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.
Aha! You revert back to using "God" as synonymous with "God consciousness"! Caught you.
Yeeeeeeees, Mystic has said a hundred times what he PERSONALLY experienced in meditation made him fully aware of God as a conscious entity. That is now his certain BELIEF.
Nevertheless, his BELIEFS aren't necessary to show sufficient evidence to irrefutably demonstrate the existence of God.
Do you actually read and understand his posts?...Ummmm, of course you do, you're just being your usual obstinate self.
That is only true about our human KNOWLEDGE!!! Sheesh. I am beginning to think I should just give up on you completely, HundredTwentyEighth.
So, you're saying that extant science is evidence of things beyond knowable (i.e. (B)). Ok, in other words it's evidence of something inscrutable that can't be defined and therefore is meaningless.
Yeeeeeeees, Mystic has said a hundred times what he PERSONALLY experienced in meditation made him fully aware of God as a conscious entity. That is now his certain BELIEF.
Nevertheless, his BELIEFS aren't necessary to show sufficient evidence to irrefutably demonstrate the existence of God.
Do you actually read and understand his posts?...Ummmm, of course you do, you're just being your usual obstinate self.
Using "God" synonymously with "God consciousness" means he is defining "God" as "God consciousness" in that post. If his definitions were consistent, then when he says "evidence of God" he would mean "evidence of God consciousness". The fact that he denies that that's what he means, shows the exploitation of the ambiguity he's been creating in order to create sophistry instead of rational arguments.
Again.. you told me "God is everything there is", that would include the tracks. A deer is not "all there is", which is where your analogy falls apart.
You really have problems. Are you at all capable of "non-literal" thinking or are you analogy challenged as well. The complete entity (all there is) is A Deer in the analogy. The "tracks, sh_t and DNA" is the partial and only evidence we have of its existence. The complete entity (all there is) is A God in our investigation of God's existence. "What we know about our reality through science" is the partial and only evidence we have of God's existence. (It is NOT God . . so your tautology crap is a non-starter.) BOTH sets of partial evidence are sufficient to establish EXISTENCE . . . without having to SEE the complete entity.
So, you're saying that extant science is evidence of things beyond knowable. Ok, in other words it's evidence of something inscrutable that can't be defined and therefore is meaningless.
Wow!! You are either really thick, or you are LYAO.
Either way...I can't read any more of this. It's giving me a headache.
Mystic is a much nicer guy than me so he has more patience...if I keep reading this stuff I'm gonna say something that will probably get me bounced.
Soooooo...I'm gonna go play around with my hottie, nudie girl buddies. Bad thunderstorms tonight, so business sucks...nothing else to do but have an "office party". WooHoo!! LATER!!!
So, you're saying that extant science is evidence of things beyond knowable (i.e. (B)). Ok, in other words it's evidence of something inscrutable that can't be defined and therefore is meaningless.
No again, 256th . . . you are not distinguishing between what actually EXISTS beyond our KNOWLEDGE and what we BELIEVE about what exists beyond our knowledge. What we BELIEVE can be completely meaningless . . . but that has nothing to do with what actually does or does not exist beyond our current knowledge. You keep equating our beliefs with the underlying reality and assume if you reject one you reject the other. That is ludicrous. They are not the same thing.
Last edited by MysticPhD; 06-22-2010 at 09:14 PM..
Using "God" synonymously with "God consciousness" means he is defining "God" as "God consciousness" in that post.
The only one defining God here is YOU!!! We are talking about partial evidence for our inscrutable Creator, period. NO beliefs or any other irrelevant crap.
Ok, in other words it's evidence of something inscrutable that can't be defined and therefore is meaningless.
No again . . . you are not distinguishing between what actually EXISTS beyond our KNOWLEDGE and what we BELIEVE about what exists beyond our knowledge. What we Believe can be completely meaningless . . . but that has nothing to do with what actually does or does not exist beyond our current knowledge. You keep equating our beliefs with the underlying reality and assume if you reject one you reject the other. That is ludicrous. They are not the same thing.
Now we're getting somewhere... What if you reject both?
What would you label somebody who rejects the idea of believing something extraordinary without proof?
I do certainly hope you know that whatever knowledge you think you have about the unknown is strictly a belief. No matter how convinced you are. Until it is actually known objectively (proven), it is still a belief.
Now we're getting somewhere... What if you reject both?
You couldn't prove it to me.
Quote:
What would you label somebody who rejects the idea of believing something extraordinary without proof?
Sensible.
Quote:
I do certainly hope you know that whatever knowledge you think you have about the unknown is strictly a belief. No matter how convinced you are. Until it is actually known objectively (proven), it is still a belief.
::Sigh:: So according to you . . . the "tracks, sh_t and DNA" does not establish the EXISTENCE of a Deer . . . that is only a belief? We have to see the Deer to prove it? Are you really saying that?
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.
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.
