Evidence for "God consciousness" (charity, blessing, choice, meaning)

[GldnRule]

Originally Posted by AREQUIPA

Your 'set to winning combinations' is just your assumption. What's more your dice game is not the only one in town. What's more, if any of those games throw a winning combination that means every one of your 'set to win' combinations loses.

Your ghastly flawed analogy displays who is ignorant.

Yeah, the "loaded dice" wasn't my best stuff. It had been a long night with lots of pervert customers, that, though I have to be nice to them because they are giving me money...it aggravates me to do so. I say, "thanks, hope you enjoyed the show, see ya soon", when I really want to say, "what a chump you are, hope you get a life soon". So the dice thing was the best annoying thing I could think of "off the cuff" at the time...to give myself a laugh. I will try my hardest to do better.

BTW AREQUIPA, thanks for the "ghastly flawed analogy" and "ignorant" proclamations. It shows the post was at least that effective.

Oh well, gotta get it in gear to do it all over again...but it's all good--It's been a good "end of week" (thurs, fri, sat) so far...and I'm donating the proceeds to one of my favorite charities. Hope tonight is as good as last night. LATER!

[AREQUIPA]

Originally Posted by GldnRule

Yeah, the "loaded dice" wasn't my best stuff. It had been a long night with lots of pervert customers, that, though I have to be nice to them because they are giving me money...it aggravates me to do so. I say, "thanks, hope you enjoyed the show, see ya soon", when I really want to say, "what a chump you are, hope you get a life soon". So the dice thing was the best annoying thing I could think of "off the cuff" at the time...to give myself a laugh. I will try my hardest to do better.

BTW AREQUIPA, thanks for the "ghastly flawed analogy" and "ignorant" proclamations. It shows the post was at least that effective.

Oh well, gotta get it in gear to do it all over again...but it's all good--It's been a good "end of week" (thurs, fri, sat) so far...and I'm donating the proceeds to one of my favorite charities. Hope tonight is as good as last night. LATER!

Well, spoken like a gentleman and I apologise for the 'ignorant' remark. We all have late nights.

Bottom line is that logic, reason and evidence is the touchstone and Faith proclamations and logical fallacies do raise my ire.

I'm most willing to start over but I do require that logic, reason and evidence is the platform for any meaningful discussion. Otherwise I just leave Faith to the faithful.

[KCfromNC]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

KC . . . you are worse than Errorquipa when it comes to not reading MY views carefully and lumping them in with all the others you are arguing with.

I guess I'll add "mocking people's names" to the list of requirements for getting a PhD in the humanities. Perhaps that takes the place of "understanding and using science" in the curriculum.

1. What is empirically undeniable and is more than sufficient to qualify for Godhood (controlling Source of it ALL) resident in the universal field that establishes our reality. and

I've waited and waited through this whole thread and there's still nothing more than just empty assertions here. I'm sure you've just been waiting for the right time to post references all of this alleged scientific evidence.

[ChristyGrl]

Originally Posted by KCfromNC

I guess I'll add "mocking people's names" to the list of requirements for getting a PhD in the humanities. Perhaps that takes the place of "understanding and using science" in the curriculum.



I've waited and waited through this whole thread and there's still nothing more than just empty assertions here. I'm sure you've just been waiting for the right time to post references all of this alleged scientific evidence.

And you will continue waiting with the rest of us because THERE IS NONE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER...IT IS STILL ALL PURE SPECULATION AND CONJECTURE AT THIS POINT IN TIME!

We are told, according to Mystic, that we can emperically infer, from all the unknown (at this time) things that go on around us and in the universe, that the UNKNOWN SOURCE OF IT ALL is God.

We know one thing for CERTAIN about the UNKNOWN SOURCE OF IT ALL....IT IS STILL UNKNOWN and calling it God doesn't change that FACT! Whether we INDIVIDUALLY call it God, Nature, The Unknown Source, Casper the Ghost or the Flying Spaghetti Monster...THE FACT REMAINS...THE SOURCE IS STILL UNKNOWN.

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by KCfromNC

I guess I'll add "mocking people's names" to the list of requirements for getting a PhD in the humanities. Perhaps that takes the place of "understanding and using science" in the curriculum.

I told you . . . I respond in kind . . . or did you miss Arequipa's Mystake references to me.

I've waited and waited through this whole thread and there's still nothing more than just empty assertions here. I'm sure you've just been waiting for the right time to post references all of this alleged scientific evidence.

You keep looking for the wrong thing . . . there is sufficient scientific evidence of the attributes of your "Nature", Universe . . . or whatever to qualify as A God for our puny race of cosmic microbes. Christy asked for why I BELIEVE the consciousness I encounter in deep meditation is God . . . and why I chose Christ as the likely source available to us humans in our consciousnesses . . . out of all the legends, myths, etc. about God. That represents 3 decades + of study since my "epiphany."

I engaged in personal subjective "experiments" (using as scientific a process as is achievable subjectively) as I gained more control over the experiences. I also reasoned that if our physical characteristics evolved in response to DNA changes . . . why wouldn't our spiritual (conscious cognitive) concepts do likewise as the DNA affected the nervous system protein fold-ups. I began a spiritual archeological research using the recorded history, oral traditions, legends, myths, etc. produced by those ancient minds as the "spiritual fossils" revealing that evolution. I had a pretty good start in the research that originally led me to Buddhism 18 years earlier.

Presenting a cogent summary at a level that is accessible to as many as possible of the audience here is no small feat. But . . . Gldnrule and Christy seem sincerely interested in at least an over view. The rest of the mockers, ridiculers, and skeptics can . . .

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by ChristyGrl

And you will continue waiting with the rest of us because THERE IS NONE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER...IT IS STILL ALL PURE SPECULATION AND CONJECTURE AT THIS POINT IN TIME!

We are told, according to Mystic, that we can emperically infer, from all the unknown (at this time) things that go on around us and in the universe, that the UNKNOWN SOURCE OF IT ALL is God.

We know one thing for CERTAIN about the UNKNOWN SOURCE OF IT ALL....IT IS STILL UNKNOWN and calling it God doesn't change that FACT! Whether we INDIVIDUALLY call it God, Nature, The Unknown Source, Casper the Ghost or the Flying Spaghetti Monster...THE FACT REMAINS...THE SOURCE IS STILL UNKNOWN.

I guess my evaluation of ChristyGrl was as flawed as that of old_cold. Nevermind. I'm too old and it requires too much work to assemble the pearls.

[old_cold]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

I guess my evaluation of ChristyGrl was as flawed as that of old_cold. Nevermind. I'm too old and it requires too much work to assemble the pearls.

Hummmm....I know I am not educated, nor do I have good debating skills and I wonder if that made it look like I just might not be discerning enough to not be easily persuaded to your viewpoint.
I'm gonna have to ponder this for awhile to see whether or not I think I've been insulted or if I should congratulate myself for being pretty smart sans the book learnin'.

[ChristyGrl]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

I guess my evaluation of ChristyGrl was as flawed as that of old_cold. Nevermind. I'm too old and it requires too much work to assemble the pearls.

Look, name calling is uncalled for and completely unnecessary IMHO.

Furthermore, I stand by what I said. We know one thing for CERTAIN about the UNKNOWN SOURCE OF IT ALL....IT IS STILL UNKNOWN and calling it God doesn't change that FACT!

You said:
". . . there is sufficient scientific evidence of the attributes of your "Nature", Universe . . . or whatever to qualify as A God for our puny race of cosmic microbes."

Just because something that, is completely unknown at this time, may qualify as A God (and this is using our definition about what a god is) doesn't mean that it, in fact, is....don't you see that??? It is pure speculation and conjecture on your part to definitively state that it IS GOD when, IN FACT, we haven't the slightest idea EXACTLY WHAT "IT" IS! THE SOURCE IS STILL UNKNOWN!!!

You said:
"I engaged in personal subjective "experiments" (using as scientific a process as is achievable subjectively) as I gained more control over the experiences. I also reasoned that if our physical characteristics evolved in response to DNA changes . . . why wouldn't our spiritual (conscious cognitive) concepts do likewise as the DNA affected the nervous system protein fold-ups. I began a spiritual archeological research using the recorded history, oral traditions, legends, myths, etc. produced by those ancient minds as the "spiritual fossils" revealing that evolution. I had a pretty good start in the research that originally led me to Buddhism 18 years earlier."

Your revelations are personal and subjective....they are not scientific evidence nor are they PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACTS...they are purely your beliefs about what you experienced, your speculations about what you experienced, your conjectures about what you experienced and while I am convinced that you honestly believe and are convinced in your own mind about what you are saying...there is still NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT OR PROVE THAT THE UNKNOWN SOURCE OF ALL IS, IN FACT, GOD....you simply cannot deny this.

I feel extremely comfortable in stating that I don't have a frackin clue what the UNKNOWN SOURCE ACTUALLY IS and I will not speculate, conjecture or label something that is UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME...I will continue to consider it and call it exactly what it is...AN UNKNOWN SOURCE.

I am confident that one day scientists will find the answers and we will all know the TRUTH about the beginning...until then, we can do nothing more than speculate about it.

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by old_cold

Hummmm....I know I am not educated, nor do I have good debating skills and I wonder if that made it look like I just might not be discerning enough to not be easily persuaded to your viewpoint.
I'm gonna have to ponder this for awhile to see whether or not I think I've been insulted or if I should congratulate myself for being pretty smart sans the book learnin'.

No insult to you, old_cold . . . just poor phrasing. I was referring to my belief that I made a mistake in judging your sincerity and objectivity. Sorry old friend. Education is not as important as agape love anyway.

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by ChristyGrl

Look, name calling is uncalled for and completely unnecessary IMHO.

Furthermore, I stand by what I said. We know one thing for CERTAIN about the UNKNOWN SOURCE OF IT ALL....IT IS STILL UNKNOWN and calling it God doesn't change that FACT!

You said:
". . . there is sufficient scientific evidence of the attributes of your "Nature", Universe . . . or whatever to qualify as A God for our puny race of cosmic microbes."

Just because something that, is completely unknown at this time, may qualify as A God (and this is using our definition about what a god is) doesn't mean that it, in fact, is....don't you see that??? It is pure speculation and conjecture on your part to definitively state that it IS GOD when, IN FACT, we haven't the slightest idea EXACTLY WHAT "IT" IS! THE SOURCE IS STILL UNKNOWN!!!

You said:
"I engaged in personal subjective "experiments" (using as scientific a process as is achievable subjectively) as I gained more control over the experiences. I also reasoned that if our physical characteristics evolved in response to DNA changes . . . why wouldn't our spiritual (conscious cognitive) concepts do likewise as the DNA affected the nervous system protein fold-ups. I began a spiritual archeological research using the recorded history, oral traditions, legends, myths, etc. produced by those ancient minds as the "spiritual fossils" revealing that evolution. I had a pretty good start in the research that originally led me to Buddhism 18 years earlier."

Your revelations are personal and subjective....they are not scientific evidence nor are they PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACTS...they are purely your beliefs about what you experienced, your speculations about what you experienced, your conjectures about what you experienced and while I am convinced that you honestly believe and are convinced in your own mind about what you are saying...there is still NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT OR PROVE THAT THE UNKNOWN SOURCE OF ALL IS, IN FACT, GOD....you simply cannot deny this.

I feel extremely comfortable in stating that I don't have a frackin clue what the UNKNOWN SOURCE ACTUALLY IS and I will not speculate, conjecture or label something that is UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME...I will continue to consider it and call it exactly what it is...AN UNKNOWN SOURCE.

I am confident that one day scientists will find the answers and we will all know the TRUTH about the beginning...until then, we can do nothing more than speculate about it.

Ridicule gets response in kind. The speculation I engage in is akin to scientific hypotheses based on known factors projected into the unknown as PLAUSIBLE explanations. It is done all the time. The speculations you mockingly compare them to . . . Casper the Ghost, FSM, Fairies, etc. have no such grounding in reality. As I said . . . nevermind. I maintain my belief that I misjudged you.