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.
I'm sorry, Konraden . . . I found the discussion stimulating and challenging.
MysticPhD,
The world NEEDS to have this information...there is none other like it I know of...and it's too good to confine to this forum in something other than a full, organized version. If I can be so forward as to ask...could you please take the time to put up an essay type form of what God, if He actually does go so far as to have such influence, has inspired and blessed you with. It is Truth.
I'm sorry, Konraden . . . I found the discussion stimulating and challenging.
There wasn't a discussion. When you're willing to agree that nature and God define separate and distinct concepts, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Your argument is that God and nature are equal. If this is the case, than god exists. However, God is not defined as equaling nature. God is frequently defined as creating nature, but not being nature. Let me know when you get around to accepting that.
There wasn't a discussion. When you're willing to agree that nature and God define separate and distinct concepts, we can have a meaningful discussion.
Your argument is that God and nature are equal. If this is the case, than god exists. However, God is not defined as equaling nature. God is frequently defined as creating nature, but not being nature. Let me know when you get around to accepting that.
Sorry . . . that won't happen. I know better. Peace.
Sorry . . . that won't happen. I know better. Peace.
You are obviously a very wise, truly enlightened man, and it has been a privilege to read the excerpt's of your synthesis you use in your debate on this forum. It is apparent you really do "know".
I'm sure you must have some kind of essay or glorified synopsis of your synthesis somewhere that you could put together. I'd really appreciate a copy of it.
Tell ya what...I'm not one to ask anyone to go to time and trouble on my behalf for nothing. If you'd be willing to spend a couple hours putting something that details your synthesis together and send it to me I would pay you for the time to do it...how about $200 for your hassle? If you'd be interested in such a proposition, send me a message and let me know.
Also could you post here on this forum, any info or links to info, that would outline the meditative technique you were using when you acquired your enlightenment?
Not for nuthin'...but you guys need to wave a white flag or sumthin'...this guy just knocks you into the dirt like a NFL linebacker against a 1st grader...he is so far above and beyond anyone else on here it's not even really a debate anymore. If God ever had the perfect, scientifically irrefutable, explanation of His existence, this guys synthesis is it. And you all knooooow that's right...though you'll never admit it.
Sorry . . . that won't happen. I know better. Peace.
And there in lies the problem. Your steadfast refusal to accept that two different concepts exist makes all of your arguments meaningless. If God is both intelligent and not-intelligent, guided and not-guided, designed and not-designed, arguing about God produces no results. God universally exists only if the definition reaches out to encompass all possible definitions--including things that are not considered Godly by anyone--not-intelligent, not-guided, and not-designed.
A discussion can only be had if we agree to the definitions of our terms, and you can't even do that. Why? Because "you know better," itself suggesting exactly why you won't--because you can't argue against two concepts, only force agreement of one all-encompassing concept which loses meaning.
And there in lies the problem. Your steadfast refusal to accept that two different concepts exist makes all of your arguments meaningless. If God is both intelligent and not-intelligent, guided and not-guided, designed and not-designed, arguing about God produces no results. God universally exists only if the definition reaches out to encompass all possible definitions--including things that are not considered Godly by anyone--not-intelligent, not-guided, and not-designed.
NO . . . the problem is your philosophical inability to deal with fundamentals and not disputables. Being the Creator of all that exists, including all life, and the director of evolution, and all processes that exist . . . is sufficiently Godly to qualify. ALL the other trimmings and attributes that humans wish to add to the basics are just that . . . trimmings and subject to dispute . . . but NOT the EXISTENCE of God.
Your version of God is indifferent, mindless, purposeless, etc. with no basis other than ignorance of any other possibility (we don't know). Mine is consciousness as the universal field establishing our reality, and is purposeful, directed etc. It is a plausible hypothesis based on extant phenomena (our own consciousnesses) and existing evidence of the effects of said universal field.
Quote:
A discussion can only be had if we agree to the definitions of our terms, and you can't even do that. Why? Because "you know better," itself suggesting exactly why you won't--because you can't argue against two concepts, only force agreement of one all-encompassing concept which loses meaning.
There is no lost scientific meaning in the description of our reality . . . only the religious absurdities you wish to incorporate for obvious reasons.
NO . . . the problem is your philosophical inability to deal with fundamentals and not disputables. Being the Creator of all that exists, including all life, and the director of evolution, and all processes that exist . . . is sufficiently Godly to qualify. ALL the other trimmings and attributes that humans wish to add to the basics are just that . . . trimmings and subject to dispute . . . but NOT the EXISTENCE of God.
Your version of God is indifferent, mindless, purposeless, etc. with no basis other than ignorance of any other possibility (we don't know). Mine is consciousness as the universal field establishing our reality, and is purposeful, directed etc. It is a plausible hypothesis based on extant phenomena (our own consciousnesses) and existing evidence of the effects of said universal field.There is no lost scientific meaning in the description of our reality . . . only the religious absurdities you wish to incorporate for obvious reasons.
These define two separate concepts and we distinguish them with two distinctly separate words: nature and God." Mixing them both together produces no end meaning other than your claim that there are no atheists--we all believe in God, which by this point just means existence.
The definitions of God and nature have been provided several times for you by both myself and others. Your refusal to accept those definitions makes arguing with you pointless.
You are obviously a very wise, truly enlightened man, and it has been a privilege to read the excerpt's of your synthesis you use in your debate on this forum. It is apparent you really do "know".
I'm sure you must have some kind of essay or glorified synopsis of your synthesis somewhere that you could put together. I'd really appreciate a copy of it.
Tell ya what...I'm not one to ask anyone to go to time and trouble on my behalf for nothing. If you'd be willing to spend a couple hours putting something that details your synthesis together and send it to me I would pay you for the time to do it...how about $200 for your hassle? If you'd be interested in such a proposition, send me a message and let me know.
Also could you post here on this forum, any info or links to info, that would outline the meditative technique you were using when you acquired your enlightenment?
Not for nuthin'...but you guys need to wave a white flag or sumthin'...this guy just knocks you into the dirt like a NFL linebacker against a 1st grader...he is so far above and beyond anyone else on here it's not even really a debate anymore. If God ever had the perfect, scientifically irrefutable, explanation of His existence, this guys synthesis is it. And you all knooooow that's right...though you'll never admit it.
Wow . . . i appreciate the kind words and your enthusiasm for my work (backed up with cash no less!). But I could never charge anyone for enlightenment. Besides . . . the written word is a poor medium for enlightenment . . . because of the absence of the direct back-and-forth necessary to deal with the many objections, misunderstandings and incorrect knowledge that arise in each individual reader.
This forum provides some ability to address each of those as they appear in rebuttal or support. But I simply do not have the time to write a generic explanation that will anticipate those that will occur upon reading my synthesis all at once. The education and understanding of reality of those reading can be quite diverse and of varying intellectual quality. Finding a balance that would reach the largest number is no small task. I attempted it many years ago . . . and it was less than satisfying. My experiences here in the forum have convinced me that it would be a fruitless task without the ability to directly address the mistaken reading and understanding that is so typical. I will try to provide YOU specifically in PM with what I can over time, Gldnrule . . . as often as I can. My meditation technique recommendations are in my existing posts . . . perhaps a search through them on keywords might produce what you seek.
These define two separate concepts and we distinguish them with two distinctly separate words: nature and God." Mixing them both together produces no end meaning other than your claim that there are no atheists--we all believe in God, which by this point just means existence.
The definitions of God and nature have been provided several times for you by both myself and others. Your refusal to accept those definitions makes arguing with you pointless.
Your refusal to think for yourself instead of running for cover in inane definitions confirms your conclusion . . . arguing with you is pointless.
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.
