Discussion:
EVIDENCE NO GODS EXIST
(too old to reply)
Bill M
2007-04-07 21:47:01 UTC
Permalink
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.

If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to all
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence. It would
not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist. No loving and caring god
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend their
eternity in his Hell.



If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.



The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;
that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)



I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists

except in their imagination.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-07 23:10:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to all
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.



It would
Post by Bill M
not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist.
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a good
enough man to actually search for the truth.



No loving and caring god
Post by Bill M
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend their
eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
Lucifer
2007-04-08 01:54:39 UTC
Permalink
God wants to believe in him, right?

God is, apparently, omnipotent.

I don't believe in god.

Therefore, god does not exist.

--

Lucifer the Unsubtle, EAC Librarian of Dark Tomes of Excessive Evil
and General Purpose Igor

The Anti-Theist, BAAWA Lowly Evilmeister and tamer of the Demon Duck
of Doom

Convicted by Earthquack

"Don't worry, I won't bite.......hard"
Martin Phipps
2007-04-08 03:31:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
But he doesn't exist. You said so yourself in another thread. "If He
actually existed then I wouldn't believe in Him," you said. I don't
claim to understand your reasoning.

Martin
Al Klein
2007-04-08 04:04:12 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
Mark Earnest
2007-04-08 04:45:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
Free Lunch
2007-04-08 04:55:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, in alt.atheism
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
You have never offered any evidence to support your religious claims.
Bill M
2007-04-08 23:12:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Free Lunch
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, in alt.atheism
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
You have never offered any evidence to support your religious claims.
True - because he has none!
JessHC
2007-04-08 11:34:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
Unsupported assertions aren't evidence.
Al Klein
2007-04-08 20:21:03 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
You post assertions every day. You've never posted evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
I bear witness continually as to what I have seen and heard.
That's just your assertions, it's not evidence. Anyone can say
anything - what matters is what you can prove - and you can't prove
anything you claim.
Bill M
2007-04-08 20:45:04 UTC
Permalink
Al,

This is an all too common tactic of religionists. In fact it is the very
basis of their religion. Just make unfounded assertions about imaginary
things and expect everyone to accept it with awe!
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
You post assertions every day. You've never posted evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
I bear witness continually as to what I have seen and heard.
That's just your assertions, it's not evidence. Anyone can say
anything - what matters is what you can prove - and you can't prove
anything you claim.
Dubh Ghall
2007-04-09 20:17:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
Perhaps, but you never post any evidence.
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own

#162 BAAWA Knight.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-04-09 20:28:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
Perhaps, but you never post any evidence.
It's one of the words their religion has dishonestly redefined. It now
means tell people what they believe whether they want it or not.

Instead of what they have seen, on request and to be questioned to
determine its veracity.

Part of their brainwashing: at one level it is the new meaning but the
subconscious impact is the old meaning. They don't even see the
disconnect.

Just like other words in their vocabulary: truth, good, bad, love etc.

It makes it impossible to hold any kind of two-way communication.
Dubh Ghall
2007-04-10 15:04:26 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 09 Apr 2007 16:28:09 -0400, Christopher A.Lee
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 23:45:31 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
You haven't seen it?
I post it every day.
I bear witness continually as to what
I have seen and heard.
Perhaps, but you never post any evidence.
It's one of the words their religion has dishonestly redefined. It now
means tell people what they believe whether they want it or not.
Instead of what they have seen, on request and to be questioned to
determine its veracity.
Part of their brainwashing: at one level it is the new meaning but the
subconscious impact is the old meaning. They don't even see the
disconnect.
Just like other words in their vocabulary: truth, good, bad, love etc.
It makes it impossible to hold any kind of two-way communication.
I'd settle for a little one way communication, if I could just get
close enough to impress on him, what I am saying.

Then perhaps the para-medics could explain any bits he didn't
understand, on the way to the ER. >:->
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own

#162 BAAWA Knight.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 02:20:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Free Lunch
2007-04-09 02:48:55 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 21:20:26 -0500, in alt.atheism
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
So you wish. You don't get to misdefine evidence to make your wishful
thinking count as evidence. You know that. You know that you are lying
when you call your unsubstantiated claims evidence. Why would any god
want you as a follower when you lie about him?
--
"Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel
to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy
Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should
take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in
which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh
it to scorn." -- Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis
Martin Phipps
2007-04-09 04:15:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.

Martin
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 04:28:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
God is just God.
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
DanielSan
2007-04-09 05:34:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
Therefore, God is unbelievable.
Post by Mark Earnest
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
Typo. Etch-a-Sketch.
Post by Mark Earnest
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And your evidence for this is?
Post by Mark Earnest
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
Test tube and petri-dishes are elements of a caricatured scientist. The
majority of scientists don't wear lab coats and work in clean rooms.
Post by Mark Earnest
God is just God.
So you say. But you have no evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
Post by Mark Earnest
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Well, we have better things to do. Like living life?
Post by Mark Earnest
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist,
Just as I tend to assume that policorns swimming in the gas-oceans of
Neptune do not exist.
Post by Mark Earnest
even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
What evidence?
Post by Mark Earnest
They love their own darkness.
Darkness? What is that, a metaphor?
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 15:10:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
Therefore, God is unbelievable.
Post by Mark Earnest
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
Typo. Etch-a-Sketch.
Post by Mark Earnest
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And your evidence for this is?
Post by Mark Earnest
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
Test tube and petri-dishes are elements of a caricatured scientist. The
majority of scientists don't wear lab coats and work in clean rooms.
Post by Mark Earnest
God is just God.
So you say. But you have no evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Well, we have better things to do. Like living life?
Post by Mark Earnest
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist,
Just as I tend to assume that policorns swimming in the gas-oceans of
Neptune do not exist.
Post by Mark Earnest
even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
What evidence?
Post by Mark Earnest
They love their own darkness.
Darkness? What is that, a metaphor?
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
DanielSan
2007-04-10 03:01:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?

I'm kinda wary of the idea of Kevin Bacon* as God, just so you know....

* Or Chevy Chase, for that matter.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
Mark Earnest
2007-04-10 02:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
DanielSan
2007-04-10 03:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
Then what does he look like? You'd think with someone as all-powerful,
all-knowing, and all-seeing as "God" is professed to be, he'd be at
least recognizable to even the STAUNCHEST atheist.

So, I ask again. What does he look like? I always envisioned Morgan
Freeman as he was in Bruce Almighty. Or, perhaps, the baboon God that
they have in South Park. Maybe even George Burns... but I can't imagine
John Denver as a prophet.

Sorry.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
Mark Earnest
2007-04-10 03:28:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
Then what does he look like?
He looks different every time...until you get to know him. Then he always
looks the same. He might be an old man, he might be a young woman; he might
even be a young teen or even a child. When you get to know him, he is deep,
sparkly, resilient, and subtly powerful.


You'd think with someone as all-powerful,
Post by DanielSan
all-knowing, and all-seeing as "God" is professed to be, he'd be at
least recognizable to even the STAUNCHEST atheist.
He doesn't make himself that obvious these days, but the day is fast coming
when he will. Right now he likes to reveal himself only to those that seek
him.
That is because it is a treasure to know God, and treasures don't come
completely for free, you know.
Post by DanielSan
So, I ask again. What does he look like? I always envisioned Morgan
Freeman as he was in Bruce Almighty. Or, perhaps, the baboon God that
they have in South Park. Maybe even George Burns...
George Burns is a good guess. He was a manifestation of God that played
God, you know.
DanielSan
2007-04-10 04:46:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
Then what does he look like?
He looks different every time...
And your evidence for that is...?
Post by Mark Earnest
until you get to know him. Then he always
looks the same. He might be an old man, he might be a young woman; he might
even be a young teen or even a child. When you get to know him, he is deep,
sparkly, resilient, and subtly powerful.
You know, "know" has a VERY different Biblical meaning. ;-)

But, anyway, God is making it rather confusing. Either that, or you're
grasping for straws and actually have no hard evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
You'd think with someone as all-powerful,
Post by DanielSan
all-knowing, and all-seeing as "God" is professed to be, he'd be at
least recognizable to even the STAUNCHEST atheist.
He doesn't make himself that obvious these days,
And why is that?
Post by Mark Earnest
but the day is fast coming
when he will. Right now he likes to reveal himself only to those that seek
him.
Right. In salt stains and cinnamon buns.
Post by Mark Earnest
That is because it is a treasure to know God, and treasures don't come
completely for free, you know.
AKA "I'm full of shit and I will believe anything I'm told."
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
So, I ask again. What does he look like? I always envisioned Morgan
Freeman as he was in Bruce Almighty. Or, perhaps, the baboon God that
they have in South Park. Maybe even George Burns...
George Burns is a good guess. He was a manifestation of God that played
God, you know.
Uh, that was a MOVIE, numbnuts. You know. Based on a novel by Avery
Corman, directed by Carl Reiner.

Just admit it, you're full of shit. You probably sit up all night
Christmas Eve waiting for Santa and Easter morning waiting for the big
rabbit with basket of eggs.

Let me know what the Tooth Fairy looks like when (s)he visits you next. :-)
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
JessHC
2007-04-10 15:49:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
Then what does he look like?
He looks different every time...until you get to know him. Then he always
looks the same. He might be an old man, he might be a young woman; he might
even be a young teen or even a child. When you get to know him, he is deep,
sparkly, resilient, and subtly powerful.
Sound like a bowling ball.
Post by Mark Earnest
You'd think with someone as all-powerful,
Post by DanielSan
all-knowing, and all-seeing as "God" is professed to be, he'd be at
least recognizable to even the STAUNCHEST atheist.
He doesn't make himself that obvious these days, but the day is fast coming
when he will. Right now he likes to reveal himself only to those that seek him.
Too bad that's demonstrably false.
Post by Mark Earnest
That is because it is a treasure to know God, and treasures don't come
completely for free, you know.
We're already aware of your deity's extortionist leanings.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
So, I ask again. What does he look like? I always envisioned Morgan
Freeman as he was in Bruce Almighty. Or, perhaps, the baboon God that
they have in South Park. Maybe even George Burns...
George Burns is a good guess. He was a manifestation of God that played
God, you know.
You're just a whacked-out dishonest troll, you know.
Darrell Stec
2007-04-10 13:05:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
Do us a favor and the carry a digital camera around with you. Next time he
visits you take a picture of him. That way we will be able to distinguish
all the half eaten sandwiches and potato chip images of him and eliminate
the fraudulent ones from the real ones on E-bay. I really hate it when I
buy the frauds and forgeries for my Jesus Gallery.

And just for identification purposes, what state issued his photo ID card?
--
Later,
Darrell Stec ***@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages
JessHC
2007-04-10 14:49:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
JessHC
2007-04-10 14:51:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
You mean, he's invisible?
No, he is not invisible at all when he walks up to you.
Then you should be able to produce a photograph that is indisputable
proof of your deity.

Sorry about the empty post.
Al Klein
2007-04-10 03:01:51 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:10:54 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
No one who has proved that he's your god has EVER walked up to me.
Post by Mark Earnest
That is all he needs to do.
But he's never done it.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-10 03:30:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:10:54 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
No one who has proved that he's your god has EVER walked up to me.
Post by Mark Earnest
That is all he needs to do.
But he's never done it.
I am sure that he has, Al. Likely many times. But you won't look for the
cues.
You assume it is not him, so you are not likely to recognize him.
Give it the benefit of a doubt, and look for the powerful and the noble and
the good, and you have a better chance of recognizing him next time he walks
up to you.
Al Klein
2007-04-11 00:06:43 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 22:30:25 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:10:54 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
No one who has proved that he's your god has EVER walked up to me.
Post by Mark Earnest
That is all he needs to do.
But he's never done it.
I am sure that he has, Al. Likely many times. But you won't look for the
cues.
An omniscient omnipotent god knows what clues I'd notice and he's
capable of giving them to me. Since I haven't seen any "clues" yet,
either he doesn't know what clues I'd need, he can't give them to me,
he doesn't want me to recognize him or - the simplest explanation
(which is usually the correct one) he doesn't exist.
Post by Mark Earnest
You assume it is not him
There's a difference between not assuming everyone who comes near me
IS him, and assuming that everyone who comes near me ISN'T him. I
take the former approach. You assume that anyone you think is your
god, IS your god, with no objective evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
Give it the benefit of a doubt
Since I DON'T assume that everyone who comes near me isn't your god, I
AM giving it the benefit of the doubt. I have an open mind, but I'm
not going to open it so wide that my brains fall out.
Post by Mark Earnest
and look for
Nope, sorry. If your god wants me to see him he's going to have to
show himself to me. I'm not making any assumptions about him, the way
you do.
Post by Mark Earnest
you have a better chance of recognizing him next time he walks up to you.
All he has to do is walk up to me and ... well, he's omniscient, so he
knows what he has to do. It's all his choice. He knew what I'd need
to convince me that he's real long before he created the universe. And
he CERTAINLY doesn't need your help.
Dubh Ghall
2007-04-10 21:48:45 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:10:54 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
snip
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Why can't he do what is needed for use to encounter him?
He walks right up to you all the time.
That is all he needs to do.
snip
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by DanielSan
Post by Mark Earnest
They love their own darkness.
Darkness? What is that, a metaphor?
The daft bastard seems to think that talking utter tripe, is being
mystical.
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own

#162 BAAWA Knight.
Martin Phipps
2007-04-09 05:14:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish
because it doesn't exist. QED.

Martin
Mike
2007-04-09 05:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
God is just God.
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with leprechauns.
Leprechauns are not an Etch A Sketch
And you don't measure leprechauns (rumor has it they are small).
And you don't put a leprechaun in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
Leprechauns are just leprechauns.
To prove them there or not, you just have
to try to encounter them.
Which nonbelievers, by and large, are not willing to do.
Nonbelievers tend to assume leprechauns do not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 15:09:33 UTC
Permalink
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
God is just God.
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with leprechauns.
Leprechauns are not an Etch A Sketch
And you don't measure leprechauns (rumor has it they are small).
And you don't put a leprechaun in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
Leprechauns are just leprechauns.
To prove them there or not, you just have
to try to encounter them.
Which nonbelievers, by and large, are not willing to do.
Nonbelievers tend to assume leprechauns do not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
Mike
2007-04-09 15:30:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist. If you wish to pervert the meaning of the
word "exist" this way and you are only claiming that God exists to the
same extent that leprechauns exist I would not venture to disagree,
except to point out that the word "exist" has a standard meaning and
that simply redefining words is not an effective way to think
straight.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
God is just God.
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with leprechauns.
Leprechauns are not an Etch A Sketch
And you don't measure leprechauns (rumor has it they are small).
And you don't put a leprechaun in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
Leprechauns are just leprechauns.
To prove them there or not, you just have
to try to encounter them.
Which nonbelievers, by and large, are not willing to do.
Nonbelievers tend to assume leprechauns do not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 16:01:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against God
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Mike
2007-04-09 16:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against God
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Yes it does work. You are simply redefining the word "exist" to mean
that anything we can conceive of and talk about "exists". You did
not answer my question. Do you believe that leprechauns exist to
exactly the same extent as God exists? If not then what is the
logical difference between your poetic verbiage about God and my
repetition of your verbiage with the word "leprechauns" substituted
for God?
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 16:25:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against God
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Yes it does work. You are simply redefining the word "exist" to mean
that anything we can conceive of and talk about "exists". You did
not answer my question. Do you believe that leprechauns exist to
exactly the same extent as God exists?
Yes, God totally exists, just as, yes, Leprechauns totally exist.
Either you exist or you don't. Both exist.


If not then what is the
Post by Mike
logical difference between your poetic verbiage about God and my
repetition of your verbiage with the word "leprechauns" substituted
for God?
JessHC
2007-04-09 21:48:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against
God
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Yes it does work. You are simply redefining the word "exist" to mean
that anything we can conceive of and talk about "exists". You did
not answer my question. Do you believe that leprechauns exist to
exactly the same extent as God exists?
Yes, God totally exists, just as, yes, Leprechauns totally exist.
Either you exist or you don't. Both exist.
Everything that exists leaves evidence of some kind. Please present
your evidence for gods and leprechauns.
Post by Mark Earnest
If not then what is the
Post by Mike
logical difference between your poetic verbiage about God and my
repetition of your verbiage with the word "leprechauns" substituted
for God?
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 22:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against
God
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Yes it does work. You are simply redefining the word "exist" to mean
that anything we can conceive of and talk about "exists". You did
not answer my question. Do you believe that leprechauns exist to
exactly the same extent as God exists?
Yes, God totally exists, just as, yes, Leprechauns totally exist.
Either you exist or you don't. Both exist.
Everything that exists leaves evidence of some kind. Please present
your evidence for gods and leprechauns.
Just take my word for it.
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
If not then what is the
Post by Mike
logical difference between your poetic verbiage about God and my
repetition of your verbiage with the word "leprechauns" substituted
for God?
JessHC
2007-04-10 14:55:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Yes, God totally exists, just as, yes, Leprechauns totally exist.
Either you exist or you don't. Both exist.
Everything that exists leaves evidence of some kind. Please present
your evidence for gods and leprechauns.
Just take my word for it.
No. Unless you'd like to take my word for it you owe me a million
dollars. After the money is received I'll take your word for it.
JessHC
2007-04-09 21:43:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against God
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Knowing there are stories about leprechauns doesn't mean leprechauns
exist. In exactly the same way that knowing there are stories about
deities doesn't mean they exist.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 22:00:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against God
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Knowing there are stories about leprechauns doesn't mean leprechauns
exist. In exactly the same way that knowing there are stories about
deities doesn't mean they exist.
Whatever is conceivable by man, is true somewhere, somehow.
JessHC
2007-04-10 14:58:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Mike
Post by Mark Earnest
What is your problem with Leprechauns?
You seem to know that they exist enough to talk about them.
Groan. Not this tiresome argument that anything we conceive of and
can talk about must exist.
Yes, I know it's tiresome, because it proves that the argument against God
about Leprechauns and the Easter Bunny and Santa Claus does not work.
Knowing there are stories about leprechauns doesn't mean leprechauns
exist. In exactly the same way that knowing there are stories about
deities doesn't mean they exist.
Whatever is conceivable by man, is true somewhere, somehow.
Non sequitur. It is conceivable that humans don't exist. The
evidence indicates otherwise.
Al Klein
2007-04-09 12:50:46 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 15:11:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Evidence is reeproducable, physical and measurably and it agrees
within error with the predictions of a testable theory. And, yes,
we've been through this already.
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
Brian Westley
2007-04-09 15:24:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.

Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
I can do this with people, because they really exist.

---
Merlyn LeRoy
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 16:02:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world today,
it happens all the time.
Post by Brian Westley
Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
Of course you can. Try it.
Post by Brian Westley
I can do this with people, because they really exist.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
JessHC
2007-04-09 21:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world today,
it happens all the time.
And yet, you can't provide one objective, verifiable instance of such.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
Of course you can. Try it.
I'm sending you a message right now. What is it?
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
I can do this with people, because they really exist.
---
Merlyn LeRoy
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 22:02:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world today,
it happens all the time.
And yet, you can't provide one objective, verifiable instance of such.
It is happening all around you every day.
If you can't see it, you're just blind.
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
Of course you can. Try it.
I'm sending you a message right now. What is it?
Don't send it to me, hand it to God.
Al Klein
2007-04-10 03:08:39 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 17:02:49 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by DanielSan
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world
today,
Post by JessHC
Post by Mark Earnest
it happens all the time.
And yet, you can't provide one objective, verifiable instance of such.
It is happening all around you every day.
If you can't see it, you're just blind.
We're looking for objective evidence, not the fantasy that some plain
old human being is your god.
Post by DanielSan
Post by JessHC
I'm sending you a message right now. What is it?
Don't send it to me, hand it to God.
He's your god - send him to collect it.
JessHC
2007-04-10 15:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by JessHC
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world today, it happens all the time.
And yet, you can't provide one objective, verifiable instance of such.
It is happening all around you every day.
If you can't see it, you're just blind.
Sorry, punkin; you make the claim, you provide the objective,
verifiable evidence. It isn't anyone else's job to go looking for it
for you.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by JessHC
Post by Brian Westley
Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
Of course you can. Try it.
I'm sending you a message right now. What is it?
Don't send it to me, hand it to God.
You just stated that your god could relay messages. Did he fail to
relay it to you? Huh, I wonder what that's evidence of.
Al Klein
2007-04-10 03:07:07 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 11:02:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world today,
it happens all the time.
You mean with over a billion people thinking they see him, there's
still not the slightest shred of objective evidence that he
objectively exists. Witnessing isn't evidence.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
Of course you can. Try it.
You give him the message and have him relay it to me. In person.
Telling me that it's a message from you and mentioning you by name. In
the next 24 hours. I can get better service than that from the
man-made internet, so surely your god can do it.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-10 03:33:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 11:02:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world today,
it happens all the time.
You mean with over a billion people thinking they see him, there's
still not the slightest shred of objective evidence that he
objectively exists. Witnessing isn't evidence.
As I said, people see God all the time, but they just don't know it is him,
so
in a way they are not seeing him at all.
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Can you give your god a message and have him relay it to another person?
Of course you can. Try it.
You give him the message and have him relay it to me. In person.
Telling me that it's a message from you and mentioning you by name. In
the next 24 hours. I can get better service than that from the
man-made internet, so surely your god can do it.
God doesn't take orders from me. But if you find him and ask him to relay a
message, he just might do it, because he wants to prove to you it is him.
DanielSan
2007-04-10 04:47:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by DanielSan
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 11:02:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world
today,
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
it happens all the time.
You mean with over a billion people thinking they see him, there's
still not the slightest shred of objective evidence that he
objectively exists. Witnessing isn't evidence.
As I said, people see God all the time, but they just don't know it is him,
so
in a way they are not seeing him at all.
So, God is doing a pisspoor job of letting himself be known. And, from
what you said, he likes to dress up as women.... Interesting.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* "In every country and every age, the priest had *
* been hostile to Liberty." --Thomas Jefferson *
******************************************************
Al Klein
2007-04-11 00:09:03 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 22:33:42 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by DanielSan
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 11:02:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Brian Westley
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
...
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
This never happens.
Yes it does. With over a billion manifestations of God in the world
today,
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
it happens all the time.
You mean with over a billion people thinking they see him, there's
still not the slightest shred of objective evidence that he
objectively exists. Witnessing isn't evidence.
As I said, people see God all the time, but they just don't know it is him, so
in a way they are not seeing him at all.
As you said. And as you didn't provide evidence for.
Post by DanielSan
God doesn't take orders from me.
And a god that created the universe doesn't need you posting to
Usenet, alienating everyone from him with your inane and utterly
stupid posts.
Post by DanielSan
But if you find him and ask him to relay a
message, he just might do it, because he wants to prove to you it is him.
That's not the way he designed me to know it's him, but you wouldn't
know that, so prattle on, making believe that you know what you're
talking about. The only one you're fooling is Mark Earnest.
Al Klein
2007-04-10 03:04:02 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:11:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
Exactly. Because he doesn't exist objectively.
Post by Mark Earnest
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
Only if you already know what he looks like, which no one can unless
he's already met him and seen objective evidence that he's God - which
is all we're asking for.

Your "witnessing" that someone who walked up to me is your god is just
your assertion, and totally worthless.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-10 03:35:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:11:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
Exactly. Because he doesn't exist objectively.
Post by Mark Earnest
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
Only if you already know what he looks like, which no one can unless
he's already met him and seen objective evidence that he's God - which
is all we're asking for.
Your "witnessing" that someone who walked up to me is your god is just
your assertion, and totally worthless.
That is precisely why you are not finding God...you don't believe me.

If you are already sure God is not there, you are not likely to recognize
him.
The Chief Instigator
2007-04-10 07:18:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:11:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
Exactly. Because he doesn't exist objectively.
Post by Mark Earnest
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
Only if you already know what he looks like, which no one can unless
he's already met him and seen objective evidence that he's God - which
is all we're asking for.
Your "witnessing" that someone who walked up to me is your god is just
your assertion, and totally worthless.
That is precisely why you are not finding God...you don't believe me.
...and you are definitely no god. (And not exactly sane.)
Post by Mark Earnest
If you are already sure God is not there, you are not likely to recognize
him.
Let's see...by your delusional "reasoning", there were 1600 and change gods at
the hockey game I attended a week ago Saturday? I seriously doubt that...
--
Patrick "The Chief Instigator" Humphrey (***@io.com) Houston, Texas
chiefinstigator.us.tt/aeros.php (TCI's 2006-07 Houston Aeros) AA#2273
LAST GAME: Houston 1, Omaha 0 (OT) (April 7)
NEXT GAME: Tuesday, April 10 at Milwaukee, 7:05
Darrell Stec
2007-04-10 12:27:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:11:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
Exactly. Because he doesn't exist objectively.
Post by Mark Earnest
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
Only if you already know what he looks like, which no one can unless
he's already met him and seen objective evidence that he's God - which
is all we're asking for.
Your "witnessing" that someone who walked up to me is your god is just
your assertion, and totally worthless.
That is precisely why you are not finding God...you don't believe me.
If you are already sure God is not there, you are not likely to recognize
him.
Your logic is flawed. Even if I don't recognize a disgruntled bully, when
my head hits smashes into his fist, I will painfully become aware of what
or who he is. When the delivery man comes to deliver my lottery winnings
check, even if I don't recognize him, I will be gleefully aware of who he
is once he hands me the lotto check.

Your god on the other hand is neither recognizable nor are any gifts he
brings. It is as though the bully is telling me he is going to hit me,
doesn't and then days later I trip and hurt myself leaping over a mud
puddle. Or the delivery man tells me he has a check for me, doesn't hand
it to me but a year latter I find the lotto check buried in the sauce of a
pizza in a shop I always frequent.
--
Later,
Darrell Stec ***@neo.rr.com

Webpage Sorcery
http://webpagesorcery.com
We Put the Magic in Your Webpages
Al Klein
2007-04-11 00:14:05 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 10 Apr 2007 08:27:29 -0400, Darrell Stec
Post by Darrell Stec
Your god on the other hand is neither recognizable nor are any gifts he
brings. It is as though the bully is telling me he is going to hit me,
doesn't and then days later I trip and hurt myself leaping over a mud
puddle. Or the delivery man tells me he has a check for me, doesn't hand
it to me but a year latter I find the lotto check buried in the sauce of a
pizza in a shop I always frequent.
Except, in Mark's case, you have to die first. Mark is perfectly
willing to tell you will happen to you after you die if you do accept
his god and if you don't accept his god. But, unless Mark's already
died, that's just more of his psychosis speaking.
Al Klein
2007-04-11 00:11:12 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 22:35:13 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Mon, 9 Apr 2007 10:11:34 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
You produce the god. Which you can't do because your god doesn't
exist objectively.
No one produces God.
Exactly. Because he doesn't exist objectively.
Post by Mark Earnest
All you can do is to recognize him when he walks up to you.
Only if you already know what he looks like, which no one can unless
he's already met him and seen objective evidence that he's God - which
is all we're asking for.
Your "witnessing" that someone who walked up to me is your god is just
your assertion, and totally worthless.
That is precisely why you are not finding God...you don't believe me.
You think entirely too much of yourself, Mark. I've lived most of my
life not believing you because you weren't born yet. But the whole
world functioned just fine without you.
Post by Mark Earnest
If you are already sure God is not there, you are not likely to recognize
him.
I won't recognize him unless he, or someone else, provides objective
evidence that he objectively exists. And you're not capable of that.
Dubh Ghall
2007-04-10 21:30:34 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 23:28:59 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
You just don't reproduce an encounter with almighty God.
God is not an Etch A Scetch.
And you don't measure God, he is infinite.
And you don't put God in a test tube,
or test him in a Petri dish.
God is just God.
To prove him there or not, you just have
to try to encounter him.
Which atheists, by and large, are not willing to do.
Atheists tend to assume God does not exist, even
though they are too lazy to examine the evidence just to make sure.
They love their own darkness.
You silly excuse for intelligence.


A great many, perhaps most, of the older atheists in alt.atheism, are
ex-xtians.
Some of us had faith as you, some of us less so, and some of us, more
so, but now, we are atheist.

For some, the transition to atheist was simply a matter of reason and
education, for some it was a long slow process, and for some the
change to atheist was long, slow, and painful, thing, resisted every
step of the way, but still the change happened.

Then dip-shits like you come in here, trying to bull-shit us with
arguments we once used our selves, and learned the fallacy of.


Do you somehow imagine that atheists were theists who just woke up one
morning and thought, "Fuck this god crap, I think I'll be an atheist"?

Actually, you probably do, you're stupid enough.

Allow me to tell you a little secret.

I have met many atheists who are ex-theists, and *none* actually
wanted to become atheist; It is something that happens, and sometimes,
when it happens, it costs us more than you could ever imagine.

Now why don't you take your sick lies, and your slimy insults, wrap
them in xtian barbed wire, and shove them where the sun doesn't shine.
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own

#162 BAAWA Knight.
Al Klein
2007-04-09 12:49:45 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 21:20:26 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
One thing it *isn't* is bald assertion. And that's all "witnessing"
is - your claim of something for which there's no evidence.
Scott Richter
2007-04-09 15:34:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Claiming evidence exists is not the same thing as presenting evidence.
Is life really this confusing for you?
Neil Kelsey
2007-04-09 16:16:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Richter
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Claiming evidence exists is not the same thing as presenting evidence.
Is life really this confusing for you?
The sad part is he thinks he's winning this debate.
Dubh Ghall
2007-04-10 15:52:36 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 21:20:26 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Al Klein
On Sat, 7 Apr 2007 18:10:16 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
But with all this "evidence" you have, why is it that you've never
been able to post a word of it?
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Why don't you tell us then?
--
The spelling Like any opinion stated here
purely my own

#162 BAAWA Knight.
Al Klein
2007-04-11 01:06:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Klein
On Sun, 8 Apr 2007 21:20:26 -0500, "Mark Earnest"
Post by Mark Earnest
We've been round and round on this, Al.
You atheists don't know what evidence is.
Why don't you tell us then?
He did - he "witnesses" to us all the time. We're supposed to accept
what he "witnesses" as evidence that what he "witnesses" is true. You
know, self-evidentiary assertion?
JessHC
2007-04-08 11:42:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
Huh. I wonder who made them blind.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
It would not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist.
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a good
enough man to actually search for the truth.
So a loving god will torture people for eternity for not being able to
"find" him/her/it as a result of being how they were created by god?
Yeah, that seems fair.
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
No loving and caring god would keep itself hidden and secret causing the
non-believers to spend their eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
God is a computer monitor? Well, that makes as much sense as anything
else, I suppose.
Jeckyl
2007-04-08 12:03:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
That's a cricular argument. And really says nothing.
Post by Mark Earnest
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a good
enough man to actually search for the truth.
Oh .. you mean not just accept things others say is true, but search for the
truth. I'm all for that. But that's not religion.
Post by Mark Earnest
No loving and caring god
Post by Bill M
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend
their
Post by Bill M
eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
If he is right in front of me and is not visible, then he's hidden. So what
you say is just nonsense.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-04-08 12:17:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
That's a cricular argument. And really says nothing.
It's worse than that. It's a personal lie, a slander, used as an ad
hominem.

The word for somebody who lies,is liar. And incases like this it's a
fact not name-calling.

But it's OK when these whining hypocrites do it even though they turn
nastier when they're called on it.
Mark Earnest
2007-04-09 02:21:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
That's a cricular argument. And really says nothing.
Post by Mark Earnest
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a good
enough man to actually search for the truth.
Oh .. you mean not just accept things others say is true, but search for the
truth. I'm all for that. But that's not religion.
Post by Mark Earnest
No loving and caring god
Post by Bill M
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend
their
Post by Bill M
eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
If he is right in front of me and is not visible, then he's hidden. So what
you say is just nonsense.
He is so, visible.
Martin Phipps
2007-04-09 04:16:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is
the
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
That's a cricular argument. And really says nothing.
Post by Mark Earnest
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a
good
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
enough man to actually search for the truth.
Oh .. you mean not just accept things others say is true, but search for
the
Post by Jeckyl
truth. I'm all for that. But that's not religion.
Post by Mark Earnest
No loving and caring god
Post by Bill M
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend
their
Post by Bill M
eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
If he is right in front of me and is not visible, then he's hidden. So
what
Post by Jeckyl
you say is just nonsense.
He is so, visible.
Only by those deluded enough to "see" him.

Martin
Jeckyl
2007-04-09 04:52:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is
the
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.
That's a cricular argument. And really says nothing.
Post by Mark Earnest
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a
good
Post by Jeckyl
Post by Mark Earnest
enough man to actually search for the truth.
Oh .. you mean not just accept things others say is true, but search for
the
Post by Jeckyl
truth. I'm all for that. But that's not religion.
Post by Mark Earnest
No loving and caring god
Post by Bill M
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend
their
Post by Bill M
eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
If he is right in front of me and is not visible, then he's hidden. So
what
Post by Jeckyl
you say is just nonsense.
He is so, visible.
No .. he is not .. I can see noone in front of me .. so unless god is noone,
he ain't visible.

Or are you saying that you are God? :)
bob young
2007-04-16 13:06:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mark Earnest
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all
Post by Bill M
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence.
He tells non believers he exists every day.
They are just blind even to what evidence really is.....
...........try me trot some out
Post by Mark Earnest
It would
Post by Bill M
not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist.
Sure he would. Life is a trial, to determine who would actually be a good
enough man to actually search for the truth.
Crazy humans, they make up a god and then they speak on it's behalf
in the face of overwhelming evidence that the whole thing is a charade.
Post by Mark Earnest
No loving and caring god
Post by Bill M
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend
their
Post by Bill M
eternity in his Hell.
He's not hidden. He is right in front of you.
THAT my friend, is why there are atheists and always will be.

They are right minded logical people who cannot stand the kind of nonsense you
have just written.

Thanks for helping the cause along the road a little further.
Donna
2007-04-08 01:26:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
You give yourself WAAYYYYY to much credit.

Donna
Post by Bill M
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to
all non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence. It
would not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist. No loving and caring
god would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend
their eternity in his Hell.
If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.
The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;
that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists
except in their imagination.
White Wille
2007-04-08 02:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to all
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence. It would
not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist. No loving and caring god
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend their
eternity in his Hell.
If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.
The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;
that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists
except in their imagination.
Go to hell.
DanielSan
2007-04-08 03:22:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by White Wille
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is
the actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands
to all non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its
existence. It would not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist. No
loving and caring god would keep itself hidden and secret causing the
non-believers to spend their eternity in his Hell.
If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.
The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the
opposite; that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that
their god actually exists
except in their imagination.
Go to hell.
Why? I'm sure he has no interest in the
garbage-dump/method-of-death-penalty-turned-city-park.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of *
* reason: The Morning Daylight appears plainer *
* when you put out your Candle." --Benjamin Franklin *
* Poor Richard's Almanack (1758) *
******************************************************
Martin Phipps
2007-04-08 03:32:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by White Wille
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to all
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence. It would
not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist. No loving and caring god
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend their
eternity in his Hell.
If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.
The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;
that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists
except in their imagination.
Go to hell.
I would except no such place exists

except in your imagination.

Martin
DanielSan
2007-04-08 04:40:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Phipps
Post by White Wille
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual
existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would
directly and clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to all
non believers, to demonstrate and convince them of its existence. It would
not permit thousands of false beliefs to exist. No loving and caring god
would keep itself hidden and secret causing the non-believers to spend their
eternity in his Hell.
If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.
The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;
that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists
except in their imagination.
Go to hell.
I would except no such place exists
Actually, this is not wholly true. Way back when, there was a garbage
dump outside the walls of Jerusalem in the Valley of Hinnom (Gehenna).
Now they burned this garbage to keep things from going crazy.

Now doing this stinks like a mofo, but it keeps disease from spreading,
including rodentia that might carry various diseases. And it would burn
nearly forever.

Now there was crime in Jerusalem; crime that, like today, the death
penalty is the punishment. The most efficient way of doing in the
convicted criminal is to simply toss them into the burning dump.

So, back then, criminals would burn in Gehenna... which evolved as
Christianity aged into "sinners would burn in Hell."

Nowadays the Valley of Hinnom is a park outside Jerusalem; the garbage
is gone.
--
******************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*----------------------------------------------------*
* The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of *
* reason: The Morning Daylight appears plainer *
* when you put out your Candle." --Benjamin Franklin *
* Poor Richard's Almanack (1758) *
******************************************************
JessHC
2007-04-08 11:37:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by White Wille
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the
actual existence of millions of atheists and billions of different god believers.
If any REAL loving and caring god actually existed, it would it would directly and
clearly communicate its existence, wishes and commands to all non believers, to
demonstrate and convince them of its existence. It would not permit thousands of
false beliefs to exist. No loving and caring god would keep itself hidden and secret
causing the non-believers to spend their eternity in his Hell.
If any REAL mean and intolerant god existed, it would simply kill the
atheists and different god believers and dispose of them.
The objective evidence is that no gods created man but quite the opposite;
that man created imaginary gods! (Thousands of them!)
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their god actually exists
except in their imagination.
Go to hell.
So that's a "no"?
Jeckyl
2007-04-08 12:05:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by White Wille
Post by Bill M
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists
except in their imagination.
Go to hell.
Ah .. now there's an example of a typical uneducated and unintelligent
response.
jl
2007-05-20 20:15:39 UTC
Permalink
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the [god itself?]
Yes, I'm with you there. The best evidence of bullshit is fresh
bullshit itself, flies circling it and steaming.

[...]
I challenge believers to provide objective verifiable evidence that their
god actually exists
except in their imagination.
There WERE two gods in Afghanistan, gorgeous things. But the Muslim
fascists destroyed them, turned them into rubble. Thus, it will be
impossible, I'm sad to say, to produce a god for you.
V
2007-06-20 12:48:41 UTC
Permalink
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the [god itself?]
V:


While your argument makes sense, more sense than many theist's
arguments make, it is still speculation.

Once we admit that we do not know, but are speculating, then you must
admit that you are agnostic on the subject.

When I left Catholicism I surveyed the God arena for what higher
powers there really were, after deciding Yahweh was man made. If you
bother to read the rest of my post you will see that two Gods come
into play with our lives Bill.

Every atheist serves two Gods. And in reality, these Gods require
worship from all humans whether they be atheists or theists. The 'God
of Inner Peace' is the first God. Without serving this God of Inner
Peace man will turn to self destruction and suicide. The other God is
that of the 'God of Nature' which makes itself evident with it natural
laws or commandments. No matter how defiant the atheist or theist
is...we will ALL bow to the God of Nature sooner or later.

Speaking of nature, it is also good to keep in touch with the lesser
cousin of the God of Nature which is seeking peace with our own nature
through right actions. Yes, learning to accept the nature of all
things is an important part of the equation for living a life at
peace, but there is a missing link that needs to be added to this
equation. The missing link is marrying authenticity with rightness.


The formula for success is: Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace


The formula for failure is: Authentic Nature + Wrong Actions =
Destruction


There are many 'natures' in our life to be mindful of - we have our
own nature, the nature other persons we have contact with, as well as
the 'nature' of nature itself. But, just becoming a 'blissninny' and
blindly accepting the various natures will not give us peace. To apply
this tool rightly, we need to adopt a life of proportionality, balance
and wisdom. How do we learn to live a more balanced life? By using
rational thought patterns and by putting reason before passion. Then
we can view our actions as balanced or not, for without rational
thought we have nothing to weigh in our quest for balance.

Knowing what is true and developing wisdom to be at peace are two very
important qualities for the confused spiritual practitioner to
develop. With respect to myself, I try to balance wisdom with that of
peace perception. For whether something is a truth or not, it still
has to pass the peace test. There are many things that are true and
good in life, but they will still end up destroying my peace if I let
them. Usually the dividing line for such 'good today ~ bad tomorrow'
questions are rooted in the area of balance and proportionality.

If you don't know what I am talking about, then I will give you this
example. we need water to drink and air to breath in order to live.
But, even though water and air are life sustaining, too much water and
too much air will become life destroying...proportionality and balance
divides life from death. I always ask if a person, place, thing or
activity promotes my peace or destroys my peace? When I practice
compassion for others as my Buddhist practice recommends, I ask this
same question of peace promotion or peace destruction of others. I
look deeply to see what is destroying the other persons peace the best
I am able to. There are 3 main components to rational thinking.

1 - Rationality requires reflection.

Many of us are too busy to reflect. Other times our minds our consumed
with troubles and out of control passions. Over thinking also plays a
part in keeping our minds working in the wrong direction. An old
Buddhist saying tells us that a constantly busy mind cannot heal
itself. Reflection time must be 'open thinking' time where we look at
both ends of the spectrum and everything in between for answers and
choices and not just the comfortable ones we are accustomed to. We
cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we
created them. Psychologist William James once said, "A great many
people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging
their prejudices."

2- Rationality is the ability to anticipate consequences.

Reflection pays big part in this as well as past experiences and the
process of extrapolation from past experiences and others mistakes.
Weighing and balancing are two key words that come into play.
Sometimes 'gambling' is more a component to those that 'shoot from the
hip' and worry about consequences later. Many of us get stuck in a
place of justifying our actions with blindness to the consequences.
Our actions are ego based and not truth or rational based. "First one
decides the goal, then one gathers the principles or delusions to
justify reaching this goal." Principles or delusions? This depends on
whether the mind is being used for rational thought or if out of
control passions are in command.

3 - Rationality requires adherence to certain standards.

There are many standards to consider and each individual has to judge
these for themselves. Another name for a standard is a rule. Many
people are defiant against 'rules' and they are entitled to not follow
the rules as they please. But such freedom has a price to pay, so they
should not balk at paying the price for their freedom with the
necessary consequences that come from not following the rules.
Standards are different for each area of excellence that we seek to
attain. The standards for excellence in rock climbing are different
from those of a scuba diver. Professional standards of an engineer
will be different from societal standards of being a good parent. But
one thing is certain. If we are defiant and balk against these
standards we will probably be headed for failure or even death in
certain activities. (Failure? This cannot be said in 100% of the
cases, for without such experimentation and digression inventors would
not produce much. But in generally acceptable terms, standards usually
have to be followed. If you balk at following standards then go back
to component 1 and do some reflection as to why?)

Now just turning to Buddhism is not all it takes if your goal is to
live a flourishing human life. Yes, Buddhism contain many truths, but
it also contains many non truths as well.

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=9.0


But isn't that how man made religion is? It all comes from imperfect
man so imperfect man can never make anything as complex as religious
thought perfect?

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=318.0

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=133.0


Yet, we as humans must still serve the God of Peace or we will self-
destruct , so we must give it our 'best efforts' irrespective of how
imperfect those efforts are. A simple tool to smooth out the everyday
fluctuations in our life is: forget perfection and look for direction.
We can either be going up, down or sideways with our goals. Use this
direction tool to get a quick gauge of your inner spiritual
condition.

See:

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0

http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=91.0


Accepting a persons nature must always be balanced with rational
thought as I said above. We can accept another's natures as an abuser
and be at peace that they have this nature, but we do not have to stay
in close proximity of them ourselves. The missing link so to speak
with the blissninny that accepts everything blindly is they are
neglecting to align ones authentic nature with that of finding inner
peace. The serenity prayer tells us we have 2 possibilities to find
peace...by Change or by Acceptance. We should always seek out change
for the most part and practice acceptance as the last resort. That is
the general rule. Change first - Accept later. For without feeling
anger or discontent we wound not seek out change - as in changing our
environment that might be an unhealthy one for us. So, we should never
regret feeling anger, but just as anger and excretion are two
naturally occurring parts of being a human, we should let them serve
us instead of we being enslaved to them.

In SCA they have a tool called abstention. They abstain the best way
they can from people places or things they have found to be
detrimental to their recovery program efforts from past experience
with them. My recovery success is based a lot on abstaining from
people, places and things that do not mesh well with me and if I
cannot avoid them, then I work to make the unavoidable fit better by
changing things on my end. Yes, we cannot change others, but we do
usually have control of ourselves and how we participate in dealing
with others. Even though we cannot completely change or wipe our many
problem areas in our life we can usually change *some* aspects of most
problems to make them more bearable. So, I am always looking for small
changes to make in the right direction and this recovery orientation
towards the direction of change helps by giving hope of possible
larger future change as well.

When Socrates was a young man he had to make a decision to make with
which road to take in his own study of philosophical knowledge. He
looked at his predecessors and their study of science and nature and
also weighed his talents in this area. His conclusion? "I am not of
the nature to study nature." Socrates was at peace with his own
nature. We only have so much of 'us' to spend, so spend it wisely.
Fighting ones authentic nature spends our time and energies unwisely.
The serenity prayer gives us the answer, "God / Higher Power, grant me
the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to
change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference."

We can see this battle over accepting others nature happening all the
time with the sexes. Many women say they can't understand men, just as
many men say they can't understand women. In the bible it says that
God's way is not man's way. Well, to further distill this we can say
that God's way is not man's way and man's way is not woman's way.
Every creature has it's way and when you can come to peace with this
you will be on your own way to accepting life on life's terms and not
your own. To start on your peace journey look for insight into the
other creatures suffering and problems. Each sex has their strong and
weak points just as the yin and yang dictates. To change this would be
to change the underlying duties and essence of that creature. It is of
their nature for men and women to be men wand women. "Were I a
nightingale, I would act the part of a nightingale; were I a swan, the
part of a swan." ~ Epictetus

I had a mentor that I held in high esteem for his various talents in
sports. As he aged he started to get back problems. One sport he
excelled in was kayaking. Kayaking eventually had a particularly bad
affect on back problems. At age 51, I cannot sit in a hard-shell
whitewater boat for longer than 10 or 15 minutes before my back starts
bothering me. This fellow had the same issues. What did I do with my
back problem and kayaking? I accepted my nature and went to inflatable
kayaks and can kayak for a few hours with only moderate back problems.
What did my mentor do? He continued with hard-shell kayaking and made
himself so uncomfortable he saw no other choice other that to kill
himself and he blew his brains out. My mentor did not have the ability
to accept ones changing nature. No flexibility gives us no hope and we
get locked into tunnel vision with death as being the only option from
escaping our pain.

Accept others nature helps when we apply live and let live. It becomes
much easier to do once we accept our own nature, then we can apply a
little of this acceptance to anthers right to exist. The Buddhist tool
of compassion helps as well. It reminds me to look for insight into he
other persons suffering. When we spend out time looking for insight
into their suffering it does not leave much time for building up
hatred against them. The two do not mix well. we cannot develop
compassion and hatred for someone at the same time.

On some discussion lists the topics have come up of doing good for
others. It seems some list members are not at peace with doing good.
Whether they feel like they must be obligated to do or give a certain
amount of themselves or their money. Or they feel something is wrong
with them for not wanting to do more good, as society 'puts' the
goodness conciseness on them. We are NOT required to do a certain
amount of 'good' for others. I would say we are required to not harm
others if we desire to be at peace. In my own case, I donate a very
small amount of money to charity and I give very little time to
volunteer work. I give what is comfortable and natural for me to give.
But, I do donate good in an area that is authentic and not forced for
me with writing my posts and planting seeds of peace in others. As I
plant the seeds in others, I water my own seeds of peace, so I get
double benefits. Find your own strengths in this area, do what is
natural and authentic for you. If you are uncomfortable with your life
write on it to clarify what you would like to get on it. The world
needs all sorts...for balance.

You can get some clarity on the authenticity issue if you ask yourself
why you wish to do something? What is your driving force? Do you act
from fear or act from desire of begins at peace? Don't let others
dictate your balance point to you. Just as no one could dictate to you
when you have had enough to eat or drink, or how much money you have
to spend. so it goes that no one can tell you how much of you that
must be spent in the world to try to do good. The decision must come
from within you. My actions are based on inner peace and if I stray -
there goes my peace - it is my choice. Put your inner peace foremost
and you will have your answer. Fear or guilt based reasons for acting
are not authentic and genuine. The persons actions are based on
negative consequences otherwise they would not do them. I see this a
lot on the Buddhist and Christian oriented discussion boards the
practitioners are worried they will develop bad karma or go to hell
for a mis-step. They are not worried about peace...they are worried
about pain. "People that practice religion are worried about going to
hell - people that practice spirituality have already been to hell and
don't want to go back." As I will tell you below in the section on
Heidegger, "When you align real and authentic actions with those that
promote inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."

Another area of nature that some disregard is that of natural law. I
find that sometime spiritual practitioners neglect the natural laws
that govern our bodies and suffer in this area from lack of living a
balanced life. Some of us forget we are spiritual beings residing in
physical bodies living in physical world and governed and as such are
governed by the following 3 branches of laws:

1 - Natural or physical laws

2 - Man made laws

3 - Divine or spiritual laws

Proportionality and balance used to be taught in ancient Greek
educational curriculum. Unfortunately, these studies have gone the way
of the dinosaurs. There is no one magic bullet in life that will fix
all our problems. Living a good life is composed of many qualities
and when we reach for one thing only with thoughts of disregarding the
rest of life's laws we will be out of balance. To be at peace is a
natural ability that is instilled within us all - you only have to
become balanced to be at peace. When Socrates was in his cell awaiting
execution, his friend Crito visited him offering plans of escape and
the resources of many of Socrates friends to help him set up a new
life away from Athens. Socrates responded to Crito, "My friend Crito,
your zeal is invaluable, if a right one; but if wrong, the greater the
zeal the greater the evil..."

Socrates accepted his fate and practiced virtue by being at peace and
living within the 3 branches of laws that governed him. This is what
the author James Allen had in mind with his famous quote from his book
"As a Man Thinketh" ~ "Circumstances do not make the man - they revel
him to himself." Manmade law imprisoned Socrates and man made laws
sentenced him to death. Socrates chose not to break the law, even when
it was a simple task to escape with the help of his friends and live
instead of die. For Socrates, circumstances did not make him into
anything other than what he 'genuinely' was.

If your an atheist or agnostic, you may not think much of divine or
spiritual laws, but you still have to answer to natural and man made
laws. Don't get confused by the term spiritual. I am not always
referring to organized religion when I use such terms. Atheist or not,
there are many mysteries in the world. The spiritual studies deals
with such mysteries, for the root of spiritualism is that of the
unseen and the force behind it all. Some people say they can defy man
made laws as well as divine laws, but no matter how defiant the person
or addict is - no one escapes natural laws. To be successful in life
we have to put some effort in spiritual work and some effort in
physical work for a good balance as well as be mindful of not
violating manmade laws.

It is by restructuring my life to accept and live within all these
laws that I have been able to find much peace...by living within my
means. My prior life was just the opposite. I lived a life that
violated all 3 branches of these laws. As I wrote in my earlier post
'Putting Peace First' ..."All our actions have consequences and many
of these actions are producing consequences that rob us of inner
peace." If we expect to escape from the consequences of ALL our
actions - that is delusional thinking. Desire plays a big part in
guiding our actions. If we have a constant supply of never ending
desires that end in the disruption of our peace what chance have we to
find serenity? To find peace I had to rework my life when it came to
excessive desires as well as being mindful of living within these 3
branches of laws.

Accepting ones nature as well as the nature of others is not the total
answer to the mystery of being at peace. Yes, we can accept our
nature, but if our nature continues to be that of peace destroying
instead of peace promoting, then some additional work needs to be
done. Sometimes we can have a say at our nature and other times we
cannot. Martin Heidegger, a famous existentialist philosopher wrote
much on authenticity. While Heidegger could be arguably be said to
have 'written the book' on authenticity and genuineness, Heidegger was
also a Nazi supporter. Now, we can sometimes blame such affiliation on
design, such as being forced against our will. But in this case,
Heidegger seemed to be a Nazi by desire and not one by design. I
discussed this in an earlier post 'Addict by design ~ Addict by
Desire'

For authenticity and genuineness to be of real value, they must also
be in the 'right direction' as the Buddhists set fourth in the
eightfold path. Yes, Heidegger new about authenticity, he seemed
authentic and genuine in his actions, but fell short of the other half
of the equation of marrying authenticity with 'right' actions.
Heidegger accepted his nature, but his natural and authentic nature
was one that was not that of 'peace promoting' in nature within
himself, nor peace promoting for others. Academic smarts are no
guarantee of peace smarts. As I wrote in my own post on authenticity,
"When you align real and authentic actions with those that promote
inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."

BTW, if you made a study of such a person as Heidegger while looking
into the subject of authenticity. Would finding our his Nazi
affiliations blind or prejudice you to what he had to say about
authenticity? Would you spend your time trying to 'prove him wrong' to
make your ego right? If you liked the philosophy of Aristotle, but
discovered Aristotle promoted slavery. Would that blind you to all of
his teaching? The nature of humans is that they are imperfect. If we
only seek out perfect humans to learn from the pickings will be
slim...really the pickings will be zero. But, even with all our
imperfections, many of us contain small perfection's to learn from if
the student is willing to look for them and be open when they surface.
The answer to these question of prejudicial blindness will tell you a
lot about your own nature. If your nature is that of passion before
reason and a tendency to being blinded to the truth due to prejudice,
then reread what I wrote in my earlier post 'Our Guiding light
Prejudice or Truth' Always remember, truth stands on it own and is
without political or religious affiliations ... just as nature
rules ... so does truth.

Accepting one authentic nature, balancing authenticity with doing
good, not harboring hatred or fear, being generous and compassionate
to others, being at peace within and with all - these are all
qualities of the enlightened mind. When Socrates was leaving his trial
after being condemned to death he had these parting words. I'll leave
you with them as they show how one man applied the equation of
Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace (Translated by Benjamin
Jowett)

"Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know this of a
truth - that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after
death. He and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own
approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that to die
and be released was better for me; and therefore the oracle gave no
sign. For which reason also, I am not angry with my accusers, or my
condemners; they have done me no harm, although neither of them meant
to do me any good; and for this I may gently blame them.

Still I have a favor to ask of them. When my sons are grown up, I
would ask you, O my friends, to punish them; and I would have you
trouble them, as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about
riches, or anything, more than about virtue; or if they pretend to be
something when they are really nothing - then rebuke them, as I have
rebuked you, for not caring about that for which they ought to care
and for thinking that they are something, when they are really
nothing. And if you do this, I and my sons will have received justice
at your hands.

The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways - I to die, and
you to live. Which is better God only knows."




Take Care,


V (Male)

Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher

For free access to my earlier posts on voluntary simplicity,
compulsive spending, debting, compulsive overeating and clutter write:
***@aol.com. Any opinion expressed here is that of my own and is not
the opinion, recommendation or belief of any group or organization.
Vinod
2007-06-20 14:46:49 UTC
Permalink
Here you are trying to do two things

1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god

Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true God you
begin to worship his creation.

Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and
served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Here is the context:

Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal
power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Rom 1:21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God,
nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish
hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made
like corruptible man; and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.

Thanks
Vinod
http://vinodisaac.com
Post by V
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is the [god itself?]
While your argument makes sense, more sense than many theist's
arguments make, it is still speculation.
Once we admit that we do not know, but are speculating, then you must
admit that you are agnostic on the subject.
When I left Catholicism I surveyed the God arena for what higher
powers there really were, after deciding Yahweh was man made. If you
bother to read the rest of my post you will see that two Gods come
into play with our lives Bill.
Every atheist serves two Gods. And in reality, these Gods require
worship from all humans whether they be atheists or theists. The 'God
of Inner Peace' is the first God. Without serving this God of Inner
Peace man will turn to self destruction and suicide. The other God is
that of the 'God of Nature' which makes itself evident with it natural
laws or commandments. No matter how defiant the atheist or theist
is...we will ALL bow to the God of Nature sooner or later.
Speaking of nature, it is also good to keep in touch with the lesser
cousin of the God of Nature which is seeking peace with our own nature
through right actions. Yes, learning to accept the nature of all
things is an important part of the equation for living a life at
peace, but there is a missing link that needs to be added to this
equation. The missing link is marrying authenticity with rightness.
The formula for success is: Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace
The formula for failure is: Authentic Nature + Wrong Actions =
Destruction
There are many 'natures' in our life to be mindful of - we have our
own nature, the nature other persons we have contact with, as well as
the 'nature' of nature itself. But, just becoming a 'blissninny' and
blindly accepting the various natures will not give us peace. To apply
this tool rightly, we need to adopt a life of proportionality, balance
and wisdom. How do we learn to live a more balanced life? By using
rational thought patterns and by putting reason before passion. Then
we can view our actions as balanced or not, for without rational
thought we have nothing to weigh in our quest for balance.
Knowing what is true and developing wisdom to be at peace are two very
important qualities for the confused spiritual practitioner to
develop. With respect to myself, I try to balance wisdom with that of
peace perception. For whether something is a truth or not, it still
has to pass the peace test. There are many things that are true and
good in life, but they will still end up destroying my peace if I let
them. Usually the dividing line for such 'good today ~ bad tomorrow'
questions are rooted in the area of balance and proportionality.
If you don't know what I am talking about, then I will give you this
example. we need water to drink and air to breath in order to live.
But, even though water and air are life sustaining, too much water and
too much air will become life destroying...proportionality and balance
divides life from death. I always ask if a person, place, thing or
activity promotes my peace or destroys my peace? When I practice
compassion for others as my Buddhist practice recommends, I ask this
same question of peace promotion or peace destruction of others. I
look deeply to see what is destroying the other persons peace the best
I am able to. There are 3 main components to rational thinking.
1 - Rationality requires reflection.
Many of us are too busy to reflect. Other times our minds our consumed
with troubles and out of control passions. Over thinking also plays a
part in keeping our minds working in the wrong direction. An old
Buddhist saying tells us that a constantly busy mind cannot heal
itself. Reflection time must be 'open thinking' time where we look at
both ends of the spectrum and everything in between for answers and
choices and not just the comfortable ones we are accustomed to. We
cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we
created them. Psychologist William James once said, "A great many
people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging
their prejudices."
2- Rationality is the ability to anticipate consequences.
Reflection pays big part in this as well as past experiences and the
process of extrapolation from past experiences and others mistakes.
Weighing and balancing are two key words that come into play.
Sometimes 'gambling' is more a component to those that 'shoot from the
hip' and worry about consequences later. Many of us get stuck in a
place of justifying our actions with blindness to the consequences.
Our actions are ego based and not truth or rational based. "First one
decides the goal, then one gathers the principles or delusions to
justify reaching this goal." Principles or delusions? This depends on
whether the mind is being used for rational thought or if out of
control passions are in command.
3 - Rationality requires adherence to certain standards.
There are many standards to consider and each individual has to judge
these for themselves. Another name for a standard is a rule. Many
people are defiant against 'rules' and they are entitled to not follow
the rules as they please. But such freedom has a price to pay, so they
should not balk at paying the price for their freedom with the
necessary consequences that come from not following the rules.
Standards are different for each area of excellence that we seek to
attain. The standards for excellence in rock climbing are different
from those of a scuba diver. Professional standards of an engineer
will be different from societal standards of being a good parent. But
one thing is certain. If we are defiant and balk against these
standards we will probably be headed for failure or even death in
certain activities. (Failure? This cannot be said in 100% of the
cases, for without such experimentation and digression inventors would
not produce much. But in generally acceptable terms, standards usually
have to be followed. If you balk at following standards then go back
to component 1 and do some reflection as to why?)
Now just turning to Buddhism is not all it takes if your goal is to
live a flourishing human life. Yes, Buddhism contain many truths, but
it also contains many non truths as well.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=9.0
But isn't that how man made religion is? It all comes from imperfect
man so imperfect man can never make anything as complex as religious
thought perfect?
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=318.0
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=133.0
Yet, we as humans must still serve the God of Peace or we will self-
destruct , so we must give it our 'best efforts' irrespective of how
imperfect those efforts are. A simple tool to smooth out the everyday
fluctuations in our life is: forget perfection and look for direction.
We can either be going up, down or sideways with our goals. Use this
direction tool to get a quick gauge of your inner spiritual
condition.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=91.0
Accepting a persons nature must always be balanced with rational
thought as I said above. We can accept another's natures as an abuser
and be at peace that they have this nature, but we do not have to stay
in close proximity of them ourselves. The missing link so to speak
with the blissninny that accepts everything blindly is they are
neglecting to align ones authentic nature with that of finding inner
peace. The serenity prayer tells us we have 2 possibilities to find
peace...by Change or by Acceptance. We should always seek out change
for the most part and practice acceptance as the last resort. That is
the general rule. Change first - Accept later. For without feeling
anger or discontent we wound not seek out change - as in changing our
environment that might be an unhealthy one for us. So, we should never
regret feeling anger, but just as anger and excretion are two
naturally occurring parts of being a human, we should let them serve
us instead of we being enslaved to them.
In SCA they have a tool called abstention. They abstain the best way
they can from people places or things they have found to be
detrimental to their recovery program efforts from past experience
with them. My recovery success is based a lot on abstaining from
people, places and things that do not mesh well with me and if I
cannot avoid them, then I work to make the unavoidable fit better by
changing things on my end. Yes, we cannot change others, but we do
usually have control of ourselves and how we participate in dealing
with others. Even though we cannot completely change or wipe our many
problem areas in our life we can usually change *some* aspects of most
problems to make them more bearable. So, I am always looking for small
changes to make in the right direction and this recovery orientation
towards the direction of change helps by giving hope of possible
larger future change as well.
When Socrates was a young man he had to make a decision to make with
which road to take in his own study of philosophical knowledge. He
looked at his predecessors and their study of science and nature and
also weighed his talents in this area. His conclusion? "I am not of
the nature to study nature." Socrates was at peace with his own
nature. We only have so much of 'us' to spend, so spend it wisely.
Fighting ones authentic nature spends our time and energies unwisely.
The serenity prayer gives us the answer, "God / Higher Power, grant me
the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to
change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference."
We can see this battle over accepting others nature happening all the
time with the sexes. Many women say they can't understand men, just as
many men say they can't understand women. In the bible it says that
God's way is not man's way. Well, to further distill this we can say
that God's way is not man's way and man's way is not woman's way.
Every creature has it's way and when you can come to peace with this
you will be on your own way to accepting life on life's terms and not
your own. To start on your peace journey look for insight into the
other creatures suffering and problems. Each sex has their strong and
weak points just as the yin and yang dictates. To change this would be
to change the underlying duties and essence of that creature. It is of
their nature for men and women to be men wand women. "Were I a
nightingale, I would act the part of a nightingale; were I a swan, the
part of a swan." ~ Epictetus
I had a mentor that I held in high esteem for his various talents in
sports. As he aged he started to get back problems. One sport he
excelled in was kayaking. Kayaking eventually had a particularly bad
affect on back problems. At age 51, I cannot sit in a hard-shell
whitewater boat for longer than 10 or 15 minutes before my back starts
bothering me. This fellow had the same issues. What did I do with my
back problem and kayaking? I accepted my nature and went to inflatable
kayaks and can kayak for a few hours with only moderate back problems.
What did my mentor do? He continued with hard-shell kayaking and made
himself so uncomfortable he saw no other choice other that to kill
himself and he blew his brains out. My mentor did not have the ability
to accept ones changing nature. No flexibility gives us no hope and we
get locked into tunnel vision with death as being the only option from
escaping our pain.
Accept others nature helps when we apply live and let live. It becomes
much easier to do once we accept our own nature, then we can apply a
little of this acceptance to anthers right to exist. The Buddhist tool
of compassion helps as well. It reminds me to look for insight into he
other persons suffering. When we spend out time looking for insight
into their suffering it does not leave much time for building up
hatred against them. The two do not mix well. we cannot develop
compassion and hatred for someone at the same time.
On some discussion lists the topics have come up of doing good for
others. It seems some list members are not at peace with doing good.
Whether they feel like they must be obligated to do or give a certain
amount of themselves or their money. Or they feel something is wrong
with them for not wanting to do more good, as society 'puts' the
goodness conciseness on them. We are NOT required to do a certain
amount of 'good' for others. I would say we are required to not harm
others if we desire to be at peace. In my own case, I donate a very
small amount of money to charity and I give very little time to
volunteer work. I give what is comfortable and natural for me to give.
But, I do donate good in an area that is authentic and not forced for
me with writing my posts and planting seeds of peace in others. As I
plant the seeds in others, I water my own seeds of peace, so I get
double benefits. Find your own strengths in this area, do what is
natural and authentic for you. If you are uncomfortable with your life
write on it to clarify what you would like to get on it. The world
needs all sorts...for balance.
You can get some clarity on the authenticity issue if you ask yourself
why you wish to do something? What is your driving force? Do you act
from fear or act from desire of begins at peace? Don't let others
dictate your balance point to you. Just as no one could dictate to you
when you have had enough to eat or drink, or how much money you have
to spend. so it goes that no one can tell you how much of you that
must be spent in the world to try to do good. The decision must come
from within you. My actions are based on inner peace and if I stray -
there goes my peace - it is my choice. Put your inner peace foremost
and you will have your answer. Fear or guilt based reasons for acting
are not authentic and genuine. The persons actions are based on
negative consequences otherwise they would not do them. I see this a
lot on the Buddhist and Christian oriented discussion boards the
practitioners are worried they will develop bad karma or go to hell
for a mis-step. They are not worried about peace...they are worried
about pain. "People that practice religion are worried about going to
hell - people that practice spirituality have already been to hell and
don't want to go back." As I will tell you below in the section on
Heidegger, "When you align real and authentic actions with those that
promote inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."
Another area of nature that some disregard is that of natural law. I
find that sometime spiritual practitioners neglect the natural laws
that govern our bodies and suffer in this area from lack of living a
balanced life. Some of us forget we are spiritual beings residing in
physical bodies living in physical world and governed and as such are
1 - Natural or physical laws
2 - Man made laws
3 - Divine or spiritual laws
Proportionality and balance used to be taught in ancient Greek
educational curriculum. Unfortunately, these studies have gone the way
of the dinosaurs. There is no one magic bullet in life that will fix
all our problems. Living a good life is composed of many qualities
and when we reach for one thing only with thoughts of disregarding the
rest of life's laws we will be out of balance. To be at peace is a
natural ability that is instilled within us all - you only have to
become balanced to be at peace. When Socrates was in his cell awaiting
execution, his friend Crito visited him offering plans of escape and
the resources of many of Socrates friends to help him set up a new
life away from Athens. Socrates responded to Crito, "My friend Crito,
your zeal is invaluable, if a right one; but if wrong, the greater the
zeal the greater the evil..."
Socrates accepted his fate and practiced virtue by being at peace and
living within the 3 branches of laws that governed him. This is what
the author James Allen had in mind with his famous quote from his book
"As a Man Thinketh" ~ "Circumstances do not make the man - they revel
him to himself." Manmade law imprisoned Socrates and man made laws
sentenced him to death. Socrates chose not to break the law, even when
it was a simple task to escape with the help of his friends and live
instead of die. For Socrates, circumstances did not make him into
anything other than what he 'genuinely' was.
If your an atheist or agnostic, you may not think much of divine or
spiritual laws, but you still have to answer to natural and man made
laws. Don't get confused by the term spiritual. I am not always
referring to organized religion when I use such terms. Atheist or not,
there are many mysteries in the world. The spiritual studies deals
with such mysteries, for the root of spiritualism is that of the
unseen and the force behind it all. Some people say they can defy man
made laws as well as divine laws, but no matter how defiant the person
or addict is - no one escapes natural laws. To be successful in life
we have to put some effort in spiritual work and some effort in
physical work for a good balance as well as be mindful of not
violating manmade laws.
It is by restructuring my life to accept and live within all these
laws that I have been able to find much peace...by living within my
means. My prior life was just the opposite. I lived a life that
violated all 3 branches of these laws. As I wrote in my earlier post
'Putting Peace First' ..."All our actions have consequences and many
of these actions are producing consequences that rob us of inner
peace." If we expect to escape from the consequences of ALL our
actions - that is delusional thinking. Desire plays a big part in
guiding our actions. If we have a constant supply of never ending
desires that end in the disruption of our peace what chance have we to
find serenity? To find peace I had to rework my life when it came to
excessive desires as well as being mindful of living within these 3
branches of laws.
Accepting ones nature as well as the nature of others is not the total
answer to the mystery of being at peace. Yes, we can accept our
nature, but if our nature continues to be that of peace destroying
instead of peace promoting, then some additional work needs to be
done. Sometimes we can have a say at our nature and other times we
much on authenticity. While Heidegger could be arguably be said to
have 'written the book' on authenticity and genuineness, Heidegger was
also a Nazi supporter. Now, we can sometimes blame such affiliation on
design, such as being forced against our will. But in this case,
Heidegger seemed to be a Nazi by desire and not one by design. I
discussed this in an earlier post 'Addict by design ~ Addict by
Desire'
For authenticity and genuineness to be of real value, they must also
be in the 'right direction' as the Buddhists set fourth in the
eightfold path. Yes, Heidegger new about authenticity, he seemed
authentic and genuine in his actions, but fell short of the other half
of the equation of marrying authenticity with 'right' actions.
Heidegger accepted his nature, but his natural and authentic nature
was one that was not that of 'peace promoting' in nature within
himself, nor peace promoting for others. Academic smarts are no
guarantee of peace smarts. As I wrote in my own post on authenticity,
"When you align real and authentic actions with those that promote
inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."
BTW, if you made a study of such a person as Heidegger while looking
into the subject of authenticity. Would finding our his Nazi
affiliations blind or prejudice you to what he had to say about
authenticity? Would you spend your time trying to 'prove him wrong' to
make your ego right? If you liked the philosophy of Aristotle, but
discovered Aristotle promoted slavery. Would that blind you to all of
his teaching? The nature of humans is that they are imperfect. If we
only seek out perfect humans to learn from the pickings will be
slim...really the pickings will be zero. But, even with all our
imperfections, many of us contain small perfection's to learn from if
the student is willing to look for them and be open when they surface.
The answer to these question of prejudicial blindness will tell you a
lot about your own nature. If your nature is that of passion before
reason and a tendency to being blinded to the truth due to prejudice,
then reread what I wrote in my earlier post 'Our Guiding light
Prejudice or Truth' Always remember, truth stands on it own and is
without political or religious affiliations ... just as nature
rules ... so does truth.
Accepting one authentic nature, balancing authenticity with doing
good, not harboring hatred or fear, being generous and compassionate
to others, being at peace within and with all - these are all
qualities of the enlightened mind. When Socrates was leaving his trial
after being condemned to death he had these parting words. I'll leave
you with them as they show how one man applied the equation of
Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace (Translated by Benjamin
Jowett)
"Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know this of a
truth - that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after
death. He and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own
approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that to die
and be released was better for me; and therefore the oracle gave no
sign. For which reason also, I am not angry with my accusers, or my
condemners; they have done me no harm, although neither of them meant
to do me any good; and for this I may gently blame them.
Still I have a favor to ask of them. When my sons are grown up, I
would ask you, O my friends, to punish them; and I would have you
trouble them, as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about
riches, or anything, more than about virtue; or if they pretend to be
something when they are really nothing - then rebuke them, as I have
rebuked you, for not caring about that for which they ought to care
and for thinking that they are something, when they are really
nothing. And if you do this, I and my sons will have received justice
at your hands.
The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways - I to die, and
you to live. Which is better God only knows."
Take Care,
V (Male)
Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
For free access to my earlier posts on voluntary simplicity,
the opinion, recommendation or belief of any group or organization.
Christopher A.Lee
2007-06-20 15:07:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
Here you are trying to do two things
1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god
What is it with you morons and your straw men to the point of
deliberate falsehood?
Post by Vinod
Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true God you
begin to worship his creation.
Why are so many of you such stupid liars? You fool nobody, not even
yourself.
Post by Vinod
Rom 1:25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and
served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Who gives a shit what the Bible says, in the real world outside your
religion?

Are you really that stupid, or just pretending?
Post by Vinod
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal
power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Rom 1:21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God,
nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish
hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made
like corruptible man; and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
So what? You know perfectly well how worthless it is outside your
religion.
Post by Vinod
Thanks
Idiot.
Post by Vinod
Vinod
http://vinodisaac.com
Post by V
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is
the [god itself?]
Post by V
While your argument makes sense, more sense than many theist's
arguments make, it is still speculation.
Once we admit that we do not know, but are speculating, then you must
admit that you are agnostic on the subject.
When I left Catholicism I surveyed the God arena for what higher
powers there really were, after deciding Yahweh was man made. If you
bother to read the rest of my post you will see that two Gods come
into play with our lives Bill.
Every atheist serves two Gods. And in reality, these Gods require
worship from all humans whether they be atheists or theists. The 'God
of Inner Peace' is the first God. Without serving this God of Inner
Peace man will turn to self destruction and suicide. The other God is
that of the 'God of Nature' which makes itself evident with it natural
laws or commandments. No matter how defiant the atheist or theist
is...we will ALL bow to the God of Nature sooner or later.
Speaking of nature, it is also good to keep in touch with the lesser
cousin of the God of Nature which is seeking peace with our own nature
through right actions. Yes, learning to accept the nature of all
things is an important part of the equation for living a life at
peace, but there is a missing link that needs to be added to this
equation. The missing link is marrying authenticity with rightness.
The formula for success is: Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace
The formula for failure is: Authentic Nature + Wrong Actions =
Destruction
There are many 'natures' in our life to be mindful of - we have our
own nature, the nature other persons we have contact with, as well as
the 'nature' of nature itself. But, just becoming a 'blissninny' and
blindly accepting the various natures will not give us peace. To apply
this tool rightly, we need to adopt a life of proportionality, balance
and wisdom. How do we learn to live a more balanced life? By using
rational thought patterns and by putting reason before passion. Then
we can view our actions as balanced or not, for without rational
thought we have nothing to weigh in our quest for balance.
Knowing what is true and developing wisdom to be at peace are two very
important qualities for the confused spiritual practitioner to
develop. With respect to myself, I try to balance wisdom with that of
peace perception. For whether something is a truth or not, it still
has to pass the peace test. There are many things that are true and
good in life, but they will still end up destroying my peace if I let
them. Usually the dividing line for such 'good today ~ bad tomorrow'
questions are rooted in the area of balance and proportionality.
If you don't know what I am talking about, then I will give you this
example. we need water to drink and air to breath in order to live.
But, even though water and air are life sustaining, too much water and
too much air will become life destroying...proportionality and balance
divides life from death. I always ask if a person, place, thing or
activity promotes my peace or destroys my peace? When I practice
compassion for others as my Buddhist practice recommends, I ask this
same question of peace promotion or peace destruction of others. I
look deeply to see what is destroying the other persons peace the best
I am able to. There are 3 main components to rational thinking.
1 - Rationality requires reflection.
Many of us are too busy to reflect. Other times our minds our consumed
with troubles and out of control passions. Over thinking also plays a
part in keeping our minds working in the wrong direction. An old
Buddhist saying tells us that a constantly busy mind cannot heal
itself. Reflection time must be 'open thinking' time where we look at
both ends of the spectrum and everything in between for answers and
choices and not just the comfortable ones we are accustomed to. We
cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we
created them. Psychologist William James once said, "A great many
people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging
their prejudices."
2- Rationality is the ability to anticipate consequences.
Reflection pays big part in this as well as past experiences and the
process of extrapolation from past experiences and others mistakes.
Weighing and balancing are two key words that come into play.
Sometimes 'gambling' is more a component to those that 'shoot from the
hip' and worry about consequences later. Many of us get stuck in a
place of justifying our actions with blindness to the consequences.
Our actions are ego based and not truth or rational based. "First one
decides the goal, then one gathers the principles or delusions to
justify reaching this goal." Principles or delusions? This depends on
whether the mind is being used for rational thought or if out of
control passions are in command.
3 - Rationality requires adherence to certain standards.
There are many standards to consider and each individual has to judge
these for themselves. Another name for a standard is a rule. Many
people are defiant against 'rules' and they are entitled to not follow
the rules as they please. But such freedom has a price to pay, so they
should not balk at paying the price for their freedom with the
necessary consequences that come from not following the rules.
Standards are different for each area of excellence that we seek to
attain. The standards for excellence in rock climbing are different
from those of a scuba diver. Professional standards of an engineer
will be different from societal standards of being a good parent. But
one thing is certain. If we are defiant and balk against these
standards we will probably be headed for failure or even death in
certain activities. (Failure? This cannot be said in 100% of the
cases, for without such experimentation and digression inventors would
not produce much. But in generally acceptable terms, standards usually
have to be followed. If you balk at following standards then go back
to component 1 and do some reflection as to why?)
Now just turning to Buddhism is not all it takes if your goal is to
live a flourishing human life. Yes, Buddhism contain many truths, but
it also contains many non truths as well.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=9.0
But isn't that how man made religion is? It all comes from imperfect
man so imperfect man can never make anything as complex as religious
thought perfect?
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=318.0
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=133.0
Yet, we as humans must still serve the God of Peace or we will self-
destruct , so we must give it our 'best efforts' irrespective of how
imperfect those efforts are. A simple tool to smooth out the everyday
fluctuations in our life is: forget perfection and look for direction.
We can either be going up, down or sideways with our goals. Use this
direction tool to get a quick gauge of your inner spiritual
condition.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=91.0
Accepting a persons nature must always be balanced with rational
thought as I said above. We can accept another's natures as an abuser
and be at peace that they have this nature, but we do not have to stay
in close proximity of them ourselves. The missing link so to speak
with the blissninny that accepts everything blindly is they are
neglecting to align ones authentic nature with that of finding inner
peace. The serenity prayer tells us we have 2 possibilities to find
peace...by Change or by Acceptance. We should always seek out change
for the most part and practice acceptance as the last resort. That is
the general rule. Change first - Accept later. For without feeling
anger or discontent we wound not seek out change - as in changing our
environment that might be an unhealthy one for us. So, we should never
regret feeling anger, but just as anger and excretion are two
naturally occurring parts of being a human, we should let them serve
us instead of we being enslaved to them.
In SCA they have a tool called abstention. They abstain the best way
they can from people places or things they have found to be
detrimental to their recovery program efforts from past experience
with them. My recovery success is based a lot on abstaining from
people, places and things that do not mesh well with me and if I
cannot avoid them, then I work to make the unavoidable fit better by
changing things on my end. Yes, we cannot change others, but we do
usually have control of ourselves and how we participate in dealing
with others. Even though we cannot completely change or wipe our many
problem areas in our life we can usually change *some* aspects of most
problems to make them more bearable. So, I am always looking for small
changes to make in the right direction and this recovery orientation
towards the direction of change helps by giving hope of possible
larger future change as well.
When Socrates was a young man he had to make a decision to make with
which road to take in his own study of philosophical knowledge. He
looked at his predecessors and their study of science and nature and
also weighed his talents in this area. His conclusion? "I am not of
the nature to study nature." Socrates was at peace with his own
nature. We only have so much of 'us' to spend, so spend it wisely.
Fighting ones authentic nature spends our time and energies unwisely.
The serenity prayer gives us the answer, "God / Higher Power, grant me
the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to
change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference."
We can see this battle over accepting others nature happening all the
time with the sexes. Many women say they can't understand men, just as
many men say they can't understand women. In the bible it says that
God's way is not man's way. Well, to further distill this we can say
that God's way is not man's way and man's way is not woman's way.
Every creature has it's way and when you can come to peace with this
you will be on your own way to accepting life on life's terms and not
your own. To start on your peace journey look for insight into the
other creatures suffering and problems. Each sex has their strong and
weak points just as the yin and yang dictates. To change this would be
to change the underlying duties and essence of that creature. It is of
their nature for men and women to be men wand women. "Were I a
nightingale, I would act the part of a nightingale; were I a swan, the
part of a swan." ~ Epictetus
I had a mentor that I held in high esteem for his various talents in
sports. As he aged he started to get back problems. One sport he
excelled in was kayaking. Kayaking eventually had a particularly bad
affect on back problems. At age 51, I cannot sit in a hard-shell
whitewater boat for longer than 10 or 15 minutes before my back starts
bothering me. This fellow had the same issues. What did I do with my
back problem and kayaking? I accepted my nature and went to inflatable
kayaks and can kayak for a few hours with only moderate back problems.
What did my mentor do? He continued with hard-shell kayaking and made
himself so uncomfortable he saw no other choice other that to kill
himself and he blew his brains out. My mentor did not have the ability
to accept ones changing nature. No flexibility gives us no hope and we
get locked into tunnel vision with death as being the only option from
escaping our pain.
Accept others nature helps when we apply live and let live. It becomes
much easier to do once we accept our own nature, then we can apply a
little of this acceptance to anthers right to exist. The Buddhist tool
of compassion helps as well. It reminds me to look for insight into he
other persons suffering. When we spend out time looking for insight
into their suffering it does not leave much time for building up
hatred against them. The two do not mix well. we cannot develop
compassion and hatred for someone at the same time.
On some discussion lists the topics have come up of doing good for
others. It seems some list members are not at peace with doing good.
Whether they feel like they must be obligated to do or give a certain
amount of themselves or their money. Or they feel something is wrong
with them for not wanting to do more good, as society 'puts' the
goodness conciseness on them. We are NOT required to do a certain
amount of 'good' for others. I would say we are required to not harm
others if we desire to be at peace. In my own case, I donate a very
small amount of money to charity and I give very little time to
volunteer work. I give what is comfortable and natural for me to give.
But, I do donate good in an area that is authentic and not forced for
me with writing my posts and planting seeds of peace in others. As I
plant the seeds in others, I water my own seeds of peace, so I get
double benefits. Find your own strengths in this area, do what is
natural and authentic for you. If you are uncomfortable with your life
write on it to clarify what you would like to get on it. The world
needs all sorts...for balance.
You can get some clarity on the authenticity issue if you ask yourself
why you wish to do something? What is your driving force? Do you act
from fear or act from desire of begins at peace? Don't let others
dictate your balance point to you. Just as no one could dictate to you
when you have had enough to eat or drink, or how much money you have
to spend. so it goes that no one can tell you how much of you that
must be spent in the world to try to do good. The decision must come
from within you. My actions are based on inner peace and if I stray -
there goes my peace - it is my choice. Put your inner peace foremost
and you will have your answer. Fear or guilt based reasons for acting
are not authentic and genuine. The persons actions are based on
negative consequences otherwise they would not do them. I see this a
lot on the Buddhist and Christian oriented discussion boards the
practitioners are worried they will develop bad karma or go to hell
for a mis-step. They are not worried about peace...they are worried
about pain. "People that practice religion are worried about going to
hell - people that practice spirituality have already been to hell and
don't want to go back." As I will tell you below in the section on
Heidegger, "When you align real and authentic actions with those that
promote inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."
Another area of nature that some disregard is that of natural law. I
find that sometime spiritual practitioners neglect the natural laws
that govern our bodies and suffer in this area from lack of living a
balanced life. Some of us forget we are spiritual beings residing in
physical bodies living in physical world and governed and as such are
1 - Natural or physical laws
2 - Man made laws
3 - Divine or spiritual laws
Proportionality and balance used to be taught in ancient Greek
educational curriculum. Unfortunately, these studies have gone the way
of the dinosaurs. There is no one magic bullet in life that will fix
all our problems. Living a good life is composed of many qualities
and when we reach for one thing only with thoughts of disregarding the
rest of life's laws we will be out of balance. To be at peace is a
natural ability that is instilled within us all - you only have to
become balanced to be at peace. When Socrates was in his cell awaiting
execution, his friend Crito visited him offering plans of escape and
the resources of many of Socrates friends to help him set up a new
life away from Athens. Socrates responded to Crito, "My friend Crito,
your zeal is invaluable, if a right one; but if wrong, the greater the
zeal the greater the evil..."
Socrates accepted his fate and practiced virtue by being at peace and
living within the 3 branches of laws that governed him. This is what
the author James Allen had in mind with his famous quote from his book
"As a Man Thinketh" ~ "Circumstances do not make the man - they revel
him to himself." Manmade law imprisoned Socrates and man made laws
sentenced him to death. Socrates chose not to break the law, even when
it was a simple task to escape with the help of his friends and live
instead of die. For Socrates, circumstances did not make him into
anything other than what he 'genuinely' was.
If your an atheist or agnostic, you may not think much of divine or
spiritual laws, but you still have to answer to natural and man made
laws. Don't get confused by the term spiritual. I am not always
referring to organized religion when I use such terms. Atheist or not,
there are many mysteries in the world. The spiritual studies deals
with such mysteries, for the root of spiritualism is that of the
unseen and the force behind it all. Some people say they can defy man
made laws as well as divine laws, but no matter how defiant the person
or addict is - no one escapes natural laws. To be successful in life
we have to put some effort in spiritual work and some effort in
physical work for a good balance as well as be mindful of not
violating manmade laws.
It is by restructuring my life to accept and live within all these
laws that I have been able to find much peace...by living within my
means. My prior life was just the opposite. I lived a life that
violated all 3 branches of these laws. As I wrote in my earlier post
'Putting Peace First' ..."All our actions have consequences and many
of these actions are producing consequences that rob us of inner
peace." If we expect to escape from the consequences of ALL our
actions - that is delusional thinking. Desire plays a big part in
guiding our actions. If we have a constant supply of never ending
desires that end in the disruption of our peace what chance have we to
find serenity? To find peace I had to rework my life when it came to
excessive desires as well as being mindful of living within these 3
branches of laws.
Accepting ones nature as well as the nature of others is not the total
answer to the mystery of being at peace. Yes, we can accept our
nature, but if our nature continues to be that of peace destroying
instead of peace promoting, then some additional work needs to be
done. Sometimes we can have a say at our nature and other times we
much on authenticity. While Heidegger could be arguably be said to
have 'written the book' on authenticity and genuineness, Heidegger was
also a Nazi supporter. Now, we can sometimes blame such affiliation on
design, such as being forced against our will. But in this case,
Heidegger seemed to be a Nazi by desire and not one by design. I
discussed this in an earlier post 'Addict by design ~ Addict by
Desire'
For authenticity and genuineness to be of real value, they must also
be in the 'right direction' as the Buddhists set fourth in the
eightfold path. Yes, Heidegger new about authenticity, he seemed
authentic and genuine in his actions, but fell short of the other half
of the equation of marrying authenticity with 'right' actions.
Heidegger accepted his nature, but his natural and authentic nature
was one that was not that of 'peace promoting' in nature within
himself, nor peace promoting for others. Academic smarts are no
guarantee of peace smarts. As I wrote in my own post on authenticity,
"When you align real and authentic actions with those that promote
inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."
BTW, if you made a study of such a person as Heidegger while looking
into the subject of authenticity. Would finding our his Nazi
affiliations blind or prejudice you to what he had to say about
authenticity? Would you spend your time trying to 'prove him wrong' to
make your ego right? If you liked the philosophy of Aristotle, but
discovered Aristotle promoted slavery. Would that blind you to all of
his teaching? The nature of humans is that they are imperfect. If we
only seek out perfect humans to learn from the pickings will be
slim...really the pickings will be zero. But, even with all our
imperfections, many of us contain small perfection's to learn from if
the student is willing to look for them and be open when they surface.
The answer to these question of prejudicial blindness will tell you a
lot about your own nature. If your nature is that of passion before
reason and a tendency to being blinded to the truth due to prejudice,
then reread what I wrote in my earlier post 'Our Guiding light
Prejudice or Truth' Always remember, truth stands on it own and is
without political or religious affiliations ... just as nature
rules ... so does truth.
Accepting one authentic nature, balancing authenticity with doing
good, not harboring hatred or fear, being generous and compassionate
to others, being at peace within and with all - these are all
qualities of the enlightened mind. When Socrates was leaving his trial
after being condemned to death he had these parting words. I'll leave
you with them as they show how one man applied the equation of
Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace (Translated by Benjamin
Jowett)
"Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know this of a
truth - that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after
death. He and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own
approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that to die
and be released was better for me; and therefore the oracle gave no
sign. For which reason also, I am not angry with my accusers, or my
condemners; they have done me no harm, although neither of them meant
to do me any good; and for this I may gently blame them.
Still I have a favor to ask of them. When my sons are grown up, I
would ask you, O my friends, to punish them; and I would have you
trouble them, as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about
riches, or anything, more than about virtue; or if they pretend to be
something when they are really nothing - then rebuke them, as I have
rebuked you, for not caring about that for which they ought to care
and for thinking that they are something, when they are really
nothing. And if you do this, I and my sons will have received justice
at your hands.
The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways - I to die, and
you to live. Which is better God only knows."
Take Care,
V (Male)
Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
For free access to my earlier posts on voluntary simplicity,
the opinion, recommendation or belief of any group or organization.
Robibnikoff
2007-06-20 15:37:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
Here you are trying to do two things
1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god
Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true God you
begin to worship his creation.
What god?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Vinod
2007-06-21 20:18:50 UTC
Permalink
Do you mean "Who God"?

He is the one who created the human beings. You and me every one is created
by Him. Even the Unvierse the planets and the stars every thing.

Isn't He the great intellecual designer? He designed the earth so precise
that if it moves even a little further away from sun it will freez up and if
it moves even a little closer to sun it will scorch up with heat.

If you read or heard about space station's computer failure. You will know
that what it takes to hang that little station out on the space. Without
computer it can't even stay in it's orbit. Think about earth that how God
has balanced it that it doesn't fall into the sun.

Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on
nothing.

Earth doesn't need booster rockets to correct it's position. NASA the most
intellecual institution of the world creates a space station and it needs
computer and booster rockets and much more to just keep the station in it's
place. There is no comparison between God's intelligence and NASA. But it is
very rare that people give God credit that He deserves.

Thanks
Vinod Isaac
http://vinodisaac.com
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
Here you are trying to do two things
1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god
Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true God you
begin to worship his creation.
What god?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Christopher A.Lee
2007-06-21 20:41:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
Do you mean "Who God"?
He is the one who created the human beings. You and me every one is created
by Him. Even the Unvierse the planets and the stars every thing.
Prove it, question-begging moron.
Post by Vinod
Isn't He the great intellecual designer? He designed the earth so precise
that if it moves even a little further away from sun it will freez up and if
it moves even a little closer to sun it will scorch up with heat.
Prove it.
Post by Vinod
If you read or heard about space station's computer failure. You will know
that what it takes to hang that little station out on the space. Without
computer it can't even stay in it's orbit. Think about earth that how God
has balanced it that it doesn't fall into the sun.
Prove it does anything outside your deluded imagination.
Post by Vinod
Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on
nothing.
What has that got to do with anything, brainwashed moron?
Post by Vinod
Earth doesn't need booster rockets to correct it's position. NASA the most
intellecual institution of the world creates a space station and it needs
computer and booster rockets and much more to just keep the station in it's
place. There is no comparison between God's intelligence and NASA. But it is
very rare that people give God credit that He deserves.
Idiot.
Post by Vinod
Thanks
Vinod Isaac
http://vinodisaac.com
Why don't you think before spouting such question-begging stupidity?
Post by Vinod
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
Here you are trying to do two things
1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god
Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true God you
begin to worship his creation.
What god?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Vinod
2007-06-21 21:49:33 UTC
Permalink
What kind of proof you want?

Who told you that every single thing in the world can be proved?

Can you prove that you exist?

Thanks
Vinod Isaac
http://vinodisaac.com
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
Do you mean "Who God"?
He is the one who created the human beings. You and me every one is created
by Him. Even the Unvierse the planets and the stars every thing.
Prove it, question-begging moron.
Post by Vinod
Isn't He the great intellecual designer? He designed the earth so precise
that if it moves even a little further away from sun it will freez up and if
it moves even a little closer to sun it will scorch up with heat.
Prove it.
Post by Vinod
If you read or heard about space station's computer failure. You will know
that what it takes to hang that little station out on the space. Without
computer it can't even stay in it's orbit. Think about earth that how God
has balanced it that it doesn't fall into the sun.
Prove it does anything outside your deluded imagination.
Post by Vinod
Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on
nothing.
What has that got to do with anything, brainwashed moron?
Post by Vinod
Earth doesn't need booster rockets to correct it's position. NASA the most
intellecual institution of the world creates a space station and it needs
computer and booster rockets and much more to just keep the station in it's
place. There is no comparison between God's intelligence and NASA. But it is
very rare that people give God credit that He deserves.
Idiot.
Post by Vinod
Thanks
Vinod Isaac
http://vinodisaac.com
Why don't you think before spouting such question-begging stupidity?
Post by Vinod
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
Here you are trying to do two things
1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god
Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true
God
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
you
begin to worship his creation.
What god?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Christopher A.Lee
2007-06-21 22:59:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
What kind of proof you want?
Not my problem. It's your so far baseless claim. You're the one who is
supposed to know what you are talking about. You know what would be
evidence.
Post by Vinod
Who told you that every single thing in the world can be proved?
Where did I say that, moron?
Post by Vinod
Can you prove that you exist?
Standard dishonest lapse into pseudo-solipsism.

Either provide the same kind of evidence for your pretend friend that
there is for ordinary people, or stop being dishonest.
Post by Vinod
Thanks
Vinod Isaac
http://vinodisaac.com
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
Do you mean "Who God"?
He is the one who created the human beings. You and me every one is
created
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
by Him. Even the Unvierse the planets and the stars every thing.
Prove it, question-begging moron.
Post by Vinod
Isn't He the great intellecual designer? He designed the earth so precise
that if it moves even a little further away from sun it will freez up and
if
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
it moves even a little closer to sun it will scorch up with heat.
Prove it.
Post by Vinod
If you read or heard about space station's computer failure. You will
know
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
that what it takes to hang that little station out on the space. Without
computer it can't even stay in it's orbit. Think about earth that how God
has balanced it that it doesn't fall into the sun.
Prove it does anything outside your deluded imagination.
Post by Vinod
Job 26:7 He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth
on
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
nothing.
What has that got to do with anything, brainwashed moron?
Post by Vinod
Earth doesn't need booster rockets to correct it's position. NASA the
most
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
intellecual institution of the world creates a space station and it needs
computer and booster rockets and much more to just keep the station in
it's
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
place. There is no comparison between God's intelligence and NASA. But it
is
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
very rare that people give God credit that He deserves.
Idiot.
Post by Vinod
Thanks
Vinod Isaac
http://vinodisaac.com
Why don't you think before spouting such question-begging stupidity?
Post by Vinod
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
Here you are trying to do two things
1.) trying to make yourself god
2.) trying to make nature god
Sin brings you to these two places where instead of worshiping true
God
Post by Christopher A.Lee
Post by Vinod
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
you
begin to worship his creation.
What god?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Robibnikoff
2007-06-22 00:47:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
What kind of proof you want?
Objective, verifiable evidence.
Post by Vinod
Who told you that every single thing in the world can be proved?
What a stupid question.
Post by Vinod
Can you prove that you exist?
Do you think you're babbling at yourself?
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
Frank Mayhar
2007-06-22 00:53:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
What kind of proof you want?
Any.
Post by Vinod
Who told you that every single thing in the world can be proved?
Can you prove that you exist?
I suspect that my fist breaking your nose would tend to be a fairly
compelling argument supporting that position, yes.
--
Frank Mayhar ***@exit.com http://www.exit.com/
Exit Consulting http://www.gpsclock.com/
http://www.exit.com/blog/frank/
http://www.zazzle.com/fmayhar*
Robibnikoff
2007-06-22 00:46:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vinod
Do you mean "Who God"?
Are you stupid? I said "what god", not "who god".
Post by Vinod
He is the one who created the human beings.
Prove it.

<remaining nonsense snipped>
--
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
BAAWA Knight!
#1557
John Baker
2007-06-22 02:56:32 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 20:46:57 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
Do you mean "Who God"?
Are you stupid?
Yes, actually, he is. <G>
Post by Robibnikoff
I said "what god", not "who god".
Post by Vinod
He is the one who created the human beings.
Prove it.
<remaining nonsense snipped>
St. Jack NopetheDopeofapes
2007-06-22 02:57:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Baker
Post by Robibnikoff
Post by Vinod
Do you mean "Who God"?
Are you stupid?
Yes, actually, he is. <G>
Post by Robibnikoff
I said "what god", not "who god".
Post by Vinod
He is the one who created the human beings.
Prove it.
Are U Sure? Have U looked everywhere?
What about under UR bed, huh, or over here,
or over there, and how about on the dark side
of the moon, etc.?

Bill M
2007-06-20 18:37:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by V
Post by Bill M
The simplest and most obvious evidence that there are no REAL gods is
the [god itself?]
While your argument makes sense, more sense than many theist's
arguments make, it is still speculation.
Once we admit that we do not know, but are speculating, then you must
admit that you are agnostic on the subject.
When I left Catholicism I surveyed the God arena for what higher
powers there really were, after deciding Yahweh was man made. If you
bother to read the rest of my post you will see that two Gods come
into play with our lives Bill.
Every atheist serves two Gods. And in reality, these Gods require
worship from all humans whether they be atheists or theists. The 'God
of Inner Peace' is the first God. Without serving this God of Inner
Peace man will turn to self destruction and suicide. The other God is
that of the 'God of Nature' which makes itself evident with it natural
laws or commandments. No matter how defiant the atheist or theist
is...we will ALL bow to the God of Nature sooner or later.
You are engaging in embelishment and obfusaction. Why do you feel
the need to invent gods?

"god ( gÅ’d) n. 1. God a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent,
omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of
faith and worship in monotheistic religions. b. The force, effect, or a
manifestation or aspect of this being. c. Christian Science " Infinite Mind;
Spirit; Soul; Principle; Life; Truth; Love " (Mary Baker Eddy). 2. A being
of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people,
especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol. 4. One that is worshiped,
idealized, or followed: money was their god. 5. A very handsome man. 6. A
powerful ruler or despot. [Middle English from Old English; See gheu( .)- in
Indo-European Roots.] "

True atheists do not believe ANY gods exist. they cwertainly don't beleive
in your two invented Gods!
Post by V
Speaking of nature, it is also good to keep in touch with the lesser
cousin of the God of Nature which is seeking peace with our own nature
through right actions. Yes, learning to accept the nature of all
things is an important part of the equation for living a life at
peace, but there is a missing link that needs to be added to this
equation. The missing link is marrying authenticity with rightness.
The formula for success is: Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace
The formula for failure is: Authentic Nature + Wrong Actions =
Destruction
There are many 'natures' in our life to be mindful of - we have our
own nature, the nature other persons we have contact with, as well as
the 'nature' of nature itself. But, just becoming a 'blissninny' and
blindly accepting the various natures will not give us peace. To apply
this tool rightly, we need to adopt a life of proportionality, balance
and wisdom. How do we learn to live a more balanced life? By using
rational thought patterns and by putting reason before passion. Then
we can view our actions as balanced or not, for without rational
thought we have nothing to weigh in our quest for balance.
Knowing what is true and developing wisdom to be at peace are two very
important qualities for the confused spiritual practitioner to
develop. With respect to myself, I try to balance wisdom with that of
peace perception. For whether something is a truth or not, it still
has to pass the peace test. There are many things that are true and
good in life, but they will still end up destroying my peace if I let
them. Usually the dividing line for such 'good today ~ bad tomorrow'
questions are rooted in the area of balance and proportionality.
If you don't know what I am talking about, then I will give you this
example. we need water to drink and air to breath in order to live.
But, even though water and air are life sustaining, too much water and
too much air will become life destroying...proportionality and balance
divides life from death. I always ask if a person, place, thing or
activity promotes my peace or destroys my peace? When I practice
compassion for others as my Buddhist practice recommends, I ask this
same question of peace promotion or peace destruction of others. I
look deeply to see what is destroying the other persons peace the best
I am able to. There are 3 main components to rational thinking.
1 - Rationality requires reflection.
Many of us are too busy to reflect. Other times our minds our consumed
with troubles and out of control passions. Over thinking also plays a
part in keeping our minds working in the wrong direction. An old
Buddhist saying tells us that a constantly busy mind cannot heal
itself. Reflection time must be 'open thinking' time where we look at
both ends of the spectrum and everything in between for answers and
choices and not just the comfortable ones we are accustomed to. We
cannot solve our problems with the same thinking that we used when we
created them. Psychologist William James once said, "A great many
people believe they are thinking when they are merely rearranging
their prejudices."
2- Rationality is the ability to anticipate consequences.
Reflection pays big part in this as well as past experiences and the
process of extrapolation from past experiences and others mistakes.
Weighing and balancing are two key words that come into play.
Sometimes 'gambling' is more a component to those that 'shoot from the
hip' and worry about consequences later. Many of us get stuck in a
place of justifying our actions with blindness to the consequences.
Our actions are ego based and not truth or rational based. "First one
decides the goal, then one gathers the principles or delusions to
justify reaching this goal." Principles or delusions? This depends on
whether the mind is being used for rational thought or if out of
control passions are in command.
3 - Rationality requires adherence to certain standards.
There are many standards to consider and each individual has to judge
these for themselves. Another name for a standard is a rule. Many
people are defiant against 'rules' and they are entitled to not follow
the rules as they please. But such freedom has a price to pay, so they
should not balk at paying the price for their freedom with the
necessary consequences that come from not following the rules.
Standards are different for each area of excellence that we seek to
attain. The standards for excellence in rock climbing are different
from those of a scuba diver. Professional standards of an engineer
will be different from societal standards of being a good parent. But
one thing is certain. If we are defiant and balk against these
standards we will probably be headed for failure or even death in
certain activities. (Failure? This cannot be said in 100% of the
cases, for without such experimentation and digression inventors would
not produce much. But in generally acceptable terms, standards usually
have to be followed. If you balk at following standards then go back
to component 1 and do some reflection as to why?)
Now just turning to Buddhism is not all it takes if your goal is to
live a flourishing human life. Yes, Buddhism contain many truths, but
it also contains many non truths as well.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=9.0
But isn't that how man made religion is? It all comes from imperfect
man so imperfect man can never make anything as complex as religious
thought perfect?
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=318.0
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=133.0
Yet, we as humans must still serve the God of Peace or we will self-
destruct , so we must give it our 'best efforts' irrespective of how
imperfect those efforts are. A simple tool to smooth out the everyday
fluctuations in our life is: forget perfection and look for direction.
We can either be going up, down or sideways with our goals. Use this
direction tool to get a quick gauge of your inner spiritual
condition.
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=4.0
http://jesusneverexisted.org/jne/forum/index.php?topic=91.0
Accepting a persons nature must always be balanced with rational
thought as I said above. We can accept another's natures as an abuser
and be at peace that they have this nature, but we do not have to stay
in close proximity of them ourselves. The missing link so to speak
with the blissninny that accepts everything blindly is they are
neglecting to align ones authentic nature with that of finding inner
peace. The serenity prayer tells us we have 2 possibilities to find
peace...by Change or by Acceptance. We should always seek out change
for the most part and practice acceptance as the last resort. That is
the general rule. Change first - Accept later. For without feeling
anger or discontent we wound not seek out change - as in changing our
environment that might be an unhealthy one for us. So, we should never
regret feeling anger, but just as anger and excretion are two
naturally occurring parts of being a human, we should let them serve
us instead of we being enslaved to them.
In SCA they have a tool called abstention. They abstain the best way
they can from people places or things they have found to be
detrimental to their recovery program efforts from past experience
with them. My recovery success is based a lot on abstaining from
people, places and things that do not mesh well with me and if I
cannot avoid them, then I work to make the unavoidable fit better by
changing things on my end. Yes, we cannot change others, but we do
usually have control of ourselves and how we participate in dealing
with others. Even though we cannot completely change or wipe our many
problem areas in our life we can usually change *some* aspects of most
problems to make them more bearable. So, I am always looking for small
changes to make in the right direction and this recovery orientation
towards the direction of change helps by giving hope of possible
larger future change as well.
When Socrates was a young man he had to make a decision to make with
which road to take in his own study of philosophical knowledge. He
looked at his predecessors and their study of science and nature and
also weighed his talents in this area. His conclusion? "I am not of
the nature to study nature." Socrates was at peace with his own
nature. We only have so much of 'us' to spend, so spend it wisely.
Fighting ones authentic nature spends our time and energies unwisely.
The serenity prayer gives us the answer, "God / Higher Power, grant me
the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to
change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference."
We can see this battle over accepting others nature happening all the
time with the sexes. Many women say they can't understand men, just as
many men say they can't understand women. In the bible it says that
God's way is not man's way. Well, to further distill this we can say
that God's way is not man's way and man's way is not woman's way.
Every creature has it's way and when you can come to peace with this
you will be on your own way to accepting life on life's terms and not
your own. To start on your peace journey look for insight into the
other creatures suffering and problems. Each sex has their strong and
weak points just as the yin and yang dictates. To change this would be
to change the underlying duties and essence of that creature. It is of
their nature for men and women to be men wand women. "Were I a
nightingale, I would act the part of a nightingale; were I a swan, the
part of a swan." ~ Epictetus
I had a mentor that I held in high esteem for his various talents in
sports. As he aged he started to get back problems. One sport he
excelled in was kayaking. Kayaking eventually had a particularly bad
affect on back problems. At age 51, I cannot sit in a hard-shell
whitewater boat for longer than 10 or 15 minutes before my back starts
bothering me. This fellow had the same issues. What did I do with my
back problem and kayaking? I accepted my nature and went to inflatable
kayaks and can kayak for a few hours with only moderate back problems.
What did my mentor do? He continued with hard-shell kayaking and made
himself so uncomfortable he saw no other choice other that to kill
himself and he blew his brains out. My mentor did not have the ability
to accept ones changing nature. No flexibility gives us no hope and we
get locked into tunnel vision with death as being the only option from
escaping our pain.
Accept others nature helps when we apply live and let live. It becomes
much easier to do once we accept our own nature, then we can apply a
little of this acceptance to anthers right to exist. The Buddhist tool
of compassion helps as well. It reminds me to look for insight into he
other persons suffering. When we spend out time looking for insight
into their suffering it does not leave much time for building up
hatred against them. The two do not mix well. we cannot develop
compassion and hatred for someone at the same time.
On some discussion lists the topics have come up of doing good for
others. It seems some list members are not at peace with doing good.
Whether they feel like they must be obligated to do or give a certain
amount of themselves or their money. Or they feel something is wrong
with them for not wanting to do more good, as society 'puts' the
goodness conciseness on them. We are NOT required to do a certain
amount of 'good' for others. I would say we are required to not harm
others if we desire to be at peace. In my own case, I donate a very
small amount of money to charity and I give very little time to
volunteer work. I give what is comfortable and natural for me to give.
But, I do donate good in an area that is authentic and not forced for
me with writing my posts and planting seeds of peace in others. As I
plant the seeds in others, I water my own seeds of peace, so I get
double benefits. Find your own strengths in this area, do what is
natural and authentic for you. If you are uncomfortable with your life
write on it to clarify what you would like to get on it. The world
needs all sorts...for balance.
You can get some clarity on the authenticity issue if you ask yourself
why you wish to do something? What is your driving force? Do you act
from fear or act from desire of begins at peace? Don't let others
dictate your balance point to you. Just as no one could dictate to you
when you have had enough to eat or drink, or how much money you have
to spend. so it goes that no one can tell you how much of you that
must be spent in the world to try to do good. The decision must come
from within you. My actions are based on inner peace and if I stray -
there goes my peace - it is my choice. Put your inner peace foremost
and you will have your answer. Fear or guilt based reasons for acting
are not authentic and genuine. The persons actions are based on
negative consequences otherwise they would not do them. I see this a
lot on the Buddhist and Christian oriented discussion boards the
practitioners are worried they will develop bad karma or go to hell
for a mis-step. They are not worried about peace...they are worried
about pain. "People that practice religion are worried about going to
hell - people that practice spirituality have already been to hell and
don't want to go back." As I will tell you below in the section on
Heidegger, "When you align real and authentic actions with those that
promote inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."
Another area of nature that some disregard is that of natural law. I
find that sometime spiritual practitioners neglect the natural laws
that govern our bodies and suffer in this area from lack of living a
balanced life. Some of us forget we are spiritual beings residing in
physical bodies living in physical world and governed and as such are
1 - Natural or physical laws
2 - Man made laws
3 - Divine or spiritual laws
Proportionality and balance used to be taught in ancient Greek
educational curriculum. Unfortunately, these studies have gone the way
of the dinosaurs. There is no one magic bullet in life that will fix
all our problems. Living a good life is composed of many qualities
and when we reach for one thing only with thoughts of disregarding the
rest of life's laws we will be out of balance. To be at peace is a
natural ability that is instilled within us all - you only have to
become balanced to be at peace. When Socrates was in his cell awaiting
execution, his friend Crito visited him offering plans of escape and
the resources of many of Socrates friends to help him set up a new
life away from Athens. Socrates responded to Crito, "My friend Crito,
your zeal is invaluable, if a right one; but if wrong, the greater the
zeal the greater the evil..."
Socrates accepted his fate and practiced virtue by being at peace and
living within the 3 branches of laws that governed him. This is what
the author James Allen had in mind with his famous quote from his book
"As a Man Thinketh" ~ "Circumstances do not make the man - they revel
him to himself." Manmade law imprisoned Socrates and man made laws
sentenced him to death. Socrates chose not to break the law, even when
it was a simple task to escape with the help of his friends and live
instead of die. For Socrates, circumstances did not make him into
anything other than what he 'genuinely' was.
If your an atheist or agnostic, you may not think much of divine or
spiritual laws, but you still have to answer to natural and man made
laws. Don't get confused by the term spiritual. I am not always
referring to organized religion when I use such terms. Atheist or not,
there are many mysteries in the world. The spiritual studies deals
with such mysteries, for the root of spiritualism is that of the
unseen and the force behind it all. Some people say they can defy man
made laws as well as divine laws, but no matter how defiant the person
or addict is - no one escapes natural laws. To be successful in life
we have to put some effort in spiritual work and some effort in
physical work for a good balance as well as be mindful of not
violating manmade laws.
It is by restructuring my life to accept and live within all these
laws that I have been able to find much peace...by living within my
means. My prior life was just the opposite. I lived a life that
violated all 3 branches of these laws. As I wrote in my earlier post
'Putting Peace First' ..."All our actions have consequences and many
of these actions are producing consequences that rob us of inner
peace." If we expect to escape from the consequences of ALL our
actions - that is delusional thinking. Desire plays a big part in
guiding our actions. If we have a constant supply of never ending
desires that end in the disruption of our peace what chance have we to
find serenity? To find peace I had to rework my life when it came to
excessive desires as well as being mindful of living within these 3
branches of laws.
Accepting ones nature as well as the nature of others is not the total
answer to the mystery of being at peace. Yes, we can accept our
nature, but if our nature continues to be that of peace destroying
instead of peace promoting, then some additional work needs to be
done. Sometimes we can have a say at our nature and other times we
much on authenticity. While Heidegger could be arguably be said to
have 'written the book' on authenticity and genuineness, Heidegger was
also a Nazi supporter. Now, we can sometimes blame such affiliation on
design, such as being forced against our will. But in this case,
Heidegger seemed to be a Nazi by desire and not one by design. I
discussed this in an earlier post 'Addict by design ~ Addict by
Desire'
For authenticity and genuineness to be of real value, they must also
be in the 'right direction' as the Buddhists set fourth in the
eightfold path. Yes, Heidegger new about authenticity, he seemed
authentic and genuine in his actions, but fell short of the other half
of the equation of marrying authenticity with 'right' actions.
Heidegger accepted his nature, but his natural and authentic nature
was one that was not that of 'peace promoting' in nature within
himself, nor peace promoting for others. Academic smarts are no
guarantee of peace smarts. As I wrote in my own post on authenticity,
"When you align real and authentic actions with those that promote
inner peace you are moving closer to enlightenment."
BTW, if you made a study of such a person as Heidegger while looking
into the subject of authenticity. Would finding our his Nazi
affiliations blind or prejudice you to what he had to say about
authenticity? Would you spend your time trying to 'prove him wrong' to
make your ego right? If you liked the philosophy of Aristotle, but
discovered Aristotle promoted slavery. Would that blind you to all of
his teaching? The nature of humans is that they are imperfect. If we
only seek out perfect humans to learn from the pickings will be
slim...really the pickings will be zero. But, even with all our
imperfections, many of us contain small perfection's to learn from if
the student is willing to look for them and be open when they surface.
The answer to these question of prejudicial blindness will tell you a
lot about your own nature. If your nature is that of passion before
reason and a tendency to being blinded to the truth due to prejudice,
then reread what I wrote in my earlier post 'Our Guiding light
Prejudice or Truth' Always remember, truth stands on it own and is
without political or religious affiliations ... just as nature
rules ... so does truth.
Accepting one authentic nature, balancing authenticity with doing
good, not harboring hatred or fear, being generous and compassionate
to others, being at peace within and with all - these are all
qualities of the enlightened mind. When Socrates was leaving his trial
after being condemned to death he had these parting words. I'll leave
you with them as they show how one man applied the equation of
Authentic Nature + Right Actions = Peace (Translated by Benjamin
Jowett)
"Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know this of a
truth - that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after
death. He and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own
approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that to die
and be released was better for me; and therefore the oracle gave no
sign. For which reason also, I am not angry with my accusers, or my
condemners; they have done me no harm, although neither of them meant
to do me any good; and for this I may gently blame them.
Still I have a favor to ask of them. When my sons are grown up, I
would ask you, O my friends, to punish them; and I would have you
trouble them, as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about
riches, or anything, more than about virtue; or if they pretend to be
something when they are really nothing - then rebuke them, as I have
rebuked you, for not caring about that for which they ought to care
and for thinking that they are something, when they are really
nothing. And if you do this, I and my sons will have received justice
at your hands.
The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways - I to die, and
you to live. Which is better God only knows."
Take Care,
V (Male)
Agnostic Freethinker
Practical Philosopher
For free access to my earlier posts on voluntary simplicity,
the opinion, recommendation or belief of any group or organization.
Mark K. Bilbo
2007-06-21 14:23:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by V
Every atheist serves two Gods
Nope.
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"Behold the foul stench of Skeletor's breakfast burrito!"
Loading...