings have not evolved since their creation. Sadly I agree with that statement because we still see the consequences of sin (as i understand it, you may see it in a different manner). However, to evolve spiritually it is a personal and individual choice of the person guided by the Holy Spirit, and not a condition of the specie per se. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miguel wrote:
"What pantheist refuse to see is that god transcends his creation." Jeannie replied: Pantheists don't usually call source "Him" and some don't even use the term "god." Source cannot "transcend" its creation because its creation is a manifestation of Itself. JB I think this is paramount. And I like the way that JB describes this. This is precisely how I feel about the pantheisic view as well,... Source cannot "transcend" its creation because its creation is a manifestation of Itself. This is the major difference between the deity-based religions and pantheism. In a deity-based religion, humans are seen as being seperate beings from their "creator". In the panthestic view humans are seen as being a direct manifestation of the spirit. I'm not saying that one idea is more correct than the other. I'm simply pointing out the difference between the two ideas. Obviously I personally favor the pantheistic view. But that's just a personal perference. |
|
|
|
|
