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.
It is neither established fact nor well-known because we have no way of knowing when any such thing occurs.
Or indeed, whether. Make a case for a soul or spirit being anything but a cumulative mental effect detectable in animals right back to the near -chemical instinctive reactions of slugs or houseflies, and then maybe we can consider the 'when'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule
...
By the way...you acknowledge the Soul/Spirit of Jesus...every time you write the date.
You like facts? Dig THAT one!
That old chestnut? The 'common era' through a historical event (Christianity rather than Mithraism, Isis worship or the Mysteries becoming the state religion of Rome) does not a single solitary thing to validate the religion as true, never mind the reality of the Jesus of the Bible, and is nothing to do with the case for a soul or spirit.
In fact, as I so often detect is the case with you, I am sure that you know it's hardly an argument at all but a rhetorical trick, done more to amuse yourself than to make a case.
And why is it STILL that way TWO THOUSAND years later?
This will help you understand: Beacons of the Past: Napoleon Bonaparte's Empire vs. Christ's:
By the way...you acknowledge the Soul/Spirit of Jesus...every time you write the date.
You like facts? Dig THAT one!
Don’t give it the slightest consideration at all. Because it is irrelevant. There have been many calendars and the one we are under was the one which “stuck”. When the dopey acolyte picked his boss’s birthday, which he got wrong, it wasn’t the year 1 in North America. Or Japan. Or many other places. You are wed to trivia. Dig that hippie mystic!
The approach of looking at the soul/rebirth from metaphoric or looking at what explanation would fit why people are misunderstanding a soul thing at least works.
I think it works far better than denying it out of hand because the evidence is actually there. People can point to it. That is a right power piece of evidence. People are just misreading what is there.
When I repeat the words and and actions of my father and his father they live on a little bit. That is ok because we really are defined by our words and actions.
Ib fact, as we slide the amounts of words and actions of them that I do; the more they lives on. If I keep sliding the scale to the point that I am only doing what he is did then I basically am them.
That approach is sound and it is also why some people incorrectly think rebirth.
The approach of looking at the soul/rebirth from metaphoric or looking at what explanation would fit why people are misunderstanding a soul thing at least works. I think it works far better than denying it out of hand because the evidence is actually there. People can point to it. That is a right power piece of evidence. People are just misreading what is there. When I repeat the words and and actions of my father and his father they live on a little bit. That is ok because we really are defined by our words and actions. Ib fact, as we slide the amounts of words and actions of them that I do; the more they lives on. If I keep sliding the scale to the point that I am only doing what he is did then I basically am them. That approach is sound and it is also why some people incorrectly think rebirth.
it is not a sound or accurate approach to claim
"people are misunderstanding"
"people are misreading what is there"
"people incorrectly think"
it is rational and logical and reasonable to express your own understanding, your own views, your own beliefs and opinions. when you speak for yourself, it is accurate. however when you wander and crash into the area of claiming that "people are misunderstanding" "people incorrectly think" and "people are misreading" it is not logical, accurate, or rational.
regarding the view "defined by our words and actions" that may be how you define a soul. However that is misreading and misunderstanding and incorrect regarding the soul in terms of many paths of religion and spirituality. you can claim any definition you want for any word and my observation is you do that freely. you can not however paste it upon others and then claim they are "misreading and misunderstanding and incorrectly thinking" for holding different views. that approach is not sound.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-01-2021 at 06:28 AM..
it is not a sound or accurate approach to claim
"people are misunderstanding"
"people are misreading what is there"
"people incorrectly think"
it is rational and logical and reasonable to express your own understanding, your own views, your own beliefs and opinions. when you speak for yourself, it is accurate. however when you wander and crash into the area of claiming that "people are misunderstanding" "people incorrectly think" and "people are misreading" it is not logical, accurate, or rational.
regarding the view "defined by our words and actions" that may be how you define a soul. However that is misreading and misunderstanding and incorrect regarding the soul in terms of many paths of religion and spirituality. you can claim any definition you want for any word and my observation is you do that freely. you can not however paste it upon others and then claim they are "misreading and misunderstanding and incorrectly thinking" for holding different views. that approach is not sound.
I disagree.
I think you guys are seeing people personality traits repeating and it is incorrectly thought of a s a soul or rebirth/reincarnation.
I also think the best way we have to teach people what claims are less reliable and what ones are more reliable is to put claims right next to each other and, far more importantly, process the the "why's" we are saying what we say right next to each other.
That being said, I can make a case for the a soul using the standard model. You might want what to try that. I learned how you process information you might want to learn how others process information.
I disagree. I think you guys are seeing people personality traits repeating and it is incorrectly thought of a s a soul or rebirth/reincarnation.I also think the best way we have to teach people what claims are less reliable and what ones are more reliable is to put claims right next to each other and, far more importantly, process the the "why's" we are saying what we say right next to each other.That being said, I can make a case for the a soul using the standard model. You might want what to try that. I learned how you process information you might want to learn how others process information.
your views are your views. just that and nothing more. i acknowledge there are other views.
without the insistence on telling others they are wrong, incorrect, misunderstanding.
here's the difference:
level playing field, many views, different ways of understanding, many paths of religion and spirituality. all sit at the table of freedom of religion. listening. tolerance of different views. focus internal on self. respect and dignity that others can think for themself.
instead of
hierarchy. better than. superior to. insistence on being right and telling others they are wrong. claims of superiority and supremacy. proselytizing. talking at. intolerance for different views. focus external on others "you guys are seeing" claims to know what is best for others.
it sounds like you yourself equate "soul" with "personality traits."
most paths of religion and spirituality do not. They do not confuse or conflate the two.
I disagree with your claim that you "learned how you process information." the views expressed in your posts indicate that is profoundly not the case.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 01-01-2021 at 07:29 AM..
your views are your views. just that and nothing more. i acknowledge there are other views.
without the insistence on telling others they are wrong, incorrect, misunderstanding.
here's the difference:
level playing field, many views, different ways of understanding, many paths of religion and spirituality. all sit at the table of freedom of religion. listening. tolerance of different views.
instead of
hierarchy. better than. superior to. insistence on being right and telling others they are wrong. claims of superiority and supremacy. proselytizing. talking at. intolerance for different views.
you are exactly right. I tell people that. My views are my views and tzaph's views are tzaph's views.
I then ask them "how do we sort through all the views?" The one thing I tell people is listen to how they address other people's beliefs. That is an indicator of agendas and intentions.
Do they want to ...
compare the claims and why's side by side?
deem some beliefs irrelevant and ban them from talking about them?
do they say "you don't understand the path."
look at how people defend their position. Open and honest people take on all challengers in the exact same manor. Open, using all the facts, looking at all the ways, all the beliefs, and honestly.
above all else ... they hold themselves to the same standards. They police their own first.
No, we are acknowledging the belief of Dionysius Exiguus. Fictional characters do not have souls.
The Soul/Spirit of Jesus compels you!!
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.
That old chestnut? The 'common era' through a historical event (Christianity rather than Mithraism, Isis worship or the Mysteries becoming the state religion of Rome) does not a single solitary thing to validate the religion as true, never mind the reality of the Jesus of the Bible, and is nothing to do with the case for a soul or spirit.
