Constructing a God Type Table

[Greta]

Forget it. I was hoping the idea of clarifying what people mean by God might be of interest but it's clearly not.

The sidetracks are boring. Yes DAM, I am a seeker, seeking inspiration, and you evangelists have simply been as dull as dishwater in always wanting to make things personal. I don't want to talk about me. I am in this body and mind 24/7 and have done so for many years. The excitement at my "new toy" is done and I now find what's going on outside of this body and mind much more interesting. You know ... animals, plants, the Earth, the universe, evolution, the ways in which humanity is developing (whether good or bad it is at least interesting) etc.

Oh yes, young Nick will speak of be being hypnotised by the patterns on the all of Plato's cave. I'm afraid all that "I'm above it all" egotistical chest beating is very dull. As far as I'm concerned, the amazing patterns of nature deserve our appreciation. They certainly deserve better than what neocons and evangelists are doling out to them.

[Dontaskme]

Forget it. I was hoping the idea of clarifying what people mean by God might be of interest but it's clearly not.

The sidetracks are boring. Yes DAM, I am a seeker, seeking inspiration, and you evangelists have simply been as dull as dishwater in always wanting to make things personal. I don't want to talk about me. I am in this body and mind 24/7 and have done so for many years. The excitement at my "new toy" is done and I now find what's going on outside of this body and mind much more interesting. You know ... animals, plants, the Earth, the universe, evolution, the ways in which humanity is developing (whether good or bad it is at least interesting) etc.

Oh yes, young Nick will speak of be being hypnotised by the patterns on the all of Plato's cave. I'm afraid all that "I'm above it all" egotistical chest beating is very dull. As far as I'm concerned, the amazing patterns of nature deserve our appreciation. They certainly deserve better than what neocons and evangelists are doling out to them.

I was inviting you to discuss ...''the idea of clarifying what people mean by God might be'' ?

But you have clearly made your mind up you are not interested, by reacting with ''forget it.''
I even invited you to discuss the concept of ''suffering'' which you also declined.

You appear to be insecure and suspicious about having these discussions with in your own words and belief are people making this personal. But let me tell you, if that's what you believe then that's your own insecurity at play here. No one is more knowledable than any one else, we all know what we know because that's what we know, from our own unique experiences. You seem to think this is a competition going on to see who can outsmart the other..it's so petty. You are of a low vibration, so be it.

You then follow up your disinterest in the invitation to discuss with your ususal silly name calling tirades.

There is no please in you, because you always make it about you.

.

I'm afraid all that "I'm above it all" egotistical chest beating is very dull.

Well, I for one have never had those thoughts about Nick.

Nick is just putting an opinion forward, we are all entitled to our opinions, no one is forcing you or anyone else to take another persons opinion personally or seriously.

You want to talk about the outside, and Nick wants to talk about the inside...so what is so wrong and dull about that?



.

[Reflex]

How does one clarify what we mean by the undifferentiated or the One? Can we quantify the unquantifiable or qualify the unqualified? Saying something about it only leads to further confusion, yet, I don’t believe silence is a legitimate option.

Those who believe themselves wise regard
as real only the appearance of things, but
these fashioners of falsehood will have their
reward. Though men are inseparable from
the Logos, yet they are separated in it; and
though they encounter it daily, they are
alienated from it. What intelligence or
understanding do they have? They believe
the popular orators, and are guided by the
opinions of the populace; they do not
understand that the majority of men are
fools, and the wise few. . . .

One should understand that the world
appears by the opposition of forces; order
exists in the world by this play of
contraries. We would never have heard of
“right” if we did not know of “wrong;”
whole and not-whole, united-separate,
consonant-dissonant,—all these are inter-
dependent. [But] in the One, above and
below are the same, [just as] beginning
and end are one in the circumference of a
circle. That which is in conflict is also in
concert; while things differ from one
another, they are all contained in the most
beautiful Unity.

[Yet the philosophers cannot understand
this;] they do not understand how that which
contains differences within it is also in
harmony, how Unity consists of opposing
forces within Itself, just as the strings of a
bow or a lyre [produce harmony while being
pulled by opposing forces.]

From Mystical Theology by Swami Abhayananda

[seeds]

A Course in Consciousness might explain what DAM is talking about. Even so, the teachings are sealed except to the open mind.

A little girl with a terminal illness asks:

“What’s going to happen to me when I die?”

As far as I am concerned, if any concept concerning our ultimate destiny cannot be simplified to the point of being able to create a genuine sense of hope when whispered into that little girl’s ear...

...then it is useless.
_______

I agree. Although I understand what DAM says, I am uncomfortable with over-emphasizing the illusory aspect of the self.

I strongly suggest that the self (as in the Cartesian “I Am”) is the only thing - in all of reality - that is not illusory.

And with no offense intended to DAM, the point is that DAM’s confusing jargon would be useless in providing hope to the child (not to mention the questionable veracity of Advaita philosophy).
_______

[seeds]

A Course in Consciousness might explain what DAM is talking about. Even so, the teachings are sealed except to the open mind.

A little girl with a terminal illness asks:

“What’s going to happen to me when I die?”

As far as I am concerned, if any concept concerning our ultimate destiny cannot be simplified to the point of being able to create a genuine sense of hope when whispered into that little girl’s ear...

...then it is useless.
_______

But V.A..is utterly 150% adamant that nothing exists.

I am not sure of what that has to do with what was being discussed, but V. A. (I assume you mean Veritas Aequitas) is just another sleepwalking materialist who no doubt has good intentions, but is nonetheless lost within his own self-created inner realm of dubious assumptions about reality (as are we all).
_______

[seeds]

Forget it. I was hoping the idea of clarifying what people mean by God might be of interest but it's clearly not.

The sidetracks are boring.

First of all, did you actually believe that something as subjectively varied as that which humans visualize with respect to the word “God” can be so easily pigeonholed?

Secondly, if you are going to make statements such as this...

I see no advantage in creating an edifice whose creation is opaque to its inhabitants,.... Ideally, evidence for creation would be too unambiguous for argument.

...then don’t be surprised if someone (me, for example) tries to give a plausible explanation for why the opacity might be essential (see my last post - viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24775&start=90#p370311 - of which you so impolitely ignored).

Therefore, some of the sidetracking is caused by you.

And lastly, you have already disqualified yourself from being an unbiased arbiter of what makes it onto your list by assuming that “ALL MODELS” of the realm I had been describing, posit the ending of “doing” and “achieving” (not to mention our little “Serendipity” issue).

And if by chance that last bit might cause a rise in your hackles, might I offer the advice that a “wise old sage” once offered to me:

A suggestion: Probably best not to sweat about disrespect on forums

_______

[Dontaskme]

From Mystical Theology by Swami Abhayananda

Nice quote. Thanks for sharing this.



.

[Greta]

Forget it. I was hoping the idea of clarifying what people mean by God might be of interest but it's clearly not.

The sidetracks are boring.

First of all, did you actually believe that something as subjectively varied as that which humans visualize with respect to the word “God” can be so easily pigeonholed?

Of course. If anything there's too many categories. Most of the theists here believe in an anthropomorphic spirit man or "God as the ground of being". In fact, as seems most likely based on language used, most theists here seem to believe that an anthropomorphic spirit man IS somehow the ground of all being.

It's pretty clear that most of you still deep down believe in Big Spirit Man and don't want to admit it. That is why there is such a profound lack of interest in clarification, as it would reveal some mightily hard-to-justify opinions formed during childhood indoctrination that never fully wore off. That is why there is such a strong resistance to referring to God as "It" when "He" is clearly absurd - so many of you do not think of God as an It in any way, shape or form but as an undoubted "He".

Secondly, if you are going to make statements such as this...

I see no advantage in creating an edifice whose creation is opaque to its inhabitants,.... Ideally, evidence for creation would be too unambiguous for argument.

...then don’t be surprised if someone (me, for example) tries to give a plausible explanation for why the opacity might be essential (see my last post - viewtopic.php?f=11&t=24775&start=90#p370311 - of which you so impolitely ignored).

Scolding used as a bridge to the moral high ground does not impress me.

I actually did have replies in hand - I sometimes address issues sequentially. I will not bother now as you appear to have lost the basic goodwill needed to motivate me to engage in friendly discussion.

[Greta]

There is no please in you, because you always make it about you.

A bald faced lie of the Trumpian tradition.

I notice that Christians always immediately revert to the "personal". This is because they lack the intelligence to think deeply about the wondrous reality outside of ourselves and human society. The complex relationships of nature studied by science are too difficult for them so they swing "discussion" around to the personal, comfortable terrain for them.

If theists actually paid attention to nature they might learn to value it rather than encourage its destruction.

I'm afraid all that "I'm above it all" egotistical chest beating is very dull.

Well, I for one have never had those thoughts about Nick.

Perhaps because it's not you who is constantly being told they are subhuman secularists who are inferior to the KKKristian Master Race.

Bye.

[Dalek Prime]

DAM, yours is just just a very windy and higgledly-piggedly way of expressing the old and well-known concept of process philosophy, the idea that processes are more fundamental than things.

Your doublespeak gimmickry isn't necessary. Just read up on process philosophers - if you can countenance learning from someone else.

Learning from others is when I need reminding of what I already know because I have temporally forgotten.

Wow. Ease up on the Ego burgers. They're clearly filling with no nutritional value.

[uwot]

If theists actually paid attention to nature they might learn to value it rather than encourage its destruction.

Well, don't forget that the christians 'saviour' told them to have no care for this world and on the day of judgement will return to completely destroy it. Makes ya wonder why his dad created anything in the first place. If it really was just for some self righteous twerps to show how far they can stick their heads up their own arses, then God is a very silly boy.

[Dontaskme]

Well, I for one have never had those thoughts about Nick.

Perhaps because it's not you who is constantly being told they are subhuman secularists who are inferior to the KKKristian Master Race.

Bye.

Well I stopped believing in fairy stories a long time ago, sometimes I have to pretend they are real, else there is nothing else to do here.
Playing make belief is about all one can do with all this spare time.

The devil makes work for idle hands.

Was that a final bye, or just one of your pretend byes?


.

[Greta]

If theists actually paid attention to nature they might learn to value it rather than encourage its destruction.

Well, don't forget that the christians 'saviour' told them to have no care for this world and on the day of judgement will return to completely destroy it. Makes ya wonder why his dad created anything in the first place. If it really was just for some self righteous twerps to show how far they can stick their heads up their own arses, then God is a very silly boy.

I think this has become a serious issue because there's people in government whose dearest wish is to see that society and others be destroyed. This is akin to electing an enemy combatant to power; they will make traitorous decisions that sell out the society, and that is exactly what they are doing.

[uwot]

I think this has become a serious issue...

You're not kidding. In a sane world this, from your neck of the woods, would be comedy: https://www.news.com.au/world/middle-ea ... 0c895f37dc

[Dubious]

If it really was just for some self righteous twerps to show how far they can stick their heads up their own arses, then God is a very silly boy.

...that only makes him a little more human and like humans may enjoy the occasional comedy. It's reported that even Hitler laughed when he saw Charlie Chaplin in the Great Dictator.