Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-08-2018, 05:54 PM
 
63,494 posts, read 39,783,865 times
Reputation: 7807

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
but you did say that. see post 2271. you said that it is morally degenerate to kill animals and eat them as part of religion. if that is the case then it is morally degenerate to kill animals and eat them for any reason.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of your stance, the double standard. same with nate's post. according to him a tribe can kill animals and do ceremony of thanks and blessing, but a religion can not. I am pointing out the double standard. again.
He did not say anything of the kind. His focus was on killing innocent animals to magically appease God. There is no double standard simply continued ad hominems against me, Nate and Gaylen for calling out the pernicious and savage primitive practice of killing innocent animals thinking it would magically appease our loving God for ANYTHING.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
If the sacrificed animals are eaten, then I have no problem with it. This whole thing is probably my fault. I was thinking of animal sacrifice as a sheer waste of the animal, so I was thinking of it in the same category as trophy-hunting or killing for fun, but I'm probably wrong about that. I don't know anything about the details of animal sacrifice. I probably should have researched that topic before complaining about animal sacrifice. I apologize if my jumping to conclusions has created unnecessary confusion.
You have no need to apologize, Tzaph's ad hominems against you are defensive distractions, evasions, and misrepresentations of the actual issue which remains magical thinking about a savage practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift View Post
MORE shameless evasions: the original comparison is from YOUR post and you continue it in THIS post. A dietary decision has nothing to do with the magical thinking of animal sacrifice.
Amen!

 
Old 01-08-2018, 11:46 PM
 
21,955 posts, read 19,080,264 times
Reputation: 18067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
True. But the fact that lots of people believe X does not make X true.
....
or it could mean billions of people recognize something that you do not.

except....you do recognize it.
by your own admission, you pray and it enhances your life for the better.
 
Old 01-09-2018, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Kent, Ohio
3,429 posts, read 2,719,596 times
Reputation: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
and guess what? billions of people do recognize and acknowledge and understand that there is a gardener and there is design and yes that the world is unfolding with exquisite planning and magnificent Divine Providence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
True. But the fact that lots of people believe X does not make X true. Practically everyone thought that the sun and stars revolved around the Earth before Copernicus showed otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
or it could mean billions of people recognize something that you do not.

except....you do recognize it.
by your own admission, you pray and it enhances your life for the better.
I do not recognize detailed planning and design, but I do grant that it is logically possible, so it is possible that, as you say, I am simply failing to see what others see. But it is also possible that the billions who believe in a divine designer with a perfect plan are simply wrong. We know enough about the origins of order, and we know enough about the elements of the physical world, to say with confidence that we don't necessarily need to posit a Grand Designer in order to understand the existence of living systems. Intelligent Design is a possibility, but it is not a good scientific explanation. Most evidence suggests that Reality is a messy natural growth process with an indeterminate future, rather than a precisely-planned design leading to the inevitable fulfillment of a Divine Intellect's wishes.

What I do recognize is that the subjective nature of qualitative experience is currently a mystery to science, and I believe that part of the "explanation" for consciousness is going to include some acknowledgement that at least the potential for subjectivity is fundamental to existence (i.e., it is "brute-fact-like" and thus not explainable in "more fundamental" terms). Hence my tendency to employ a "sleeping mind" analogy when trying to posit some initial premises out of which explanations for everything else can be built. (The overall design of any logical argument or theory is such that one posits certain brute facts as "givens" and then shows how other facts can be logically derived from the brute facts.) Also, for various reasons I've tried to explain in other threads, I think that Reality (in a holistic sense) is actually the only "experiencer". The brain-like parts of Reality are not ontologically isolated experiencers (i.e., their essence is "shared/universal" not "self-contained particulars"). Instead of "parts experiencing reality" it is more like "Reality experience Itself from the various perspectives of its parts". These parts are, to a great extent, epistemologically isolated (hence the feeling of being isolated particulars) but ontologically (i.e., in term of their fundamental essence) they are One.

I believe you mentioned the Akashic Records at some point in this thread (am I right?). I don't know how familiar you are with the historical roots of this concept, but - for Westerners - the term 'Akashic Records' came into our vocabulary primarily through Theosophists in the 1800s as they worked to translate ancient Esoteric Buddhist ideas into terms that Westerners could appreciate. Of course you have a host of non-physical spiritual beings (spirit guides, Lords of the Records, loved ones, etc.) and the notion of reincarnation through innumerable worlds and lifetimes, but at the core of everything is the One - the Unity of all Being. Separateness/particularity is, in some sense, a sort of illusion. I often describe my own philosophy as "Sorta like Buddhism" because I share with Buddhism this concept of the Subjective Unity of Being which, via the lingo of analytic philosophy, I translate into the "Self as an Aristotelian universal." The One is brute-fact/fundamentally subjective and is the ultimate "Experiencer" at the ontological core of every experience ever experienced by any being. I avoid the word "God" because too many people immediately translate that word into an Intelligent Designer with a detailed plan for everything, I and don't believe that the Buddhist Subjective Unity implies any such thing. Maybe Being has some precise plan for all of its future experiences, but I really don't believe so. To quote Aerosmith ( ) "Life's a journey, not a destination."
 
Old 01-09-2018, 05:29 PM
 
21,955 posts, read 19,080,264 times
Reputation: 18067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
I do not recognize detailed planning and design, but I do grant that it is logically possible, so it is possible that, as you say, I am simply failing to see what others see. But it is also possible that the billions who believe in a divine designer with a perfect plan are simply wrong. We know enough about the origins of order, and we know enough about the elements of the physical world, to say with confidence that we don't necessarily needto posit a Grand Designer in order to understand the existence of living systems. Intelligent Design is a possibility, but it is not a good scientific explanation. Most evidence suggests that Reality is a messy natural growth process with an indeterminate future, rather than a precisely-planned design leading to the inevitable fulfillment of a Divine Intellect's wishes....."
Just because the system is planned, designed, created, and functions with intelligent design, does not mean everything that happens within the system is pre-determined. The determining factor in what unfolds in our life is how we choose to use our free will in responding to the situations we are presented with.

with regards to "perfect plan" there is perfection in how the system is planned and designed. There is planning in terms of what unfolds in the circumstances of our life. Again the outcome or "what we do with it" is not predetermined. That is determined by how we use our free will, the choices we make. That includes both the choices we make before we are born in setting up the circumstances and situations in our current lifetime. And the choices we make during our lifetime in how we respond to whatever we face each day in our life.

so the Grand Designer of our own life is us. It is a precisely-planned design in the sense of you setting up situations for this lifetime prior to incarnating in this life.

is the future indeterminate? yes. our life is shaped and "determined" by the choices we make with regards to how we use our thought, speech, action, and feelings as we go through our daily life. And how we respond to what we face. That is why free will is so powerful.

when you say the inevitable fulfillment of a Divine Intellect's wishes I'm not sure what you mean. What does the Divine Intellect wish for us? A high quality of life. To that end, the Divine is constantly pouring forth all manner of abundance, blessings, treasure, and delight. The extent to which we are able to receive that (and not push it away or obstruct it) is determined by how we use our free will, how well we understand how the system works and the extent to which we choose to do the right thing.

I'm curious and intrigued that you would use the word "messy" and I would like to hear more what that connotes for you. Do you mean random and chaotic? Do you mean without apparent meaning or purpose? Do you mean inconsistent or unpredictable? if there was more understanding about "why" something was happening, or "what" it was about, would that make it less messy? If you knew more of what was going on behind the scenes would it be less messy?

[for instance my observation of Mystic's use of the word "magic" seems to connote things that he does not understand and does not like, does not approve of, and has disdain for. often atheists of that stripe use the word "woo" in the same way, as a pejorative.]

Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-09-2018 at 06:51 PM..
 
Old 01-09-2018, 06:58 PM
 
21,955 posts, read 19,080,264 times
Reputation: 18067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
..Maybe Being has some precise plan for all of its future experiences, but I really don't believe so. To quote Aerosmith .... "Life's a journey, not a destination."
It is not determined by Being, it is determined by you. You shape what happens. Do you have any "plans at all for any future experiences?" Do you ever make plans of any kind or do you just drift along with whatever from one day to the next? Do you consciously have any type of intentions or yearning or desires in your life? How willing are you to participate in the process consciously? How appealing is it? Being loves you no matter what and takes delight in you no matter what and holds you dear and close and utterly safe and protected no matter what. It is about you becoming a conscious Creator (that's what made in His image is), for you to create like Being does, honing your awareness and skills and putting them into practice with intention and attention.
 
Old 01-10-2018, 07:33 AM
 
21,955 posts, read 19,080,264 times
Reputation: 18067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
...we know enough about the elements of the physical world, to say with confidence that we don't necessarily need to posit a Grand Designer in order to understand the existence of living systems. Intelligent Design is a possibility, but it is not a good scientific explanation. Most evidence suggests that Reality is a messy natural growth process with an indeterminate future, rather than a precisely-planned design leading to the inevitable fulfillment of a Divine Intellect's wishes.
You or science can weigh and measure and dissect and catalog and describe a human body, a "living system." But that is not understanding anything more than the physical.

The physical (world, body, item, system) is the most superficial aspect of anything. Superficial as in on the surface and not going deeper.

A human is more than the physical. A living system is more than the physical. It is the non physical as well. And if a person ignores or dismisses the non physical then their understanding of anything (a person a human a world a relationship a problem a living system) remains very superficial.

You will never have "a good explanation" for anything beyond the most superficial unless and until the non physical is included and addressed as well. That is the limitation of "scientific evidence."


The physical anything is the end result. What comes before it is what creates it and that is the non physical. Thought speech yearning desire ideas feeling inspiration intention.

The non physical gives rise to the physical. Always. The physical is an oupicturing of the non physical. For better or worse.

Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-10-2018 at 08:03 AM..
 
Old 01-10-2018, 08:47 AM
 
Location: Kent, Ohio
3,429 posts, read 2,719,596 times
Reputation: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
I'm curious and intrigued that you would use the word "messy" and I would like to hear more what that connotes for you. Do you mean random and chaotic? Do you mean without apparent meaning or purpose? Do you mean inconsistent or unpredictable? if there was more understanding about "why" something was happening, or "what" it was about, would that make it less messy? If you knew more of what was going on behind the scenes would it be less messy?
What I mean by 'messy' is this: Events that were not intended (or planned, or specifically anticipated) by any conscious being. Basically beyond the detailed control of any conscious mind. I suspect that these "messy" events were unanticipated because, as a matter of principle, they could not possibly have been anticipated. And if certain "messy" events were anticipated to some degree (perhaps recognized as a possibility at some point), conscious minds (or, at least, intelligent/loving conscious minds) struggled to prevent them with some risk of genuine failure. By "genuine" failure or a "genuine" tragedy, I mean a failure/tragedy that was not purposefully dealt to beings in order to "teach them a lesson" or "help them grow/evolve", etc. so that, ultimately, everything comes out ok. Again, what made the event "messy" was that is was not intended. It might be more or less successfully dealt with after the fact, but it was never specifically intended.

Concerning the notion of "dealing with" messy events: If there is a high-level Divine Intelligence with a God's-eye view of all Reality, then maybe this Intelligence is so good at making lemonade out of lemons that it simply never fails to turn tragedies, no matter how devastating, into "teachable moments" or opportunities for growth. Indeed, this job doesn't even have to fall on a Divine High-level Intelligence. It is possible that human minds just naturally have this capacity, and that some people are able to use this capacity to the fullest. Indeed, I believe that this is, in fact, a capacity of humanity-as-a-whole. No matter how bad things get, there is a basic capacity for humanity to recover and, in the process, identify some good that came out of it. But this does not mean that the suffering was intentionally created or allowed as part of some master plan.

Example:
A child suffers 3rd-degree burns over 80% of her body, suffers for years until, as a young adult, she eventually commits suicide.

I think it is horrendously misguided to blame this tragedy on past-life karma, as if she somehow "deserved" this or "brought it upon herself" due to actions in another life. I would love to be wrong about this. I'd really like to believe that horrible things have these kinds of satisfying explanations, but to really believe this, I think I'd have to engage in some self-deception and pretend that somehow everything is really ok when, deep down, I suspect that it is not. I can accept the possibility that past-life karma works this way, and I can genuinely hope that it works this way, but to say that I fully and truly believe it would be a lie. To be fully honest with myself, I have to admit that I am agnostic on the issue of past-life karma explaining a tragedy of this sort. I can hope that it does, but I can't honestly say that I fully believe that it does.

Just for the record: For various reasons, I have enough confidence in the idea that Reality is an infinite (or FAPP infinite) multiverse, and high enough confidence in my arguments for the "self as an Aristotelian universal" (aka, something sorta like the Buddhist "Oneness of Being") so that, I think I can honestly say I "believe" these things. I can't say that I have 100% confidence in these ideas, but my confidence is high enough that I would literally "bet my life" on these things being true, if I were given the opportunity to place such a bet. For me, confidence that high translates into "belief". My confidence in past-life karma is not that high, so I can't honestly say that I believe in it.

But, as I see it, the multiverse/Oneness combo pack offers some profound avenues for hope that, in the long run, there can potentially be a sort of "spiritual evolution" that, really, ends up being very similar to the idea of a multitude of incarnations leading Nirvana and thus, in some sense, things are ultimately destined to be "ok", in a manner of speaking. The girl with the burned body probably lives a vast multitude of lives, and most of them are not tragic so, on balance, IF there is some perspective from which "she" can reminisce over her many lives she could feel that, on the whole, she did ok. But here is the crucial point: The life in which she was burned did not happen because she "needed to have that experience" for some higher purpose. We have the capacity to overcome tragedies and make lemonade, but that is not why tragedies happen. No. Tragedies happen because Existence is a messy business.

We are resilient; we have the capacity to deal with tragic events and find some way to make lemonade. I suspect that we evolved this capacity because, otherwise, humanity might have simply become a failed species. Retrospectively, we can say that we owe our lives to certain challenges, but that's not really why the challenges happened. Maybe the burned girl's tragedy prompted some consumer-protection legislation that ultimately saved lives, and one of the saved lives turns out to be a Nobel Peace prize winner who prevents WWIII. That's great. But that's not why it happened, and that end result was not inevitable. There was genuine risk that the net effect of the tragedy could have been more pain and suffering than it was ever "worth" in terms of positive good stemming from it.

Addendum: Relating to the Christian theme of this thread, I doubt that Jesus was "sent" to Earth to ultimately die on the cross and be a savior. In retrospect - as part of the "lemonade-making" process - billions of people have seemingly benefited from the teachings and death of Jesus, but I suspect that his death was really a "mess" that people have turned into a narrative of hope - a mythology, in the Jung/Campbell sense of the term - that has proven helpful to them.

Last edited by Gaylenwoof; 01-10-2018 at 09:08 AM..
 
Old 01-10-2018, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Kent, Ohio
3,429 posts, read 2,719,596 times
Reputation: 1667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
The physical anything is the end result. What comes before it is what creates it and that is the non physical. Thought speech yearning desire ideas feeling inspiration intention.

The non physical gives rise to the physical. Always. The physical is an oupicturing of the non physical. For better or worse.
IF this is true, then fine. You are right and I am wrong. But I cannot in good conscience say that I believe it is true. On the contrary, I see almost overwhelming evidence and lots of good reasons for thinking that desires, feelings, inspiration, and intentions essentially are physical processes (so long as we understand the concept of "physical" in such a way that there can be "something it is like to be" a physical entity.) These qualitative aspects of the physical need not be conceived as "non-physical"; they can be understood (better, in my view) as subjective aspects of physical beings, which is to say, they are aspects of physical beings that cannot be fully characterized in purely objective/quantitative terms. Subjective/qualitative terms are necessary for full comprehension/explanation, but so are the natural laws discovered by science.

To understand something like, say, desire, one needs to understand BOTH the subjective and objective dimensions. We can learn things about desire by studying the physical aspects of desire - things that we would have never learned without studying the physical dimensions. But, just as you don't have the cat's smile without the cat, you don't have desire without the physical being who experiences the desire. The science is extremely strong on this point. And, as I've argued in other threads, even if we fully accept the seemingly most powerful evidence against the physicality of mental states (i.e., psi-phenomena such as clairvoyance, past-life memories, psychokinesis, telepathy, NDEs, prayers answered, etc.), none of these things are completely inexplicable in physical terms. These phenomena, if fully verified, would requires some radical adjustment to scientific theories, but they would not necessarily imply that something like desire is non-physical.

I know that you will see this as mere stubbornness or perhaps a sort of blindness on my part, but from my perspective there are some powerful reasons to believe that "desire" does not occur without the natural laws of physics, chemistry, and biology playing some major role.
 
Old 01-10-2018, 11:31 AM
 
21,955 posts, read 19,080,264 times
Reputation: 18067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof View Post
...I think it is horrendously misguided to blame this tragedy on past-life karma, as if she somehow "deserved" this or "brought it upon herself" due to actions in another life. I would love to be wrong about this. I'd really like to believe that horrible things have these kinds of satisfying explanations, but to really believe this, I think I'd have to engage in some self-deception and pretend that somehow everything is really ok when, deep down, I suspect that it is not.....
the words and attitude you use of "blame" "deserved this" and "brought it upon herself" are not kind or loving. They are harsh and punitive and mean. Those are human beliefs, human thoughts, human attitudes. That is not the nature of a loving human, and that is not the nature of a loving Divine Being, nor is it the nature of reincarnation.

When tragedy happens, at the human level we would never speak or use the harsh horrible phrases you used, blaming them, they deserved it, she brought it upon herself. We would express kindness, compassion, sympathy, support, for both the injured girl, and her grieving family. That is how we act as loving kind humans.

That is one level or layer of understanding, and our response to it. That is the most superficial level as in on the surface, the single isolated physical event, what it looks like and feels like to her and her family and you as an observer.

But in trying to understand the event at a deeper level, we have to be willing and able to look beyond that. Are you able to hold and see and explore an event at not just the "physical" level that presents itself, but beyond that?

Can you hear the difference between the terms you used (blame deserved this brought it upon herself) in comparison to "chose to" "made a choice" "outcome" "consequences." Can you hear and feel the difference between a "victim" mentality of "bad things happen to me;" and a high level of personal responsibility and choice. There is choice at the soul level; and there is choice at the human personality level. And we would never say to anyone else regarding a tragedy they chose to have it happen. It is a framework we use internally within our own understanding.

If you only are able to view the event at one level, then your understanding of it remains superficial.

At the core of Oneness is only goodness, blessing, love, kindness, compassion. Always has been. Always will be. Those are also at the core of every event and situation and circumstance in our lives.

Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-10-2018 at 11:54 AM..
 
Old 01-10-2018, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
17,071 posts, read 10,860,314 times
Reputation: 1870
As if Gaylenwoof were espousing those ideas and descriptions. Why do people wonder about your methods? There you go.


Maybe it's just a problem with reading comprehension, but I'd have to say it is thoughtless REaction.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:58 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top