A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

seeds
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by seeds »

attofishpi wrote: Mr seeds, it appears we both have much in common in our beliefs, in fact in all my years of forum posting i have not come across anyone that seems to perceive our reality and God in such a similar light as i do, i believe we are both Panentheists.
Yes, atto, in the forums I have always referred to myself as being a “Panentheistic/Berkeleyanish Idealist.”
attofishpi wrote: I've known that God exists since 1997.
And for me it’s been since 1970 through an event that I am not yet prepared to discuss in a forum.

However, thank you for sharing your story, especially considering how you and I both know of the sideways glances we incur from the skeptics of any kind of spiritual guidance we profess to receiving.
attofishpi wrote: ...i believe in reincarnation. I believe that we reincarnate continuously throughout life's existence - i think you believe we are only reborn once or twice.
Clearly, neither of us can be certain of our theories. However, I personally believe that there is no “rebirthing” involved in our situation.

There is simply our initial birth into existence from the amniotic waters of our mother’s womb, and then a second and final birth of our soul (mind/consciousness) into our ultimate and eternal form.

And although it is compelling to think that we need to come back into the darkness of the universe – over and over again – in order to “learn” something, I suggest that everything we will need to know in order grow and evolve throughout eternity can be ascertained in the pristine clarity of “true reality” where nothing will be hidden from us anymore.

(Continued in next post)
_______
seeds
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by seeds »

_______

(Continued from prior post)
attofishpi wrote: ...I believe this continues until we have learned enough of God perhaps to join the sages - i guess in something like a 'heaven'...
The method I use in evaluating the plausibility of any afterlife concept is to see how well it stands up in the context of eternity (i.e., infinite time).

To quote something I have written elsewhere:
seeds wrote: I cannot stress enough the importance of having a solid understanding of the meaning of eternity.

Eternity is the ultimate frame of reference by which to measure the validity of any concept – religious or otherwise – that tries to describe the purpose and form we will acquire after death.

If any alleged truth concerning our ultimate destiny appears to be flimsy, illogical, or short lived when evaluated in the context of eternity, then it should be abandoned.
As a thought experiment, imagine that one grain of sand represents one billion years. Now picture every beach and every desert on the entire planet.

With that in mind, and to slightly paraphrase something I have written elsewhere...

...If you had to reincarnate a million times into human form in order to reach a level of being where it is no longer necessary for you to reincarnate anymore; and if your million incarnations only took place once every one thousand years, it would be the equivalent of only one grain of sand (one billion years). And no matter what form you have acquired in that time, eternity still looms before you in a vision of endlessness that defies comprehension.

So the question is - what is your status at that juncture, and what would your “purpose” be from that moment on?

The point is that when the suggested components and outcome of every single world religion (including those promoting reincarnation) are projected into eternity, they all seem to fizzle-out and dissipate into a misty fog of purposelessness.

Eternity absolutely demands that any living entity in possession of eternal life must have a form that can grow and evolve.

It must be a form that has a forever ripening and fruitful purpose that will not wither or fade in the distant depths of eternal existence.

And the only concept that can even remotely withstand the awesome reality of eternal life is the concept I’ve been promoting in this forum.

It is a concept that is metaphorically depicted in this one simplistic little drawing, here: http://theultimateseeds.com/Images/18%2 ... ge%208.jpg

It is absolutely teeming with an eternal purpose for us.

(Continued in next post)
_______
Last edited by seeds on Tue Jan 24, 2017 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
seeds
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by seeds »

_______

(Continued from prior post)
attofishpi wrote: When i saw on the news a member of ISIS cutting the head off of a charity worker, i asked the sage\God as to whether this perpetrator was going to be reincarnated as the beast...
atto, this is where we need to be careful.

Because for every head that an ISIS member cuts off, the members of western nations (i.e., Americans) are tearing to shreds multiple bodies of little children with our drones and “smart” bombs.

Though it is all total insanity on either side of the situation, your assumption of the condemnation of the ISIS member to a beastly incarnation reminds me of the old Biblical axiom...

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

How about we just assume that in the end – in the name of love – we will all be forgiven for the errors we made in this temporary madhouse.
_______
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by thedoc »

seeds wrote:_______
The method I use in evaluating the credibility of any afterlife concept is to see how well it stands up in the context of eternity (i.e., infinite time).
Here I must disagree with you, Eternity is not infinite time, Eternity has nothing to do with time it is the complete absence of time. Forever is an infinite time but in Eternity there is no time.
seeds
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by seeds »

seeds wrote: The method I use in evaluating the plausibility of any afterlife concept is to see how well it stands up in the context of eternity (i.e., infinite time).
thedoc wrote: Here I must disagree with you, Eternity is not infinite time, Eternity has nothing to do with time it is the complete absence of time. Forever is an infinite time but in Eternity there is no time.
doc, if you Google the definition of “eternity,” the very first thing that pops up is this:
Google wrote:
eternity

noun:

infinite or unending time.
And Dictionary.com says...
Dictionary.com wrote:
eternity

1. infinite time; duration without beginning or end.

2. eternal existence, especially as contrasted with mortal life:
However, regardless of our preferred definition, I trust that you know what I meant.
_______
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22527
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by Immanuel Can »

thedoc wrote:
seeds wrote:_______
The method I use in evaluating the credibility of any afterlife concept is to see how well it stands up in the context of eternity (i.e., infinite time).
Here I must disagree with you, Eternity is not infinite time, Eternity has nothing to do with time it is the complete absence of time. Forever is an infinite time but in Eternity there is no time.
An interesting thought, thedoc. "Time" seems to me to be essentially an entropic kind of measurement. Outside of an entropic situation, one wonders what it would measure, if anything at all... :?

I might be inclined to agree with you there.
thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by thedoc »

seeds wrote:
seeds wrote: The method I use in evaluating the plausibility of any afterlife concept is to see how well it stands up in the context of eternity (i.e., infinite time).
thedoc wrote: Here I must disagree with you, Eternity is not infinite time, Eternity has nothing to do with time it is the complete absence of time. Forever is an infinite time but in Eternity there is no time.
doc, if you Google the definition of “eternity,” the very first thing that pops up is this:
Google wrote:
eternity

noun:

infinite or unending time.
And Dictionary.com says...
Dictionary.com wrote:
eternity

1. infinite time; duration without beginning or end.

2. eternal existence, especially as contrasted with mortal life:
However, regardless of our preferred definition, I trust that you know what I meant.
_______
I know exactly what you mean, and it seems to be the preferred definition of atheists to discredit the notion of Heaven. However I disagree with the dictionary definition, which corresponds with the popular definition, and that is in error.
Dubious
Posts: 4043
Joined: Tue May 19, 2015 7:40 am

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by Dubious »

seeds wrote:I firmly believe that life continues on for us after death.
Dubious wrote:...and what would warrant this belief since creating humans is a mass production event.
seeds wrote:That question makes no sense to me.
Simple! A momentary ripple followed by an incubation of approximately nine months and another consciousness is born which by merit of being human is destined to be reborn according to your view. But as confirmed by history, God or nature couldn't care less about all your pretty ones. They're a dime a dozen, totally expendable and replaceable. If life weren't so cheap we wouldn't need all the myth and religion to enhance it.
seeds wrote:The fact that humans are generally unaware of just how strange the universe truly is, is testament to my earlier assertion of how humans are operating at a restricted level of consciousness which makes them somnambulistically oblivious of the bizarre features of our current situation.
"Bizarre features of our current situation" do not on any level endorse a life after death scenario. A restricted level of consciousness may seem to make the universe strange without actually being particularly strange as comprehended by a less restricted consciousness. In our case, being admittedly handicapped in that respect, what would justify an even greater insurgence of strangeness such as believing in life after death?

What I find immeasurably bizarre beyond anything in the universe or quantum theory is human behavior and beliefs transgressing the purlieus of logic, reason and viability into regions of total absurdity grounded in the momentum of consciousness called "wishful thinking".

Having lived your years, however long, humans should feel entitled to the kind of destiny you proclaim? Some, like yourself, IC and Doc, may "feel" that way and in a sense it serves a purpose for only '"in time", through the alchemy of consciousness can time be dilated into eternity making the present more palatable. After which, there is no affirmation or negation, no right or wrong or even any acknowledgement thereof. There is only the complete obliteration of time squeezing out all of history into an eternity you will never feel.
seeds wrote: The point is, Dubious (and assuming that “eternal life” is a possibility), that what we will be able to do with the mental fabric of our very own being (i.e., our minds sans “physical” body) is exactly what the Creator of this universe has done with the mental fabric of his own being.
...yes but in our case to experience all this in whatever state you still requires blood flowing to the brain. Without that there is absolutely nothing, time condensed to zero, in the most literal sense. As the saying goes, "mind is what the brain does".
seeds wrote:After a second and final birth out of these temporary bodies and into our ultimate and eternal form, we are going to be like the Creator of this universe.
Sorry! But after the fuck ups we proved ourselves to be on this planet this sentiment sounds slightly out of tune.
seeds wrote:And if you think that being magnetically adhered to the spherical surface of a spinning ball feels natural to you right now in our temporary form, then just imagine how natural “true reality” will feel to us in a form and context that is meant to last forever.
Easy to say "true reality"! Aside from being derived from your imagination as wishful thinking, it's also an oxymoron. There is nothing to prevent your consciousness from endorsing such views since it contains whatever imagination creates. Nevertheless, it is so much easier to explain the physics of gravitation then the true reality of Beings meant to last forever.

I think for most people when they get really old and tired, don't wish for a second tier of existence which lasts forever. More likely they prefer to surrender to the oblivion they came from.
seeds wrote:(Take a peek at a series of extremely fanciful illustrations I created to help visualize the ideas above. Scroll down when you land on the first one, here: http://theultimateseeds.com/murmurings.htm)_______
I looked at them and they're quite impressive!
User avatar
Dontaskme
Posts: 16940
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by Dontaskme »

Dubious wrote:
I think for most people when they get really old and tired, don't wish for a second tier of existence which lasts forever. More likely they prefer to surrender to the oblivion they came from.
It's like where does the day end and the night begin?

Where is the dividing line?

For life to be possible it has to die. Therefore death is living..life is dying..there is no dividing line..death is the beginning of life..life is the end of death..life is the beginning of death..death is the end of life..add infinitum.

So what exactly lives or dies here?

Simple answer: Nothing.

What begins ends, nothingness sustains.

''Death is the stripping away of all that is not you. The secret of life is to die before you die-and find that there is no death.''



Image
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10012
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by attofishpi »

seeds wrote:_______

(Continued from prior post)
attofishpi wrote: When i saw on the news a member of ISIS cutting the head off of a charity worker, i asked the sage\God as to whether this perpetrator was going to be reincarnated as the beast...
atto, this is where we need to be careful.

Because for every head that an ISIS member cuts off, the members of western nations (i.e., Americans) are tearing to shreds multiple bodies of little children with our drones and “smart” bombs.

Though it is all total insanity on either side of the situation, your assumption of the condemnation of the ISIS member to a beastly incarnation reminds me of the old Biblical axiom...

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

How about we just assume that in the end – in the name of love – we will all be forgiven for the errors we made in this temporary madhouse.
_______
Most of humanity see a huge difference between videoing some innocent man having his head hacked off with a knife to the occasional innocent victim of a US bomb where the head of this evil ISIS group is a target.

And why would you bring this up as an issue in consideration that you believe the afterlife is so much better than the life we currently live.
seeds wrote:...If you had to reincarnate a million times into human form in order to reach a level of being where it is no longer necessary for you to reincarnate anymore; and if your million incarnations only took place once every one thousand years, it would be the equivalent of only one grain of sand (one billion years). And no matter what form you have acquired in that time, eternity still looms before you in a vision of endlessness that defies comprehension.

So the question is - what is your status at that juncture, and what would your “purpose” be from that moment on?
The universe does not exist in an eternal state of providing the reality we are now afforded, so at this juncture i believe your post to to be rather ill conceived.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10012
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by attofishpi »

seeds wrote:_______

(Continued from prior post)
attofishpi wrote: When i saw on the news a member of ISIS cutting the head off of a charity worker, i asked the sage\God as to whether this perpetrator was going to be reincarnated as the beast...
atto, this is where we need to be careful.

Because for every head that an ISIS member cuts off, the members of western nations (i.e., Americans) are tearing to shreds multiple bodies of little children with our drones and “smart” bombs.

Though it is all total insanity on either side of the situation, your assumption of the condemnation of the ISIS member to a beastly incarnation reminds me of the old Biblical axiom...

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

How about we just assume that in the end – in the name of love – we will all be forgiven for the errors we made in this temporary madhouse.
_______
I made no assumption, i made a statement with great understanding of this entity - God - and a sage - and they answered that this individual will reincarnate as the beast.

Most of humanity see a huge difference between videoing some innocent man having his head hacked off with a knife to the occasional innocent victim of a US bomb where the head of this evil ISIS group is a target.

And why would you bring this up as an issue in consideration that you believe the afterlife is so much better than the life we currently live?
seeds wrote:...If you had to reincarnate a million times into human form in order to reach a level of being where it is no longer necessary for you to reincarnate anymore; and if your million incarnations only took place once every one thousand years, it would be the equivalent of only one grain of sand (one billion years). And no matter what form you have acquired in that time, eternity still looms before you in a vision of endlessness that defies comprehension.

So the question is - what is your status at that juncture, and what would your “purpose” be from that moment on?
The universe does not exist in an eternal state of providing the reality we are now afforded, so at this juncture i believe your post to to be rather ill conceived.
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 10012
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by attofishpi »

Harbal wrote:
attofishpi wrote: I've known that God exists since 1997. In 2005 i climbed out of bed when the words "tonight, bad luck" were said to me from the aether. That night i was attacked by someone with a baseball bat - i had a broken arm and nose.
It's a shame the voice from the aether didn't give you enough information to enable you to avoid the beating.
What you appear to misunderstand is that the sage\God - were the ones that gave me the beating.
User avatar
Harbal
Posts: 9830
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:03 pm
Location: Yorkshire
Contact:

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by Harbal »

attofishpi wrote:
What you appear to misunderstand is that the sage\God - were the ones that gave me the beating.
You're right, I did appear to misunderstand, which is a state of affairs I anticipate continuing.
seeds
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by seeds »

attofishpi wrote:
seeds wrote:_______

(Continued from prior post)
attofishpi wrote: When i saw on the news a member of ISIS cutting the head off of a charity worker, i asked the sage\God as to whether this perpetrator was going to be reincarnated as the beast...
atto, this is where we need to be careful.

Because for every head that an ISIS member cuts off, the members of western nations (i.e., Americans) are tearing to shreds multiple bodies of little children with our drones and “smart” bombs.

Though it is all total insanity on either side of the situation, your assumption of the condemnation of the ISIS member to a beastly incarnation reminds me of the old Biblical axiom...

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.”

How about we just assume that in the end – in the name of love – we will all be forgiven for the errors we made in this temporary madhouse.
_______
I made no assumption, i made a statement with great understanding of this entity - God - and a sage - and they answered that this individual will reincarnate as the beast.
atto, please don’t take my replies as being any sort of questioning of the means through which you receive your spiritual guidance.

We’re just having what I hope is a friendly exchange of ideas concerning God, of which we both (if we are being honest) could be wrong.

(Continued in next post)
_______
seeds
Posts: 2179
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2016 9:31 pm

Re: A Challenge to Richard Dawkins and the Atheists

Post by seeds »

_______

(Continued from prior post)
attofishpi wrote: Most of humanity see a huge difference between videoing some innocent man having his head hacked off with a knife to the occasional innocent victim of a US bomb where the head of this evil ISIS group is a target.
The “occasional” innocent victim? Don’t be naïve, atto.

A quick Google search brought up an article from the Atlantic Magazine online which stated that...
The Atlantic wrote: “Between January 2012 and February 2013,” The Intercept reported, “U.S. special operations airstrikes killed more than 200 people. Of those, only 35 were the intended targets. During one five-month period of the operation, according to the documents, nearly 90 percent of the people killed in airstrikes were not the intended targets.” That’s one campaign of many in just one country where drone killings happen...

...In 2014, The Guardian provided even more reason to doubt Brennan:

A new analysis of the data available to the public about drone strikes, conducted by the human-rights group Reprieve, indicates that even when operators target specific individuals – the most focused effort of what Barack Obama calls “targeted killing” – they kill vastly more people than their targets, often needing to strike multiple times. Attempts to kill 41 men resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1,147 people, as of 24 November.
(Bolding mine)

And furthermore, just because we don’t video our crimes does not make them any less cold-blooded and heinous.

Besides that, you don’t need a video when you can simply imagine the horror of an instantaneous dismembering of multiple bodies of men, women, and children in the explosion of a Hellfire missile sent from the safety of the video game atmosphere of a predator drone operator.

And don’t even get me started on why a group like ISIS exists in the first place (a topic for a different thread perhaps).
_______
Post Reply