The Creation of the Term "God"

[Dontaskme]

You are making a logical claim not an empirical claim. Even if there was emprical evidence you would still be wrong, and in the absence of emprical evidence are are logically wrong.

An empirical claim is a metaphysical idea believed to be real and true. You knew nothing at your birth, everything you do know is what other people have informed you, and you have believed what they have informed you because you believe that others exist.

But who informed those others? the answer is they have been informed by the people who came before them who also believed that others exist.. The point is...WHO was the ''very first'' KNOWER?

...the answer is obviously very troubling, because of the infinite regress problem.

An empirical claim is a statement about the world that is known as common knowledge to everyone via some information gained by observations and experiments. But these claims are of a metaphysical nature. They are simply 'ideas' artificially imposed upon what is essentially at it's deepest core.. totally void of knowing - Every empirical claim is nothing but the nothingness itself. Both the void and that which the void contains are the same one reality.

So again, you are missing the point. Your turn

.

[Sculptor]

You are making a logical claim not an empirical claim. Even if there was emprical evidence you would still be wrong, and in the absence of emprical evidence are are logically wrong.

An empirical claim is a metaphysical idea believed to be real and true. You knew nothing at your birth, everything you do know is what other people have informed you, and you have believed what they have informed you because you believe that others exist.

But who informed those others? the answer is they have been informed by the people who came before them who also believed that others exist.. The point is...WHO was the ''very first'' KNOWER?

...the answer is obviously very troubling, because of the infinite regress problem.

An empirical claim is a statement about the world that is known as common knowledge to everyone via some information gained by observations and experiments. But these claims are of a metaphysical nature. They are simply 'ideas' artificially imposed upon what is essentially at it's deepest core.. totally void of knowing - Every empirical claim is nothing but the nothingness itself. Both the void and that which the void contains are the same one reality.

So again, you are missing the point. Your turn

.

You have added nothing.
You are shotting yourself in the foot.
You have undermined the very value of everything you have said.
You are contradicting yourself and are too dull to see that.

[Dontaskme]

You have added nothing.
You are shotting yourself in the foot.
You have undermined the very value of everything you have said.
You are contradicting yourself and are too dull to see that.

This ''you'' is nothing and everything.
There is only nothing, which is everything. Everything is relative to nothing.
Both nothing and everything are the same id-entical reality.

There isn't a ''someone'' to add to what you already are which is nothing and everything. ( but you are too dull to see this, however, a polishing of the mirror is all that is needed, as turds cannot be polished )

Unconditional love or the beloved is another term for nothing and everything which is another term for infinity which is totally free and boundless eternally.

The only contradiction here, is the illusory belief there is a ''someone'' called a 'you' or a 'self'....but the belief is an all inclusive aspect of what is already being everything, so nothing is ever being added except the artificial belief....how can something be added to that which is everything....? Actual Reality doesn't need a ''someone called self or you'' to be.

Life is a dream dreamt by no one. Nothing is writing this message, and nothing is reading it. Or, everything is writing this message and everything is reading it...that's all that's happening.

You know nothing - anything you do know is heresay that has been imagined by no one, and believed to be real.

The only real here, is nothing which is everything, this pure ''what is'' is neither alive nor dead, right or wrong, it's just pure unconditional boundless free ISness.

The OP is correct.

If you are expecting something from this message, then you will get nothing and be very disappointed, for nothing is already being everything. You do not need to show up to your own show in the attempt to control it by believing you are adding to it, or that you are going to get something from it by adding to it. There simply is no other you to take that position of adding to what is already everything..

Reality doesn't take any such position, except within the artificial dream of separation where there is a belief that I exist. In reality there is no I that exists, except in this conception, which is a superimpostion upon nothing....in other words the I is an imposter...Reality has no such imposter, reality is everywhere and nowhere all at once, one without a second.

Thankyou.

.

[Sculptor]

You have added nothing.
You are shotting yourself in the foot.
You have undermined the very value of everything you have said.
You are contradicting yourself and are too dull to see that.

This ''you'' is nothing and everything.

Contradition.
Run along now!
Jog on boy.

[Belinda]

There is no distinction between the creator and the created - except conceptually.

Yeah it must be so difficult for you thinking that your table is the same a carpenter.

DonAskMe's table is partly the experience of carpenters, and partly the experiences of DAM and her cat and whoever else experiences the table. There is no such thing as a table in or for itself.

However existence itself , or 'being', is more than the sum of all possible experiencers; it's also how all possible experiences are necessary experiences.

[Sculptor]

There is no distinction between the creator and the created - except conceptually.

Yeah it must be so difficult for you thinking that your table is the same a carpenter.

DonAskMe's table is partly the experience of carpenters, and partly the experiences of DAM and her cat and whoever else experiences the table. There is no such thing as a table in or for itself.

This does not make the table a carpenter.

However existence itself , or 'being', is more than the sum of all possible experiencers;

That is an empty assertion. Since you may only know your own experience.

... it's also how all possible experiences are necessary experiences.

SO what?
He claimed that the thing created is THE SAME as the creator. That is incohernt babble.
It is a self negating statement since it does not just dissolve the meanings of carpenter and table, it also negates the word create and its cognates. this turns every thing he says into babble.
He's just not saying anything at all.

[Dontaskme]

If carpenter is the creator
And tables are made in the image of carpenter
THEN
Is a table the creator.

A creator is not in the table. The table was/is in the creator as a concept known. There's never a table until it's created conceptually by it's creator ...A table is the formless creator's created image in the form of a table, and prior to the table's manifested existence, the table's existence was also just an invisible ''thought''... the table was just an idea within the creator, not the other way around. The creator is never in the thing it creates.

There's nothing in the created image of a table, the table is the byproduct of the formless creator only..creator and creation are ONE.

For example: it is only a concept that apparently makes what did not exist appear to exist, as in nothing is something.
A creation is a thing, and a thing can only exist as a concept known to no thing.

Do you understand this?

.

[Sculptor]

If carpenter is the creator
And tables are made in the image of carpenter
THEN
Is a table the creator.

A creator is not in the table. The table was/is in the creator as a concept known. There's never a table until it's created conceptually by it's creator ...A table is the formless creator's created image in the form of a table, and prior to the table's manifested existence, the table's existence was also just an invisible ''thought''... the table was just an idea within the creator, not the other way around. The creator is never in the thing it creates.

There's nothing in the created image of a table, the table is the byproduct of the formless creator only..creator and creation are ONE.

For example: it is only a concept that apparently makes what did not exist appear to exist, as in nothing is something.
A creation is a thing, and a thing can only exist as a concept known to no thing.

Do you understand this?

.

Yes. I love to see a great salad.

[Dontaskme]

Yes. I love to see a great salad.

All words are a salad.

A salad doesn't know anything, how could it...it cannot, no more than a single tomatoe can know it's creator. But a creator sure as heck can know a tomato, since it's the tomatoe's only existence, as a concept known by it's creator.

Reality is not what 'thought' says it is. . except in this conception.

.

[Sculptor]

Yes. I love to see a great salad.

All words are a salad.

Yes and rich is poor, dogs are all cats, and black is white.

[Belinda]

Yeah it must be so difficult for you thinking that your table is the same a carpenter.

DonAskMe's table is partly the experience of carpenters, and partly the experiences of DAM and her cat and whoever else experiences the table. There is no such thing as a table in or for itself.

This does not make the table a carpenter.

However existence itself , or 'being', is more than the sum of all possible experiencers;

That is an empty assertion. Since you may only know your own experience.

... it's also how all possible experiences are necessary experiences.

SO what?
He claimed that the thing created is THE SAME as the creator. That is incohernt babble.
It is a self negating statement since it does not just dissolve the meanings of carpenter and table, it also negates the word create and its cognates. this turns every thing he says into babble.
He's just not saying anything at all.

The table is not a carpenter because social reality has decreed no doubt for good reason that the table is not a carpenter. There are some cultures where selected inanimate objects are held to be the same as or aspects of their human maker. You are an anthropologist so you may know better than I which societies these are. I think they are animistic, or spiritualist, cultures.

"My grandfather's clock-------stopped, short, never to go again, when the old man died"

[Belinda]

Yes. I love to see a great salad.

All words are a salad.

Yes and rich is poor, dogs are all cats, and black is white.

Sculptor, you conflate social reality with reality.

[Dontaskme]

Yes and rich is poor, dogs are all cats, and black is white.

In the conceptual dream of dualistic mental separation, there are opposites. A cat is a nought but a thought. A thought requires a thinker, and hey presto...you've got the notion of two things, an object and a subject. However, a thinker is not separated from the thought it thinks....is it not? it's all one unitary function, is it not?

The external world existing of conceptual things, is the projection of invisible thoughts ...ok? what the heck was a cat until a thought thought the concept into existence? does the cat know it's a cat, NO cats do not inform themselves they are cats...knowledge does...where does knowledge come from? ....it comes from words, and where do words come from?

Life is a dream, dreamt by no thing.

No thing can dream it is a thing.

Can a tree know it is a tree? No, concepts know nothing, concepts are known by nothing.

There is no thing knowing a thing.

All this nonsense appears like an oxymoron and could not be any other way, as you are both the moron and the knower of the moron simultaneously.

Reality is totally non-negotiable

Only silence is real and true, everything else is a poor substitute, a myth, a story full of noise and fury told by a fool signifying absolutely nothing.

God never reveals itself, God is the revealing, and revealed both, as ONE unitary action.

God being just another word for you, and you is just another word for consciousness, and consciousness is just another word for beingness, and beingness is just another word for nothingness, and nothingness is just another word for everything....

...are you getting the gist as to where this is going yet?

[Sculptor]

DonAskMe's table is partly the experience of carpenters, and partly the experiences of DAM and her cat and whoever else experiences the table. There is no such thing as a table in or for itself.

This does not make the table a carpenter.

However existence itself , or 'being', is more than the sum of all possible experiencers;

That is an empty assertion. Since you may only know your own experience.

... it's also how all possible experiences are necessary experiences.

SO what?
He claimed that the thing created is THE SAME as the creator. That is incohernt babble.
It is a self negating statement since it does not just dissolve the meanings of carpenter and table, it also negates the word create and its cognates. this turns every thing he says into babble.
He's just not saying anything at all.

The table is not a carpenter because social reality has decreed no doubt for good reason that the table is not a carpenter. There are some cultures where selected inanimate objects are held to be the same as or aspects of their human maker.

There are no human cultures that confuse a maker for the thing made.
If you think there are please cite!

You are an anthropologist so you may know better than I which societies these are. I think they are animistic, or spiritualist, cultures.

"My grandfather's clock-------stopped, short, never to go again, when the old man died"

Wind-up clocks are always in the habit of stopping.
I only wihs the wind-up that is this thread represents stops soon

[Sculptor]

All words are a salad.

Yes and rich is poor, dogs are all cats, and black is white.

Sculptor, you conflate social reality with reality.

no