You are the one who wrote, "..., you are truly just, it is who you are." So, I was just trying to clarify.Rhodnar wrote:Truly just is what we're meant to be, not what we are, unless we are already truly just.ken wrote: So, truly just can not be removed because truly just is who we really are, is this nearly right?
Also, are you saying that I am truly just now because it is who I am already? If not, then when do I actually become truly just, for myself?
Further to this could I already be the truly just Creator, but you are just unaware of this yet? And if you think I could not be yet because I am asking questions, then remember I might just be asking you for clarification to see just how close or not you are to being the truly just Creator and/or knowing who/what the truly just Creator actually IS.
But now I think you mean ALL beings are meant to be truly just creators and until they become truly just creators then they are just beings.
You have stated that you are already a truly just creator and that by being truly just you have reached life's apex. You have won the race, as you said. You have also stated, that I am not there yet.
You have also asked me to imagine that I/you were a truly just creator, as it were. And, as such you are not a part of this planet and vastly more powerful than anything upon it.
It may well not be, to you. But the way you are trying to describe this, some may suggest that it appears to be like a riddle.Rhodnar wrote: It's not a riddle.
I do NOT seem to think that others use pronouns in the same way that I do. What I do now propose though is if you had any humiliation, openness and inquisitiveness to learn and become wiser, then you would find that the way I use pronouns will very simply and easily explain what it is that you are trying to explain.Rhodnar wrote: We are a species of life on the planet Earth by the way. You seem to think that others use pronouns in the same way that you do.
I do NOT think others should do anything, but what I do KNOW is I have a definition for ALL words that I use, which on all occasions I can identify and show them and show how each of those definitions fit perfectly together like a puzzle. So, that when ALL the definitions or pieces of the puzzle are together they form a true and whole picture of Life, Itself. Therefore, if there were any mysteries or puzzles in Life before, then they are non-existent NOW.
I have asked you Who 'I' am, and you are unable to answer the question. That is fine, but do not expect Me to know exactly what you mean when you say, "I am me".Rhodnar wrote:When I say "me" or "I", I mean just that, there is no other meaning. I am me.
I am not sure what this about. I was just asking an open-ended question to find out if you clarify some thing. You could not answer, but that is still perfectly fine and perfectly understandable, from where you are.Rhodnar wrote:Given that I have no proof that I'm not just an avatar or any other form of being external to my present form, I am content to be me. It's the only me that I know, and I like me. Proof to me is in no way subjective, it's an absolute. "Visions of Gods" and "Feeling the presence of Gods" etc: are all subjective, they can all just be products of our own minds. There is no proof.
It is entirely possible that you or anybody else could be an avatar of a truly just creator. It would actually be just for a truly just creator to be born into this world, to see if it could find its way back. To ensure that the system was functioning correctly.
There is NOT only one. There are countless different things, which when put together is 'ALL there is'. This 'ALL there is' there is only One of. I drew that conclusion from 'ALL there is'.Rhodnar wrote:From what do you draw the conclusion, that there is only one? I know that it's your theory/belief, but what proof do you have?
Oh, I ALREADY do know. I just asked to see if you could explain yourself better.Rhodnar wrote:When I was young, I went on holiday to meet my grandparents. Over the course of the three weeks we went jigging for cod multiple times and caught nothing. On the day before we were to return home, we went jigging for cod one last time. By this point I had thought that I'd caught something, and hauled my line all the way up from the bottom, countless times. Finally out of boredom/frustration/curiosity, I asked my grandfather, "How will I know when I've caught one?", "Oh, you'll know." came his reply. No sooner had the words left his lips than I caught one. He was absolutely right, "Oh, you'll know.".ken wrote: Okay. You are already "there" right? If so, then when will I or others know we are there also, with you?
Yes I have noticed 'you' do not.Rhodnar wrote:I don't.ken wrote: How do 'you' know 'I' die? 'I' might just keep on existing, and from the species that has evolved to the point that its body can write thing down, HERE and NOW, I just continue on writing and TRYING to express Who or what 'I' really am. Being able to write is one thing, but being able to truly listen is another.
Is that what 'god' IS? Or, is that what you think 'god' is?Rhodnar wrote:A god:
- the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
- a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.
That certainly is NOT what 'God' IS, to Me.Rhodnar wrote:A truly just being is just a being. Everybody reading this is a being, everything aware of its own existence is a being. Every living thing is a being, where there is life there is being. I know you like to be precise, so everything that exists is in a state of being, but if it isn't alive, for my purposes here it isn't a being.
A god is something to be worshiped, something that is better than lesser beings.
The following quotation might help you understand the distinction:
There are NO good people and there are NO bad people, to Me. ALL adult human beings can, and do, do good and bad things. So, that quotation did not help Me at all to understand the distinction.Rhodnar wrote:“With or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil - that takes religion.” - Steven Weinberg
It just shows Me HOW judgmental human beings can be.
If that is what you say I can only take your word for it that there is truth in it. You will not provide any sufficient explanations, definitions, nor evidence of what exactly a truly just being is, so I can only go on what you say here. The definitions you provide for what exactly a god is could NOT be true, so all i have is is that a truly just being is not some thing that does not even exist.Rhodnar wrote:A truly just being is not a god.
If a person says telepathy is a better means of communication than the cellphone, and that person is asked how could it be better, then just provide the information that shows how telepathy IS better. That is how it is done.Rhodnar wrote:That's a bit like asking "How could telepathy be a better means of communication than the cellphone?".ken wrote: HOW could it be the only truly acceptable source of the Universe if it is pure conjecture.
It's an hypothesis. People willingly accept all sorts of hypotheses about the origin of the Universe (religions), and they too are pure conjecture.
This is the only truly just one. Therefore; the only truly acceptable one.[/quote]
This is where people and I differ tremendously. If people are willing to accept things as being true, without any evidence nor proof whatsoever, then so be it. But I do not and will not do that.
If the 'Universe', is All there is, and the Universe is made up by countless number of parts, and the sum of ALL those parts is All there is, or the Universe, Itself, then that Universe is the one and only One. Can you now see where I am getting the One from?Rhodnar wrote:Perfectly reasonable conclusion, I have no evidence to suggest to you that you are wrong. I'm still not sure where you're getting the "one" from though. I see no reason to concluded a "one" over a "two"...a "billion"...etc.ken wrote: In My opinion, formed on the basis of incomplete information supplied by you, I conclude that there is only One Creator who is Truly Just, and that Creator is the Universe, Itself.
Did you mean to write the meaning of life, from YOUR perspective is "true happiness", OR, are you seriously suggesting that the meaning of life IS "true happiness" and that is the absolute Truth?Rhodnar wrote:Because it is.ken wrote:But YOU are the one who said the meaning of life IS "true happiness".Rhodnar wrote: If the Universe was not "created" at all, and it just "is", then life has no meaning.
Again what do you mean by "life itself is a continual search for happiness"?Rhodnar wrote: If the Universe was not created for a reason, there is no actual "meaning", but life itself is a continual search for happiness, and true happiness is continual happiness. Again, describing blue...
I would suggest that trees, flowers, planet earth, and a lot of animals, besides the human animal of course, are NOT in any search, let alone a continual search, for happiness. Please explain and describe how a tree or a planet like earth are in a continual search for happiness.
I have experienced feelings, even happiness, so using the describing blue to a blind person does NOT work. Describe to all of us here, who are by the way emotional feeling beings, how ALL living things are in a continual search for happiness, and how this then leads on to the conclusion that the meaning of life IS "true happiness".
You also were the one that wrote that the tree cannot be truly happy, but the human can.
What do you mean by "IF the Universe was "not" created? Of course it was created. You could NOT be in the position that you are in right now if there was NO thing created previously. The evidence that the Universe was, IS, and will always be created is the words you are reading write now, let alone every other thing that also exists, including 'you'.Rhodnar wrote:If the Universe was not created, then it is truly just. How could it not be?ken wrote: But there is also the case that the Universe is being created, right HERE, right NOW, and being created by Its Self. This being 'ALL there is' must be truly just, because there obviously is no other being nor thing. So, if this is the case, then the Universe is being CREATED, and by your logic then life has meaning. Like I do with all words that I do not know, for sure, their meaning or definition I go and look it up in a dictionary. The dictionary I looked in for the definition or the meaning of 'life', said, living, being alive. That definition was perfect as it fitted in perfectly together with all the other answers that I came to also.
The Universe was created and It is truly just also.
Obviously NO thing external brought or created the Universe into existence. And just as obvious is the fact the Universe is being created right NOW, through cause and effect. To Me, the truly just Creator is just the Universe, or Nature, Itself, and It just allows every single thing or ALL of Its parts to move freely about. It does not intervene in any way, shape, nor form other then giving ALL things the freedom to move about. The human beings, which are just as natural as any other thing or part, also has this freedom to move about completely freely or with free will. ALL adult human beings can choose to do what is right or choose to do what is wrong, and, from whatever they choose to do, they end up being the creators of the world that they eventually end up living in.Rhodnar wrote: What I mean by that is, we are products of nature, we "make our own beds" as it were. That is truly just to the beings within a non-created universe. Cause and effect.
For clarification- A universe not specifically brought into existence by a being or beings.
The way human beings have created a way of life, or this world, as it is also known is solely their responsibility. This war-torn, pollution-riddled, greedy world that we human beings live in now was and is of course created by us, human beings. And, a truly just being or creator would not just sit, in this type of world, and just say I have reached the apex of life and I sit here now in "true happiness", with ALL this going on around them. If they did, then that would be truly unjust. To sit here and watch children being abused and dying of starvation continually and also state that I am in a state of "true happiness" is totally unjust. That is NOT just at all. That is certainly NOT just for all.
The one and only Truly Just Creator, the Universe, Itself, will NOT do anything to intervene. In the scope of eternity and infinity It does not care one solitary bit about a species such as human beings. If they wipe themselves out or if they learn to live with each other in peace and harmony is of NO concern to the Truly Just Creator. It will NOT intervene. However, human beings themselves CAN BE truly just beings or creators themselves. If and when they learn and discover HOW to do this, then they will realize that they can NOT be in a state of True Happiness until they have done ALL they can to create and make the world a better place for ALL to live in together, in peace and harmony.
That resolving or Wanting to change, and then doing so, was a part of HOW I got here also. Although you believe you are far ahead of what I am.Rhodnar wrote:In 2008, and by resolving to change, then doing so.ken wrote: When exactly did you become truly just, and how did you get there?
Could you explain more so that others will know how to get there, themselves, and when that will be for them also?
It is a journey of the mind. A re-examination of self to find true self. A child is born into this world, and made into what it becomes, by this world. There are genetic differences, that cause us all to be fundamentally different from each other, regardless of external stimuli, but we all still have a true self.
I am not sure that this is truly the case, but I would have to hear your reasons for why you think this would be impossible for some, first.Rhodnar wrote:Unfortunately, we are subject to evolution, and genetic differences can express themselves in ways that would make finding a true self that is truly just, impossible for some.
But WHY postulate some thing that is not true at all.Rhodnar wrote: However; any such anomalies can be explained away simply by assuming that the creator(s) of the Universe are truly just.
e.g. We could postulate that we in fact live in a multiverse (in this case), and anybody incapable of finding a truly just true self in this Universe will find it in another.
Rhodnar wrote:I'm only using that as an example, there may be many other possibilities. Without all of the information I cannot tell you what would be truly just or what would not be. However; if the Universe was created by the truly just, then the solution to any apparent anomaly will be truly just.
HOW ready are you?Rhodnar wrote:I never said anything about me creating anything. I'm waiting to be born in the sense, that I am now in a place that I could be trusted to be a creator. If the Universe was created by the truly just, for the purposes of reproduction, I am now ready to be born.ken wrote: Okay, good and fair enough summary. But how can 'you' still be waiting to be born if, as you allege you are, are already a truly just creator, who has already reached the apex of life?
Are you prepared to let go of ALL of your assumptions, beliefs, biases in order to learn and discover ALL there is? Are you OPEN enough to have ALL of Life's mysteries revealed to you?
I NEVER saw it as insulting at all either.Rhodnar wrote:'I'm' not saying that, no. I didn't write the song or produce/shoot/edit the video.ken wrote: Again I really am a slow and simple one, what may be obvious to you in that film clip was certainly NOT obvious to Me. I do NOT like to assume any thing and prefer to just ask for clarity? Are you saying that we are all fools and that you love us all, and, that we should come and join the joy ride that you are on because you have no unresolved questions and because you have already become a truly just creator who has already reached life's apex?
By the way, "Hello, you fool I love you." doesn't strike me as insulting. It is akin to a parent saying to its child "Come here you little scamp you." and giving the child a hug. So, no I wouldn't say that anybody is being called a "fool".
If your way of answering open-ended clarifying questions is by saying things like, "If you are in the right place and time, then you will see it" instead of explaining the best way possible of ALL you know, then I think that just maybe you are not ahead of others and you would truly love to be.Rhodnar wrote:If you're in the right place and time, you'll see it. If not...It's a nice happy song anyway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCorJG9mubk[/quote]