The Solution To The Mystery

God, the FSM, and everything else.
User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 31160
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Gord » Thu Jul 12, 2018 7:10 am

Io wrote:Try understanding why you are wrong instead of assuming no-one else has understood you.

onion
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:23 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote:Great Caesar's ghost!!!
I'm guessing that you also watched Perry White in the original Superman TV show of the 1950's. Perry White would say "Great Caesar's ghost" when he didn't believe something.

Perry White would be a fun moderator on our forum.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPT5KIbSuzM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUeqIXOh54


Hah! You guessed it! I particularly remember one episode in which the ghost of Julius Caesar was featured. (Spoiler: It was a man in luminous paint, and somebody was trying to dupe old Perry.)
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:39 am

TazAnastazio wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote: At present, we don't KNOW with certainty whether human action is responsible for catastrophic warming (although we certainly have a very high degree of probability when we make that assertion). But the American Right Wing wants to argue that as long as there is ANY doubt, they are justified in believing the comfortable conclusion and doing nothing.


You realise I can turn this argument around and say something along the lines of "as long as there is any doubt for God's existence, we are justified in believing the comfortable, for some of us anyway, conclusion and believe nothing." ? I could then elaborate in a fancy manner around this for a couple of paragraphs like so many others have done above. But scrap that. I appreciate the time you took to write a decent response. Others resolve to scrap my whole concept, clinging to the few attempts to imagine certain alternatives to already established scientific concepts, making the point that since my writing contains certain doubtful/disproven/wrongful statements on science the whole concept is null.


You do realize that I was rebutting the Republican argument, not endorsing it?

What you imagine doing has actually been done. The seemingly hard-headed skeptic Martin Gardner, who loved mathematics and had a good layperson's understanding of it, and who heaped scorn upon the credulous followers of all manner of irrational belief, including William James for his belief in spiritualism, in the end said that he was a fideist, one who held a belief in a basically unknown god, and he believed in it because it comforted him. I consider this an extreme form of irrationalism and was disappointed to find it in a man who fully realizes that what he is doing is irrational and yet does it anyway.

Is it easier for you to believe that when presented with an object, that that object was formed by an infinite chain of actions, or that at some point going back in time from the objects formation, you reached a blank ?! Apply then the concept to intelligence. Now think of one thing that serves absolutely no purpose. Why would your existence be any different ?!


You are confusing causation with purpose. They go in opposite directions from the present, and the one has nothing to do with the other, logically. As for your first question, it's easiest for me to recognize that I don't have any knowledge about ultimate origins, and therefore I don't take any position on such questions. As for the second, purpose arises from our desires; whether the universe as a whole is moving to fulfill the purpose of a creator, we simply don't know, and the sample of it that we know about is unlikely to give us any more information. The overwhelming majority of "stuff" in this universe is devoid of any purpose conceivable by human beings. (Think of the asteroid belt between Mars and Jupiter.)

Our most brilliant scientists could not reach with their imaginations beyond the singularity to infinity, and they may have gotten a few things wrong here and there. I attempted just that, to reach with my imagination as far as I could into infinity. For 20 years now I've been contemplating the concept, have conversations with people, philosophizing on various concepts; unfortunately didn't have the chance to learn University science, master it and do the research to expand my ideas. This blog was a chance to do that, see where my imagination had took me, where I was right if anywhere, I knew I was wrong in most concepts except for the Infinite. When I was a child I wanted to imagine what lied beyond the stars. As an adult I wanted to reach to the depths of infinity with my imagination and if not answer humanity's unanswerable so far questions, at least find a reasonably satisfactory explanation for all things. Yet since both the most brilliant scientists and I have failed reaching with our minds to Infinity, the Biblical explanation of creation taken figuratively to allow for scientific explanations such as the concept of evolution, suits me fine. At least I tried through reason and step by step deduction and enjoyed contemplating my way through things. I did take some giant leaps, tested the extraordinary claims, but how else could anybody contemplate the Infinite ?! I didn't just believe because they told me so, but because it made sense to me, till proven otherwise.


Hmm, so you couldn't figure it out (and nor can anyone else, so don't feel bad). So, like so many people, you chose an oracle, the Bible? Why that oracle? Why not the Vedas, or the creation myths of the Egyptians, or the Mayans? I'm betting you chose it because you were surrounded by a culture in which the Bible was nearly everyone's oracle. Wasn't it lucky that you and I happened to live in a time and in places where this true oracle was dominant? Think of all those billions of people who grew up elsewhere and missed all the "truths" that were revealed to us.
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3572
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic D)...

Postby Lausten » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:56 pm

TazAnastazio wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to oppose the ignorant, manipulating, life and resource wasting type of
organized religion, as opposed to indiviual, personal belief ?

Positive thoughts bring positive feelings to an individual; such positivity affects the individual's environment ( work place ), which in turn affects more positively the individual in question and society and humanity in extend.

Being optemistic as opposed to pecimistic can make both literary and figuratively speaking,

* ALL THE DIFFERENCE IN THE WORLD ! *

The Iron Chariots Wiki has been archived, but I could still find it. You might want to look around there. This link answers your question succinctly and gives several good examples of how wrong beliefs are harmful.

If positive feelings were actually the result of wrong beliefs, and those resulted in positive actions, it would be a strange world. We would see all sorts of positive things happening but we wouldn't be able to say how they got that way. The people who took the positive actions would claim their claims, and others would not be able to rationally just start believing them because they hadn't had the same life experiences that led to those wrong beliefs. However they wouldn't want to argue that person out of doing whatever they were doing, since it was positive.

The only way this could result in an overall positive effect is if all of these people who had disparate ideas didn't fight about them. They would have to accept that some people believe differently, and agree on what a positive outcome is. Unfortunately, I live in the real world, where some people believe that killing Muslims is a positive outcome, or building walls on your border is ordained by a god. These are much more common results of belief, not feeding the hungry and housing the homeless.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby TazAnastazio » Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:22 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote: Hmm, so you couldn't figure it out (and nor can anyone else, so don't feel bad). So, like so many people, you chose an oracle, the Bible? Why that oracle? Why not the Vedas, or the creation myths of the Egyptians, or the Mayans? I'm betting you chose it because you were surrounded by a culture in which the Bible was nearly everyone's oracle. Wasn't it lucky that you and I happened to live in a time and in places where this true oracle was dominant? Think of all those billions of people who grew up elsewhere and missed all the "truths" that were revealed to us.


This is an excellent point! I tried to wrap my mind around that a few times. I though, what if I had grown up in China or I had lived in pre-historic times? I like the philosophy of Confucianism and Taoism by the way as well (yin-yang) along with other philosophies such as those that ran along the lines of intelligence causing the evolution of the universe and there is a reason for that. What you believe is a matter of the dominant religion or philosophy in your environment. Some people have their own philosophy, I call mine Infinitsm. The argument goes to whether the writers of the Bible were inspired but said intelligence or not. I like "Less Miserables" of Hugo too, where he refers to God extensively. Was he inspired by God too ? I guess "the truth is in the eye of the beholder." To have history we had to have the written language first. Has God or other intelligent existence revealed themselves to people prior or not, or inspired them? Are confessions of such interactions simply the result of twisted imaginations (ghosts, alien abductions etc.) ? Or both ? I would not believe I've seen something unless someone else saw it too (but then you have "magic" tricks seen by many at the same time, which are just a trick of vision and imagination). What we do know is that we were handed from our ancestors the Tora and other writings some of which were discarded. We know that the biblical writings were written by different people at different times. The theme was similar; God created the world and He would send a messenger to save it from sin ( prove God's existence, purpose of human existence; die on the cross to leave perhaps an imprint in history so his teachings, the truths he revealed, would not be forgotten; as with all things God does, there had to be a reason for Christ's death on the cross right ? Also, the messenger according to the Bible, would raise from death after three days to prove that God is the reason for all existence ). We also know about certain correlation of events concerning the "prophecies" of the old testament and their fulfillment in Christ in the New testament. Now I know about other legends ( Gilgamesh ), and that Homer had a vivid imagination too. But so did Jules Verne, he imagined the solar trips both of which took place exactly as he said (around the moon 1st, to the moon after. ) The legend of the virgin birth and the death on the cross may have not been new; I guess God in His infinite wisdom didn't choose, in this case, to be original ( except for Christ's ressurrection that was the original part), :offtopic: the root (Anastas-) of both my real first and last name came from that event (or supposed event) nothing unique about it, there are many Greeks all over the world with the same first and last name - very popular in Greece :offtopic:). It all depends on whether you believe or not, whether our thoughts, consciousness and dreams, are influenced by God and some other intelligence or not. Is there a God and other forces meddling with His work and our minds? This question would be in the realm of religion to answer.

Here is a link that deals with the countless prophesies, to include the death and resurrection of Christ, taking place in the Hebrew scriptures (the Old testament) and being fulfilled by Christ in the New testament; if these events did take / had taken place, the mathematical propability would nullify happenstance and prove a purpose:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.gotque ... ssiah.html

If they events in the Bible didn't take place, then the people who wrote the biblical texts, and those who edited them and orchestrated such a masterful plot, truly deserve credit. It's on "the eye", mind rather, "of the beholder" to consider the possibilities and probabilities.

As for me, I am absolutely certain of one thing :
THE INFINITE IS THE REASON FOR ALL EXISTENCE!

From " Les Miserables " by Victor Hugo :

"He contemplated the grandeur, and the presence of God; the eternity of the future, that strange mystery; the eternity of the past, a stranger mystery; all the infinities hidden deep in every direction; and, without trying to comprehend the incomprehensible, he saw it. He did not study God; he was dazzled by Him. He reflected uponthe magnificent union of atoms, which give visible forms to Nature, revealing forces by recognizing them, creating individualities in unity, proportions in extension,the innumerable in the infinite, and through light producing beauty. These unions are forming and dissolving continually; from which come life and death."
Last edited by TazAnastazio on Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:47 pm, edited 2 times in total.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3572
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby Lausten » Thu Jul 12, 2018 5:31 pm

Mission Statement of Got Questions Ministries:

"Got Questions Ministries seeks to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by providing biblical, applicable, and timely answers to spiritually related questions through an internet presence."


Do you know where you are? Have you eaten healthy food in the last few days? Are you bathing? When is the last time you went for a walk outdoors? Maybe you feel "busy" because you are spending too much time at gotquestions.org

Taz wrote:If they events in the Bible didn't take place, then the people who wrote the biblical texts, and those who edited them and orchestrated such a masterful plot, truly deserve credit. It's on "the eye" mind rather "of the beholder" to consider the possibilities and probabilities.


Or it was a perfectly normal progression of a culture that developed mythologies and was influenced by other cultures around them. I'll grant that the consistent thread of the narrative is a bit unusual in that they survived being conquered and preserved their holy texts and updated their myth to fit the fact that their god was wrong. But all of it can be explained in terms of other cultures that did similar things but were less successful.
Last edited by Lausten on Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 13944
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jul 12, 2018 9:22 pm

TazAnastazio wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote: Hmm, so you couldn't figure it out (and nor can anyone else, so don't feel bad). So, like so many people, you chose an oracle, the Bible? Why that oracle? Why not the Vedas, or the creation myths of the Egyptians, or the Mayans? I'm betting you chose it because you were surrounded by a culture in which the Bible was nearly everyone's oracle. Wasn't it lucky that you and I happened to live in a time and in places where this true oracle was dominant? Think of all those billions of people who grew up elsewhere and missed all the "truths" that were revealed to us.


This is an excellent point! I tried to wrap my mind around that a few times.


...........and that made my brain hurt, so I unwrapped my mind and clung to what I already believed...........
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:10 pm

TazAnastazio wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote: Hmm, so you couldn't figure it out (and nor can anyone else, so don't feel bad). So, like so many people, you chose an oracle, the Bible? Why that oracle? Why not the Vedas, or the creation myths of the Egyptians, or the Mayans? I'm betting you chose it because you were surrounded by a culture in which the Bible was nearly everyone's oracle. Wasn't it lucky that you and I happened to live in a time and in places where this true oracle was dominant? Think of all those billions of people who grew up elsewhere and missed all the "truths" that were revealed to us.


This is an excellent point! I tried to wrap my mind around that a few times. I though, what if I had grown up in China or I had lived in pre-historic times? I like the philosophy of Confucianism and Taoism by the way as well (yin-yang) along with other philosophies such as those that ran along the lines of intelligence causing the evolution of the universe and there is a reason for that. What you believe is a matter of the dominant religion or philosophy in your environment.


Like you, having grown up in a Christian milieu, it really does seem to me that what I call the best parts of Christianity are actually better than other religions, and I think I can give an objective explanation of that superiority. Of course, from a practical point of view, Christians pretty much behave like all people everywhere. Some few of them are altruistic; the majority put themselves first and indulge in back-biting and revenge when they don't get their way. Yet they are constantly congratulating themselves on their superiority to people of other religions and especially to people of no religion.


But in fact, the Christian texts themselves are of three kinds: (1) Passages like the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus urges people to be absolutely forgiving, heedless of the future, and radically non-violent; these are too fine to be practical as a way of running the world, and I don't consider them good advice. (2) Passages like Luke 19: 27, in which Jesus quotes as a lesson to his disciples, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me." These are too harsh and unforgiving. (3) Sublime passages, such as Matthew 25:31--46 (the parable of the sheep and the goats), in which deeds of charity are said to be the only keys to entering the Kingdom and are independent of any particular recognition of one religion or another.

TazAnastazio wrote: As for me, I am absolutely certain of one thing :
THE INFINITE IS THE REASON FOR ALL EXISTENCE!

From " Les Miserables " by Victor Hugo :

"He contemplated the grandeur, and the presence of God; the eternity of the future, that strange mystery; the eternity of the past, a stranger mystery; all the infinities hidden deep in every direction; and, without trying to comprehend the incomprehensible, he saw it. He did not study God; he was dazzled by Him. He reflected uponthe magnificent union of atoms, which give visible forms to Nature, revealing forces by recognizing them, creating individualities in unity, proportions in extension,the innumerable in the infinite, and through light producing beauty. These unions are forming and dissolving continually; from which come life and death."


That was among my earliest reading in French, and is still among my favorite pieces. The final section, in which Marius is led to understand the saintliness of Jean Valjean, just in time to rush to his deathbed, is deeply moving, as is Jean Valjean's epitaph:

Il dort, quoique le départ fût pour lui bien étrange.
Il vivait. Il mourut quand il n’eut plus son ange.
La chose simplement d’elle-même arriva,
Comme la nuit se fait lorsque le jour s’en va.

(He sleeps, though his passage was quite unusual. He had been alive, but he died when he lost his angel. The thing simply happened of its own accord, as night comes on when the light goes away.)

Of course, you have to have read the whole three volumes to appreciate that Jean Valjean was a branded man with no place in respectable French society. He spent a decade of his life raising the orphan Cosette, but eventually had to lose her (for her own good) to Marius. So he made the ultimate sacrifice and allowed her to marry Marius, but it killed him to do so. That is the kind of Christian love that lays down its life for another.

But Victor Hugo didn't die a Christian. He had a very vexed relationship with the Church, as you will see if you read Quatre-vingt treize.
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 13944
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:13 pm

The best and worst parts of all religions are the same. THAT is not about the religions, but of our value system and the fact that all religions talk out of both sides of their mouths.

Just look.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28116
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

religion is a placebo

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:27 am

TazAnastazio wrote: If they events in the Bible didn't take place,
The events did not take place. Archaeology shows that.

TazAnastazio wrote:then the people who wrote the biblical texts, and those who edited them and orchestrated such a masterful plot, truly deserve credit.
The Roman pagan religion already sacrificed sheep,goats and cows. It got an update when it claimed it sacrificed a human, called Jesus. Today terrorists are still blowing themselves up to become martyrs like Jesus. You think that is a good plot?

The most blatant hypocrisy in the Christian belief system is that Jesus "died for our sins", yet simultaneously Jesus is in heaven answering our prayers. Obviously Jesus didn't die and simply went home to be with daddy. :lol:

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3572
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Lausten » Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:47 am

Upton_O_Goode wrote:(2) Passages like Luke 19: 27, in which Jesus quotes as a lesson to his disciples, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me." These are too harsh and unforgiving.

Sorry, can't let that slide. Quoting scripture out of context just makes us look bad. Those are red letters words, but it's a parable, so you have to also know who in the story is saying them. In this case, it's an evil master. Any liberal preacher will tell you this is a difficult parable to work with because it appears to be the master is God. I don't think it is. I think the evil master is an evil master and the point of the parable is to sympathize with the third slave, the one who disobeys him and gets thrown into the outer darkness.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 13944
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am
Custom Title: bobbo da existential pragmatist

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:02 am

We must take the bible literally as the direct word of God. EG: a year is a year. A year being 365 days or 100 or 1000 times that......whatever God literally means it to be.

Can I get an Amen?
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:49 am

Lausten wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote:(2) Passages like Luke 19: 27, in which Jesus quotes as a lesson to his disciples, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me." These are too harsh and unforgiving.

Sorry, can't let that slide. Quoting scripture out of context just makes us look bad. Those are red letters words, but it's a parable, so you have to also know who in the story is saying them. In this case, it's an evil master. Any liberal preacher will tell you this is a difficult parable to work with because it appears to be the master is God. I don't think it is. I think the evil master is an evil master and the point of the parable is to sympathize with the third slave, the one who disobeys him and gets thrown into the outer darkness.


Actually, I did say Jesus was quoting. I thought that was sufficiently clear. Sorry if it wasn't.

I also said this was a lesson to the disciples (as all the parables were). My point was that this quote was IN the lesson, and it was there gratuitously. It adds nothing at all to the rest of the parable, so why does Jesus quote it with obvious approval? What message were the disciples supposed to get from hearing it? It is a polar opposite to the parables like the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son, and the Sheep and the Goats. As I said, it strikes a note of harshness and refusal to forgive. The reference to those who "would not that I should reign over them" would, in any other context, be taken as an allusion to the anticipated personal reign of Christ.
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Jul 13, 2018 10:53 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:We must take the bible literally as the direct word of God. EG: a year is a year. A year being 365 days or 100 or 1000 times that......whatever God literally means it to be.

Can I get an Amen?


Or 360 days, when they need to reconcile the interval between the order to rebuild the temple and the beginning of Jesus's ministry with the timetable from Daniel. (But if that doesn't work, just go on fiddling the numbers until you get something that does work.)
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic D)...

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:08 am

Lausten wrote:Unfortunately, I live in the real world, where some people believe that killing Muslims is a positive outcome, or building walls on your border is ordained by a god. These are much more common results of belief, not feeding the hungry and housing the homeless.


Indeed, and it is no excuse to say that the Muslims are exhibiting even worse behavior. Some of them truly are, and I'm not forgetting that. But to meet violence with violence, as the US has done in sending its invincible weaponry all over the Middle East, prolonging conflicts and creating millions of orphans and homeless people is just as much a crime as the terrorism that the West (and Russia!) is dealing with.

I notice that the Rapture-ready people think of Muslims as inherently violent. It is true that Islam expanded its territory by force of arms. Christians forget that Christianity expanded into northern Europe in exactly that way: Get hold of the leader of a tribe, get him to order a mass conversion of his people, and execute those who resist. That was hardly compatible with the mission allegedly given to the disciples by Jesus.

They also forget that what Catholics and Protestants did to each other from 1525 to 1648 can only be described as a series of massacres, one that reduced the population of Prussia from 15 million to 5 million and contained such niceties as the 1572 massacre on St. Bartholomew's Day. It's almost amusing to hear them implying that Christianity is a religion of peace, quoting the appropriate passages from the Gospels. They forget that the current tolerance, which they have even extended to Jews in the past few decades, was the result of their not being able to wipe one another out.
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3572
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Lausten » Fri Jul 13, 2018 1:25 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote:(2) Passages like Luke 19: 27, in which Jesus quotes as a lesson to his disciples, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me." These are too harsh and unforgiving.

Sorry, can't let that slide. Quoting scripture out of context just makes us look bad. Those are red letters words, but it's a parable, so you have to also know who in the story is saying them. In this case, it's an evil master. Any liberal preacher will tell you this is a difficult parable to work with because it appears to be the master is God. I don't think it is. I think the evil master is an evil master and the point of the parable is to sympathize with the third slave, the one who disobeys him and gets thrown into the outer darkness.


Actually, I did say Jesus was quoting. I thought that was sufficiently clear. Sorry if it wasn't.

I also said this was a lesson to the disciples (as all the parables were). My point was that this quote was IN the lesson, and it was there gratuitously. It adds nothing at all to the rest of the parable, so why does Jesus quote it with obvious approval? What message were the disciples supposed to get from hearing it? It is a polar opposite to the parables like the Good Samaritan, the Prodigal Son, and the Sheep and the Goats. As I said, it strikes a note of harshness and refusal to forgive. The reference to those who "would not that I should reign over them" would, in any other context, be taken as an allusion to the anticipated personal reign of Christ.

The fact that it is opposite of other parables should be a clue, but most Christians don't take that clue. I should mention I've argued this interpretation with a few Christians, and they take the stand that this is Jesus saying he's going to send you to hell if you don't love him. But there are scholars that say this is a slave owner abusing his slave and the story is a warning that standing up to that power is not going to be easy.

My Lectionary review includes a link to one of those scholars.

Or here, where I go into more detail.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re:The Solution To The Mystery "Repurged." Thank you all for your time,patience and feedback,and wish you all the best!

Postby TazAnastazio » Fri Jul 13, 2018 2:57 pm

Disclaimer : These are my OWN theories. Some are right, some are wrong, for others it is still unknown or debatable. As time goes by I'll be researching the subject and make the necessary "purging". This is not a scientific paper based on research ! This is the work of a PHILOSOPHER ! I find it challenging to conceive the idea, before I read it somewhere else. PUTTING MY NAME ON AN IDEA, BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE CONCEIVES IT AND PROVES IT RIGHT, that would be a bonus ! There is risk to that asis evident from some colorful responses I sometimes get from scientific afficionados and virtuosos ! But somehow like this, PHILOSOPHERS grasped with their imaginations GREAT IDEAS, upon which scientists built, and others learned ! FEEL FREE TO CONTRIBUTE !


THE INFINITE, IN SEARCH OF THE ULTIMATE TRUTH !


The Infinite has no shape nor size, no beginning nor end, no limits and no gaps. "Nothing", "time" and "distance" do not exist for the Infinite, as it encompasses every unit, every stage, every existence and every concept. When humanity refers to the idea of "God", what other concept could have such characteristics attributed to by humanity, other than the Infinite? Any other traditional god/superior intelligence/existence/being/concept would evolve from the Infinite and would be finite.

Every form of existence, every intelligence, energy and matter, form/evolve from the Infinite and de-form/dissolve into the Infinite. Every existence has a purpose. The ultimate purpose of intelligent existence is to bring about positivity to counterbalance negativity, both of which are emerging properties/outcomes of actions and reactions that bring forth existence. This is what existing is, serve a purpose to administer things within our environment within the Infinite. The purpose of life is knowledge. Knowledge is passed to the future generations; knowledge and the right actions prove us able for further function within the Infinite and to serve a further purpose within the Infinite, till we dissolve/de-form back into it.

Negativity springs from selfishness which is the result of self-interest. Self-interest is necessary for every existence to exist. Because an intelligent existence recognizes the limits in its environment, and the limits of its own existence, due to self-interest, said existence may become selfish. Without self interest we would not care to exist, yet because we realize that we will only exist for a limited time, wanting to make the best of our existence, we become selfish and behave negatively to others. Negativity and positivity are the result of the interaction of the various forms of existence among themselves and with their environment within the Infinite; an example is humans interacting with gravity. Without gravity we would not be able to stay on earth and survive, and because of gravity, when we fall we hurt ourselves and even die.

Infinite minute perhaps spherical particles (no other shape would provide for better combinations to form matter, and no other shape of matter would provide for better fluidity within the infinite than the spherical ) bring about all physical phenomena within the Infinite, such as matter, energy and intelligence; along with gravity, light and sound.

If "nothing" did exist, if even infinitely minute space of nothing truly existed, there would be no Infinite since there would be limits; which means that the only seemingly infinite, had beginnings and endings. Yet existence, or particles and objects forming everything within the Infinite cannot form/evolve out of nothing. Therefore nothing cannot exist at all and definitely cannot extend beyond the Infinite, for the Infinite to exist, and for everything else to exist within the Infinite. Yet, if "nothing" does not exists, what then explains space for fluidity within the Infinite? Could there be an Infinite Nothing within an Infinite Everything, how could that be possible when the existence of the one, nullifies the existence of the other? Surely there always has to be something for something else to form from, and there always has to be something for something else to be de - formed ( destroyed, disposed of ) into.

Could it be perhaps that we have an Infinite "antimatter" evolving to an "Infinite" matter and vice versa, infinitely? We could suppose that infinite Universes of anti-matter, break apart to infinitely minute particles of antimatter (or even just minute particles of antimatter), and switch/evolve/form in turn to infinite minute particles of matter ( or just minute particles), which in turn form Infinite Universes of matter; and infinite Universes of matter break apart to Infinite minute particles of matter and switch to infinitely minute particles of antimatter which in turn form infinite Universes of antimatter, infinitely.

Distance does not exist for the Infinite because even if an object travels thousands of light years in space, from the perspective of the Infinite, at the same time it has not moved at all, it moved thousands of light years, and it is also moving infinitely. The infinite is ever reaching and ever extending from every perspective both outwards the macrocosm and inwards the microcosm. The Infinite is within every matter, energy and intelligence, and every matter, energy and intelligence is formed from within the Infinite and de-formed into the Infinite. There are no absolute sizes within the infinite, nothing is absolutely large or absolutely small. An absolute zero temperature for example denotes a situation when all movement ceases, yet movement never ceases, it could decelerate infinitely within the infinite microcosm, and accelerate infinitely within the infinite macrocosm ( infinite large in size clusters of universes ).

Time does not exist for the infinite. Time is simply a measurement of movement in reference to other movement or change; change happens due to the interaction of particles or objects and its rate and effect depend on the cause and influencing factors and the object undergoing it. Change is relative to circumstance and its effect ( positive or negative, quick or slow ) a matter of perception of the observer going through said change ( what we think of as time, passes quickly when we are busy, absorbed in thought, are entertained; yet seems to stall in traffic, when we are bored, working through a drudging task etc. ).

If time did not actually existed time, dimensions would not exist either. Infinite universes and clusters of infinite universes are formed and deformed infinitely with infinite possibilities. There is probably nothing flat in the infinite; everything within the Infinite is made of particles ( quite possibly spherical in shape for fluidity of movement and formation ) with smaller particles forming between the spaces the larger particles form. If an object becomes small enough, it would most likely find itself in a three dimensional space. There may not be a two dimensional space, and if time did not exist, there would be no forth dimension, or any other dimensions.

Even if we suppose that in the vastness of the Infinite where everything is possible, an exact replica of our own universe existed, we would have to assume that in that universe every chain reaction from its beginning to the given point of comparison to our own, was exactly the same for every factor, even if seemingly insignificant, that would otherwise bring forth a difference between the two universes. But each of the two universes would have also been affected by infinite chains of actions and reactions that lead to their formation which would also have to be the same, for the universes to be exactly the same and so on. Continuing that process of reasoning we would deduce that to have an exact replica universe we would have to have such a phenomenon of similarity to reach an INFINITE degree. That would mean replicated infinities! Therefore two exactly the same universes where a person could find the exact replica of himself, and travel in that universes time frame, are an impossibility. To consider that possible, said person would have to be able to find the exact replica of his planet within the exact replica of his universe, among the infinite choices within the infinite, and travel to the exact point in time of his choice, since the formation of said universe, in order to travel from that point in time of that universe, to a specific time in the past or the future. That would be the only way to travel in time.

The only way perhaps that dimensional time could exist, let alone time travel being possible, would be if we would consider again infinite possible futures within infinite EXACTLY THE SAME UNIVERSES ( which universes would have infinite minute differences ); through which, unbeknownst to ourselves and the people of our environment, we are passing to ( from one in a given infinite fraction of a moment, to another one out of the infinite alternatives ). That would be the only way to have dimensional time, with dimensional past and present, and a dimensional future (one out of the infinite available PER INDIVIDUAL EXISTENCE ). Which one preexisting / predetermined future would be chosen out of the infinite choices could depend to minute details of our daily life. But as aforementioned, such exact replica universes are an impossibility because such a phenomenon would also imply replicated infinities.

Even if we suppose for the sake of the argument that time travel was possible, in order to travel to the past by means of actual time - travel, a person would have to have the means to roll back all the chains of actions and reactions that lead to his / her present point in time. Such a regression would in turn change the person's environment and world to an infinite perhaps effect; which as a result would bring future, and perhaps infinite changed actions and reactions, which would in turn bring change of infinite proportions. The result of his / her cells regressing would have a chain of actions and reactions to particles forming the subatomic particles that comprise them. Every action and every act, such as metabolic and other bodily function would have to be regressed! For said person travel to the future, which could not possibly be predetermined / preexisting, if supposedly there is such thing as dimensional time, he or she would have to choose from infinite choices as mentioned earlier. If such a one predetermined /preexisting future existed for an existence, then there would be no point for that existence, or its purpose would be limited (animals in a farm). If the future of our world was predetermined, then humanity could not be held accountable for its actions. There would be no point for existence, since there would be no living, experiencing, and learning from it. The future of every existence within the infinite could not be predetermined, if that was the case the infinite would be limited, with other words there would be no infinite since every existence in it would be like machinery. Finally, if we believed that our future was predetermined/preexisting, then while we would and should still seclude and punish criminals and the tyrants of history, could we still also hold them ethically accountable (same argument could be made of course for the criminals and tyrants mental status and genetic make up, is there a very fine line between mental status and evil nature?).

The idea that the future already exists, that everything is predetermined and therefore no reason for anyone to work towards anything since the outcome has already taken place in the future or some version of a predetermined future is not acceptable. At least with astrology there is always the explanation that " forces / spirits " would make things take place as foretold to lure you in the occult. Some of this time travel multidimensional notions don't seem to be further from science fiction and even occultism.

The idea of time travel sprang from the notion that time would slow down when travelling at the speed of light, and even regress when travelling faster. This theory could never be validated because such speeds are impossible to reach. Furthermore a craft travelling at such speeds would have to follow a means of navigation other than light since the image of objects in the immediate front of the craft, would reach the craft at double the speed of light ( both light and craft traveling at the same speed ) and objects perpendicular to the sides and back of the craft would be invisible ( craft is always ahead of the image generated ) . The pilots would not be able to react since what would be visible to them would be a mixed stream of color and light jetting on them from their front sides and through the immediate front, because both them and the light travel at the same speed ( for one it would seem to them that they would crash on objects earlier than they actually would - also, for the sake of the point we suppose they survived the trip, and we also exclude friction that would set enormous temperature and turn the craft alight before it reached a fraction of light speed, also we neglect the relativity concept that the mass of the aircraft would reach infinite levels ). Since objects travelling at the speed of light are impossible to observe, since their original position would be visible after they had already been long gone, experiments with them are impossible to be conducted even in our imagination. Without even a reasonable deduction based on logical steps we could consider other possibilities and even doubt the existence of dimensional time, a road onto which one can travel back and forth. Additionally the detrimental effect to the objects travelling at the speed of light, would give false perception in regards to their shape, and deem such an imagined experiment questionable. An experiment that cannot even be conducted in our imagination, has no grounds and its theoretical outcomes are invalid or non existing.

Einstein, and those who sold books and made movies based on his "time travel" theories tapped in humanity's characteristic of remorse and regret. Who would not want to go back in time and change things after they had acquired precious knowledge. Surely it would be nice if we could live long enough and be young enough to live, learn and live better in our longer futures.

Though at times referring to infinite levels and values, Einstein sometimes seems to not fully consider concepts from the perspective of the Infinite and infinity; or to apply the idea of the infinite and infinity to EVERY concept. Einstein came up with an equation which while scientists believe it holds its ground to things we can actually perceive and observe ( or we think we do ) it does not perhaps apply to the reality of the Infinite ! If the maximum heat we can theoretically get would be produced by running an almost infinitely large object by the speed of the fastest thing we are able to observe ( light ), then that would be the maximum temperature ( Energy ) theoretically achievable, which would be a finite amount and not infinite, since it is depended upon a finite value, the constant speed of light; which leads to the paradox that the whole amount of energy within the Infinite, is a finite unit ! What is the paradox with this, is that it contradicts the law of thermodynamics dictating that energy cannot be created or destroyed. If something is finite IT HAS TO BE CREATED AND BE ABLE TO BE DESTROYED, otherwise IT CAN BE NOTHING BUT INFINITE !

If we consider an object approaching a wall, would it eventually reach or NEVER reach the wall? How about BOTH at the SAME time! When we consider things from the perspective of an object of finite size, sure it will eventually reach the wall... that "0" point or in Einstein's terms the fastest speed possibly achievable, the speed of light ( before time and space get SUPPOSEDLY all jumbled up, relativity etc. ), but wait... What if the object becomes small enough to pass between the particles that comprise the wall ? Now consider this, what if as it passes it continues to become ever so small, INFINITELY small, at what point does it exactly pass through or even reach the wall ? NEVER !

The aforementioned considerations would lead to the six fundamental principles of the Infinite from which most concepts could be explained:

1) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE SIZE, ABSOLUTE LARGE OR ABSOLUTE SMALL !

2) Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it is formed from matter and it forms matter, and it takes intelligence to do so. The Infinite is the Infinite Intelligence, Energy and Matter.

3) Where there is action there is a reaction; everything within the Infinite is the result of the cause and effect phenomenon. The Infinite is the reason for all existence, objects and phenomena.

4) Time may not exist, time could simply be a means to measure movement in reference to other movement - how many turns a planet made around a star, while that star was rotating once around its galaxy.

5) If an object becomes small enough it will most likely find itself in a "THREE DIMENSIONAL SPACE". If physical / dimensional time does not exist, a fourth dimension woul not exist either. There would be no more dimensions than three.

6) Math is a perception ( a dimension if you like ) because our mathematical calculations depend on what amount we assign to a UNIT (stage). Math is the assigned amount of a unit ( 1 ), it's absence ( 0 ) and the Infinite ( never absolute unit or absolute absence of it ).

If an object traveled with the speed of light its original position WOULD BE INVISIBLE ( meaning we would see the object in its original position after the object had been long gone already, because it would take the same speed for light to reach it, and therefore light would not reach it in time ), so Einstein's relativity examples would not hold ( the objects that seem to collide to the perception of one observer while they overpass each other according to the perception of another observer. Also if the speed of light cannot be achieved, especially when considering what would happen to the mass (spacecraft) accelerating hypothetically towards even a fraction of the speed of light, maybe the mentioning of time travel mentioning would be more appropriate for the science fiction books. The fascination around time travel, is good for sales.

As light is warped from gravitational forces and is reflected upon objects, WE WILL NEVER VISIT INHABITED PLANETS OR WILL BE VISITED BY ORGANIC SPECIES FROM OTHER PLANETS UNLESS WE ( OR THEY ) FIND OTHER MEANS OF NAVIGATING THROUGH SPACE OTHER THAN LIGHT, WHY ?

We ( they ) would need to be able to perceive what lies ahead in time to avoid collisions ( Somedar - for a lack of a better word meaning a machinery which would be using other means to function than rays - many, many times faster than light, but even then our brains will never be able to react to such speeds, perhaps artificial intelligence thinking 100 times faster than the speed of light, to bring the "pulp" that would remain from our bodies somewhere - and NO time would not be affected ( since time does not exist ) and we would not travel in it, neither the effect of our brains bouncing in our skulls would change, or our cells and the very molecules that comprise them. Do I need to get into the type of steering and break system we would need ... SO NO LIVING BREATHING SPECIES COULD HAVE POSSIBLY EVER REACHED, OR WILL POSSIBLY EVER REACH, EARTH UNLESS THEY WERE OR WILL BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE BY OTHER MEANS THAN FOLLOWING LIGHT (shortcuts of the universe) OR UNLESS THEY ARE OTHER FORMS OF ENERGY + INTELLIGENCE + MATTER COMBINATION (for one they shouldn't have to breath, drink, eat move their bowels etc. - no time to sleep from all that bouncing and the noise and heat from all that friction etc. etc. Currents of particles could be the cause movement of objects in space, and whirlpools ( wormholes ). Magnetic fields ( gravity ) pull space forming particles, pulling as a consequence said space; and bend light, the only means of navigation in space.

No "Imagination is..." NOT "better than knowledge". Imagination is the means to collect the "ore" ( conceive the idea ), yet REASON, LOGICAL DEDUCTION, are the means to distill the "GOLD", which is knowledge.

Imagine if light didn't truly travel as believed! Imagine if it was rather a ripple particle reaction our brains understand as "light"; like water waves having a ripple reaction, the impact of which we feel or see on objects; there is movement of water, but it is not the first molecules in line which reach us, but the last ones . When light ( or sound ) occurs ( electron jump in the case of light ), in most cases it can be observed from every direction. Could that mean that it doesn't actually travel ? Could it be that the electron jumps which generate photons, causes a ripple effect from particle to particle, a wave the end of which affects our brains in a way we understand as "light." It would be like if people would stand in line in every direction and the person in the middle taps the next ( well in this example he/she would have to tap the people around him/her one at a time, but with light is different, just for the sake of the analogy without much nitpicking), and the people at the end feel the tap of the last person next to them, the first person in the center that started the "tap effect" didn't touch them ! With colored surfaces, it could be that the involved particles absorb the facets of the tap of the different colors in the spectrum, allowing a different kind of tap to continue, one that has only the same color effect with the one of the surface. How long it would take from the particle jumps that occurred to create the photons (or rather the ripple / tap effect) to the effect that those particle jumps ( creation of photons ) would have on our brains, times the distance between our eyes and the particle jumps, we could be interpreting as light-speed. This hypothesis could explain why it takes light speed for a photon to have its effect on our brains and while though it can be observed it has no mass let alone acquiring infinite mass. This could also explain how it is that light having no mass is affected by gravitational forces, is pulled by a black hole ( not the photons themselves but the particles of space involved in the light ripple / tap effect ). Photons are traveling as scientists say at light speed. As scientists also say, photons have no mass, they don't acquire infinite mass as they "travel" light speed! Imagine the world bombarded by photons of infinite mass, there would not be a world, but then there would not be light in the first place. Light travels in most cases in all directions, but even on a single direction traveling for 13 Billion years ( oldest light observable ) would take a lot of energy lost, where has light acquired all that energy from ?

If light did not actually travel, we would have the TIME it took for the effect, but no SPACE ( no travel ). Take light, as we think we know it, out of the equation, and the MAGICAL / ALLURING idea of relativity is falling apart ! Why do we give so much weight to light, ONE physical phenomenon out of the Infinite which we cannot observe, and we attribute all the function of the universe, let alone the Infinite, based on that singular phenomenon ?

"Nothing", "Everything", "Time", "Space", "Distance", "Dimensions, "Beginning", "End", "Energy", "Mass", "Intelligence", "Objects", "Particles" are simply concepts conceived to describe what we THINK we see and understand within the INFINITE.

Matter would not move without energy and energy could not be directed without intelligence. The Infinite Intelligence Energy and Matter. No other concept except the Infinite, could be attributed the characteristics humanity has attributed to the idea of "God."

One thing is absolutely certain. The Infinite is the reason for all existence and all phenomena within the Infinite.

This theory / philosophy is called Infinitism; the theory / philosophy of the Infinite.
Last edited by TazAnastazio on Fri Jul 13, 2018 6:39 pm, edited 4 times in total.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9227
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby Poodle » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:11 pm

Excuse me everyone, but has anyone seen 'The History of 20th century Science'? It seems to have disappeared completely, as though it never.ever happened.

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby TazAnastazio » Fri Jul 13, 2018 3:24 pm

Poodle wrote:Excuse me everyone, but has anyone seen 'The History of 20th century Science'? It seems to have disappeared completely, as though it never.ever happened.


:gp: :!: Good one Poodle :!: :gp: :lol: :lol: :lol:
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Jul 13, 2018 5:04 pm

Lausten wrote:The fact that it is opposite of other parables should be a clue, but most Christians don't take that clue. I should mention I've argued this interpretation with a few Christians, and they take the stand that this is Jesus saying he's going to send you to hell if you don't love him. But there are scholars that say this is a slave owner abusing his slave and the story is a warning that standing up to that power is not going to be easy.

My Lectionary review includes a link to one of those scholars.

Or here, where I go into more detail.


Thanks for the links. So, it appears some of the Christians you have discussed this with actually do think that Jesus meant a direct threat to anyone who didn't submit to him. Of course, I don't think the Gospels are anything like accurate history (and I imagine you don't either, in common with anyone who reads them with an open mind). So, whether he said that or not in real history is irrelevant. What we have is the character described in the Gospels, so a composite creation of many authors. So, we shouldn't look for consistency. It is impossible not to think that some of those writers were petty, spiteful, vengeful people for whom unending torture with fire was quite appropriate for people who denied these beliefs. Hence the passages that reek of revenge, such as the weeping and gnashing of teeth in Mark's version of the Sermon on the Mount.
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 31160
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Re:The Solution To The Mystery "Repurged." Thank you all for your time,patience and feedback,and wish you all the be

Postby Gord » Fri Jul 13, 2018 7:55 pm

TazAnastazio wrote:Disclaimer : These are my OWN theories. Some are right, some are wrong, for others it is still unknown or debatable. As time goes by I'll be researching the subject and make the necessary "purging". This is not a scientific paper based on research ! This is the work of a PHILOSOPHER ! I find it challenging to conceive the idea, before I read it somewhere else. PUTTING MY NAME ON AN IDEA, BEFORE SOMEONE ELSE CONCEIVES IT AND PROVES IT RIGHT, that would be a bonus ! There is risk to that asis evident from some colorful responses I sometimes get from scientific afficionados and virtuosos ! But somehow like this, PHILOSOPHERS grasped with their imaginations GREAT IDEAS, upon which scientists built, and others learned ! FEEL FREE TO CONTRIBUTE !


THE INFINITE, IN SEARCH OF THE ULTIMATE TRUTH !


The Infinite has no shape nor size, no beginning nor end, no limits and no gaps. "Nothing", "time" and "distance" do not exist for the Infinite, as it encompasses every unit, every stage, every existence and every concept. When humanity refers to the idea of "God", what other concept could have such characteristics attributed to by humanity, other than the Infinite? Any other traditional god/superior intelligence/existence/being/concept would evolve from the Infinite and would be finite.

Every form of existence, every intelligence, energy and matter, form/evolve from the Infinite and de-form/dissolve into the Infinite. Every existence has a purpose. The ultimate purpose of intelligent existence is to bring about positivity to counterbalance negativity, both of which are emerging properties/outcomes of actions and reactions that bring forth existence. This is what existing is, serve a purpose to administer things within our environment within the Infinite. The purpose of life is knowledge. Knowledge is passed to the future generations; knowledge and the right actions prove us able for further function within the Infinite and to serve a further purpose within the Infinite, till we dissolve/de-form back into it.

Negativity springs from selfishness which is the result of self-interest. Self-interest is necessary for every existence to exist. Because an intelligent existence recognizes the limits in its environment, and the limits of its own existence, due to self-interest, said existence may become selfish. Without self interest we would not care to exist, yet because we realize that we will only exist for a limited time, wanting to make the best of our existence, we become selfish and behave negatively to others. Negativity and positivity are the result of the interaction of the various forms of existence among themselves and with their environment within the Infinite; an example is humans interacting with gravity. Without gravity we would not be able to stay on earth and survive, and because of gravity, when we fall we hurt ourselves and even die.

Infinite minute perhaps spherical particles (no other shape would provide for better combinations to form matter, and no other shape of matter would provide for better fluidity within the infinite than the spherical ) bring about all physical phenomena within the Infinite, such as matter, energy and intelligence; along with gravity, light and sound.

If "nothing" did exist, if even infinitely minute space of nothing truly existed, there would be no Infinite since there would be limits; which means that the only seemingly infinite, had beginnings and endings. Yet existence, or particles and objects forming everything within the Infinite cannot form/evolve out of nothing. Therefore nothing cannot exist at all and definitely cannot extend beyond the Infinite, for the Infinite to exist, and for everything else to exist within the Infinite. Yet, if "nothing" does not exists, what then explains space for fluidity within the Infinite? Could there be an Infinite Nothing within an Infinite Everything, how could that be possible when the existence of the one, nullifies the existence of the other? Surely there always has to be something for something else to form from, and there always has to be something for something else to be de - formed ( destroyed, disposed of ) into.

Could it be perhaps that we have an Infinite "antimatter" evolving to an "Infinite" matter and vice versa, infinitely? We could suppose that infinite Universes of anti-matter, break apart to infinitely minute particles of antimatter (or even just minute particles of antimatter), and switch/evolve/form in turn to infinite minute particles of matter ( or just minute particles), which in turn form Infinite Universes of matter; and infinite Universes of matter break apart to Infinite minute particles of matter and switch to infinitely minute particles of antimatter which in turn form infinite Universes of antimatter, infinitely.

Distance does not exist for the Infinite because even if an object travels thousands of light years in space, from the perspective of the Infinite, at the same time it has not moved at all, it moved thousands of light years, and it is also moving infinitely. The infinite is ever reaching and ever extending from every perspective both outwards the macrocosm and inwards the microcosm. The Infinite is within every matter, energy and intelligence, and every matter, energy and intelligence is formed from within the Infinite and de-formed into the Infinite. There are no absolute sizes within the infinite, nothing is absolutely large or absolutely small. An absolute zero temperature for example denotes a situation when all movement ceases, yet movement never ceases, it could decelerate infinitely within the infinite microcosm, and accelerate infinitely within the infinite macrocosm ( infinite large in size clusters of universes ).

Time does not exist for the infinite. Time is simply a measurement of movement in reference to other movement or change; change happens due to the interaction of particles or objects and its rate and effect depend on the cause and influencing factors and the object undergoing it. Change is relative to circumstance and its effect ( positive or negative, quick or slow ) a matter of perception of the observer going through said change ( what we think of as time, passes quickly when we are busy, absorbed in thought, are entertained; yet seems to stall in traffic, when we are bored, working through a drudging task etc. ).

If time did not actually existed time, dimensions would not exist either. Infinite universes and clusters of infinite universes are formed and deformed infinitely with infinite possibilities. There is probably nothing flat in the infinite; everything within the Infinite is made of particles ( quite possibly spherical in shape for fluidity of movement and formation ) with smaller particles forming between the spaces the larger particles form. If an object becomes small enough, it would most likely find itself in a three dimensional space. There may not be a two dimensional space, and if time did not exist, there would be no forth dimension, or any other dimensions.

Even if we suppose that in the vastness of the Infinite where everything is possible, an exact replica of our own universe existed, we would have to assume that in that universe every chain reaction from its beginning to the given point of comparison to our own, was exactly the same for every factor, even if seemingly insignificant, that would otherwise bring forth a difference between the two universes. But each of the two universes would have also been affected by infinite chains of actions and reactions that lead to their formation which would also have to be the same, for the universes to be exactly the same and so on. Continuing that process of reasoning we would deduce that to have an exact replica universe we would have to have such a phenomenon of similarity to reach an INFINITE degree. That would mean replicated infinities! Therefore two exactly the same universes where a person could find the exact replica of himself, and travel in that universes time frame, are an impossibility. To consider that possible, said person would have to be able to find the exact replica of his planet within the exact replica of his universe, among the infinite choices within the infinite, and travel to the exact point in time of his choice, since the formation of said universe, in order to travel from that point in time of that universe, to a specific time in the past or the future. That would be the only way to travel in time.

The only way perhaps that dimensional time could exist, let alone time travel being possible, would be if we would consider again infinite possible futures within infinite EXACTLY THE SAME UNIVERSES ( which universes would have infinite minute differences ); through which, unbeknownst to ourselves and the people of our environment, we are passing to ( from one in a given infinite fraction of a moment, to another one out of the infinite alternatives ). That would be the only way to have dimensional time, with dimensional past and present, and a dimensional future (one out of the infinite available PER INDIVIDUAL EXISTENCE ). Which one preexisting / predetermined future would be chosen out of the infinite choices could depend to minute details of our daily life. But as aforementioned, such exact replica universes are an impossibility because such a phenomenon would also imply replicated infinities.

Even if we suppose for the sake of the argument that time travel was possible, in order to travel to the past by means of actual time - travel, a person would have to have the means to roll back all the chains of actions and reactions that lead to his / her present point in time. Such a regression would in turn change the person's environment and world to an infinite perhaps effect; which as a result would bring future, and perhaps infinite changed actions and reactions, which would in turn bring change of infinite proportions. The result of his / her cells regressing would have a chain of actions and reactions to particles forming the subatomic particles that comprise them. Every action and every act, such as metabolic and other bodily function would have to be regressed! For said person travel to the future, which could not possibly be predetermined / preexisting, if supposedly there is such thing as dimensional time, he or she would have to choose from infinite choices as mentioned earlier. If such a one predetermined /preexisting future existed for an existence, then there would be no point for that existence, or its purpose would be limited (animals in a farm). If the future of our world was predetermined, then humanity could not be held accountable for its actions. There would be no point for existence, since there would be no living, experiencing, and learning from it. The future of every existence within the infinite could not be predetermined, if that was the case the infinite would be limited, with other words there would be no infinite since every existence in it would be like machinery. Finally, if we believed that our future was predetermined/preexisting, then while we would and should still seclude and punish criminals and the tyrants of history, could we still also hold them ethically accountable (same argument could be made of course for the criminals and tyrants mental status and genetic make up, is there a very fine line between mental status and evil nature?).

The idea that the future already exists, that everything is predetermined and therefore no reason for anyone to work towards anything since the outcome has already taken place in the future or some version of a predetermined future is not acceptable. At least with astrology there is always the explanation that " forces / spirits " would make things take place as foretold to lure you in the occult. Some of this time travel multidimensional notions don't seem to be further from science fiction and even occultism.

The idea of time travel sprang from the notion that time would slow down when travelling at the speed of light, and even regress when travelling faster. This theory could never be validated because such speeds are impossible to reach. Furthermore a craft travelling at such speeds would have to follow a means of navigation other than light since the image of objects in the immediate front of the craft, would reach the craft at double the speed of light ( both light and craft traveling at the same speed ) and objects perpendicular to the sides and back of the craft would be invisible ( craft is always ahead of the image generated ) . The pilots would not be able to react since what would be visible to them would be a mixed stream of color and light jetting on them from their front sides and through the immediate front, because both them and the light travel at the same speed ( for one it would seem to them that they would crash on objects earlier than they actually would - also, for the sake of the point we suppose they survived the trip, and we also exclude friction that would set enormous temperature and turn the craft alight before it reached a fraction of light speed, also we neglect the relativity concept that the mass of the aircraft would reach infinite levels ). Since objects travelling at the speed of light are impossible to observe, since their original position would be visible after they had already been long gone, experiments with them are impossible to be conducted even in our imagination. Without even a reasonable deduction based on logical steps we could consider other possibilities and even doubt the existence of dimensional time, a road onto which one can travel back and forth. Additionally the detrimental effect to the objects travelling at the speed of light, would give false perception in regards to their shape, and deem such an imagined experiment questionable. An experiment that cannot even be conducted in our imagination, has no grounds and its theoretical outcomes are invalid or non existing.

Einstein, and those who sold books and made movies based on his "time travel" theories tapped in humanity's characteristic of remorse and regret. Who would not want to go back in time and change things after they had acquired precious knowledge. Surely it would be nice if we could live long enough and be young enough to live, learn and live better in our longer futures.

Though at times referring to infinite levels and values, Einstein sometimes seems to not fully consider concepts from the perspective of the Infinite and infinity; or to apply the idea of the infinite and infinity to EVERY concept. Einstein came up with an equation which while scientists believe it holds its ground to things we can actually perceive and observe ( or we think we do ) it does not perhaps apply to the reality of the Infinite ! If the maximum heat we can theoretically get would be produced by running an almost infinitely large object by the speed of the fastest thing we are able to observe ( light ), then that would be the maximum temperature ( Energy ) theoretically achievable, which would be a finite amount and not infinite, since it is depended upon a finite value, the constant speed of light; which leads to the paradox that the whole amount of energy within the Infinite, is a finite unit ! What is the paradox with this, is that it contradicts the law of thermodynamics dictating that energy cannot be created or destroyed. If something is finite IT HAS TO BE CREATED AND BE ABLE TO BE DESTROYED, otherwise IT CAN BE NOTHING BUT INFINITE !

If we consider an object approaching a wall, would it eventually reach or NEVER reach the wall? How about BOTH at the SAME time! When we consider things from the perspective of an object of finite size, sure it will eventually reach the wall... that "0" point or in Einstein's terms the fastest speed possibly achievable, the speed of light ( before time and space get SUPPOSEDLY all jumbled up, relativity etc. ), but wait... What if the object becomes small enough to pass between the particles that comprise the wall ? Now consider this, what if as it passes it continues to become ever so small, INFINITELY small, at what point does it exactly pass through or even reach the wall ? NEVER !

The aforementioned considerations would lead to the six fundamental principles of the Infinite from which most concepts could be explained:

1) THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE SIZE, ABSOLUTE LARGE OR ABSOLUTE SMALL !

2) Energy cannot be created or destroyed, it is formed from matter and it forms matter, and it takes intelligence to do so. The Infinite is the Infinite Intelligence, Energy and Matter.

3) Where there is action there is a reaction; everything within the Infinite is the result of the cause and effect phenomenon. The Infinite is the reason for all existence, objects and phenomena.

4) Time may not exist, time could simply be a means to measure movement in reference to other movement - how many turns a planet made around a star, while that star was rotating once around its galaxy.

5) If an object becomes small enough it will most likely find itself in a "THREE DIMENSIONAL SPACE". If physical / dimensional time does not exist, a fourth dimension woul not exist either. There would be no more dimensions than three.

6) Math is a perception ( a dimension if you like ) because our mathematical calculations depend on what amount we assign to a UNIT (stage). Math is the assigned amount of a unit ( 1 ), it's absence ( 0 ) and the Infinite ( never absolute unit or absolute absence of it ).

If an object traveled with the speed of light its original position WOULD BE INVISIBLE ( meaning we would see the object in its original position after the object had been long gone already, because it would take the same speed for light to reach it, and therefore light would not reach it in time ), so Einstein's relativity examples would not hold ( the objects that seem to collide to the perception of one observer while they overpass each other according to the perception of another observer. Also if the speed of light cannot be achieved, especially when considering what would happen to the mass (spacecraft) accelerating hypothetically towards even a fraction of the speed of light, maybe the mentioning of time travel mentioning would be more appropriate for the science fiction books. The fascination around time travel, is good for sales.

As light is warped from gravitational forces and is reflected upon objects, WE WILL NEVER VISIT INHABITED PLANETS OR WILL BE VISITED BY ORGANIC SPECIES FROM OTHER PLANETS UNLESS WE ( OR THEY ) FIND OTHER MEANS OF NAVIGATING THROUGH SPACE OTHER THAN LIGHT, WHY ?

We ( they ) would need to be able to perceive what lies ahead in time to avoid collisions ( Somedar - for a lack of a better word meaning a machinery which would be using other means to function than rays - many, many times faster than light, but even then our brains will never be able to react to such speeds, perhaps artificial intelligence thinking 100 times faster than the speed of light, to bring the "pulp" that would remain from our bodies somewhere - and NO time would not be affected ( since time does not exist ) and we would not travel in it, neither the effect of our brains bouncing in our skulls would change, or our cells and the very molecules that comprise them. Do I need to get into the type of steering and break system we would need ... SO NO LIVING BREATHING SPECIES COULD HAVE POSSIBLY EVER REACHED, OR WILL POSSIBLY EVER REACH, EARTH UNLESS THEY WERE OR WILL BE ABLE TO NAVIGATE BY OTHER MEANS THAN FOLLOWING LIGHT (shortcuts of the universe) OR UNLESS THEY ARE OTHER FORMS OF ENERGY + INTELLIGENCE + MATTER COMBINATION (for one they shouldn't have to breath, drink, eat move their bowels etc. - no time to sleep from all that bouncing and the noise and heat from all that friction etc. etc. Currents of particles could be the cause movement of objects in space, and whirlpools ( wormholes ). Magnetic fields ( gravity ) pull space forming particles, pulling as a consequence said space; and bend light, the only means of navigation in space.

No "Imagination is..." NOT "better than knowledge". Imagination is the means to collect the "ore" ( conceive the idea ), yet REASON, LOGICAL DEDUCTION, are the means to distill the "GOLD", which is knowledge.

Imagine if light didn't truly travel as believed! Imagine if it was rather a ripple particle reaction our brains understand as "light"; like water waves having a ripple reaction, the impact of which we feel or see on objects; there is movement of water, but it is not the first molecules in line which reach us, but the last ones . When light ( or sound ) occurs ( electron jump in the case of light ), in most cases it can be observed from every direction. Could that mean that it doesn't actually travel ? Could it be that the electron jumps which generate photons, causes a ripple effect from particle to particle, a wave the end of which affects our brains in a way we understand as "light." It would be like if people would stand in line in every direction and the person in the middle taps the next ( well in this example he/she would have to tap the people around him/her one at a time, but with light is different, just for the sake of the analogy without much nitpicking), and the people at the end feel the tap of the last person next to them, the first person in the center that started the "tap effect" didn't touch them ! With colored surfaces, it could be that the involved particles absorb the facets of the tap of the different colors in the spectrum, allowing a different kind of tap to continue, one that has only the same color effect with the one of the surface. How long it would take from the particle jumps that occurred to create the photons (or rather the ripple / tap effect) to the effect that those particle jumps ( creation of photons ) would have on our brains, times the distance between our eyes and the particle jumps, we could be interpreting as light-speed. This hypothesis could explain why it takes light speed for a photon to have its effect on our brains and while though it can be observed it has no mass let alone acquiring infinite mass. This could also explain how it is that light having no mass is affected by gravitational forces, is pulled by a black hole ( not the photons themselves but the particles of space involved in the light ripple / tap effect ). Photons are traveling as scientists say at light speed. As scientists also say, photons have no mass, they don't acquire infinite mass as they "travel" light speed! Imagine the world bombarded by photons of infinite mass, there would not be a world, but then there would not be light in the first place. Light travels in most cases in all directions, but even on a single direction traveling for 13 Billion years ( oldest light observable ) would take a lot of energy lost, where has light acquired all that energy from ?

If light did not actually travel, we would have the TIME it took for the effect, but no SPACE ( no travel ). Take light, as we think we know it, out of the equation, and the MAGICAL / ALLURING idea of relativity is falling apart ! Why do we give so much weight to light, ONE physical phenomenon out of the Infinite which we cannot observe, and we attribute all the function of the universe, let alone the Infinite, based on that singular phenomenon ?

"Nothing", "Everything", "Time", "Space", "Distance", "Dimensions, "Beginning", "End", "Energy", "Mass", "Intelligence", "Objects", "Particles" are simply concepts conceived to describe what we THINK we see and understand within the INFINITE.

Matter would not move without energy and energy could not be directed without intelligence. The Infinite Intelligence Energy and Matter. No other concept except the Infinite, could be attributed the characteristics humanity has attributed to the idea of "God."

One thing is absolutely certain. The Infinite is the reason for all existence and all phenomena within the Infinite.

This theory / philosophy is called Infinitism; the theory / philosophy of the Infinite.

:befuddled:
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11228
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:27 pm

I agree, Gord.

Taz has been pouring out rivers of meaningless drivel. I cannot be bothered reading it.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3572
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota
Contact:

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Lausten » Fri Jul 13, 2018 8:45 pm

Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Lausten wrote:The fact that it is opposite of other parables should be a clue, but most Christians don't take that clue. ...

My Lectionary review includes a link to one of those scholars.

Or here, where I go into more detail.


.... So, we shouldn't look for consistency. It is impossible not to think that some of those writers were petty, spiteful, vengeful people for whom unending torture with fire was quite appropriate for people who denied these beliefs. Hence the passages that reek of revenge, such as the weeping and gnashing of teeth in Mark's version of the Sermon on the Mount.

You see the problem, but how do we handle it? If everyone saw the Bible as historical documents and tried to understand them in context, we would at least be arguing about them while using agreed upon and scientific methods. We would still have disagreements, but there wouldn't be this extra layer of "if you are wrong, you'll burn in hell". So, that's my crusade; get the discussion of what the authors might have been intending into the conversation wherever I can.

Otherwise, we end up pointing out problems of interpretation that only pertain to a minority of Bible readers. This gives others an advantage in arguing their interpretation. Your post tried to get around this by pointing there are a variety of personalities portrayed for the Jesus character, but that assumes the authors were trying to portray a consistent character in the first place. I say, the question of the Bible portraying anything that actually existed is settled, that is, it doesn't. And it doesn't matter that I say it, it is the scholarly consensus. But for church survival reasons, this has not been passed along to the general population.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Io
Poster
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Re:The Solution To The Mystery "Repurged." Thank you all for your time,patience and feedback,and wish you all the be

Postby Io » Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:36 pm

TazAnastazio wrote:Disclaimer : These are my OWN theories. Some are right, some are wrong, for others it is still unknown or debatable.

Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?

User avatar
Upton_O_Goode
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3792
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2017 1:15 am
Custom Title: Unlimited_Oracular_Guidance
Location: The Land Formerly Known as Pangea

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby Upton_O_Goode » Fri Jul 13, 2018 9:47 pm

Lausten wrote:
Upton_O_Goode wrote:
Lausten wrote:The fact that it is opposite of other parables should be a clue, but most Christians don't take that clue. ...

My Lectionary review includes a link to one of those scholars.

Or here, where I go into more detail.


.... So, we shouldn't look for consistency. It is impossible not to think that some of those writers were petty, spiteful, vengeful people for whom unending torture with fire was quite appropriate for people who denied these beliefs. Hence the passages that reek of revenge, such as the weeping and gnashing of teeth in Mark's version of the Sermon on the Mount.

You see the problem, but how do we handle it? If everyone saw the Bible as historical documents and tried to understand them in context, we would at least be arguing about them while using agreed upon and scientific methods. We would still have disagreements, but there wouldn't be this extra layer of "if you are wrong, you'll burn in hell". So, that's my crusade; get the discussion of what the authors might have been intending into the conversation wherever I can.

Otherwise, we end up pointing out problems of interpretation that only pertain to a minority of Bible readers. This gives others an advantage in arguing their interpretation. Your post tried to get around this by pointing there are a variety of personalities portrayed for the Jesus character, but that assumes the authors were trying to portray a consistent character in the first place. I say, the question of the Bible portraying anything that actually existed is settled, that is, it doesn't. And it doesn't matter that I say it, it is the scholarly consensus. But for church survival reasons, this has not been passed along to the general population.


No disagreement from me there, although I see at least one indication that Paul's letters were written to contradict other versions of the story, and he says that anyone---even an angel from heaven---who contradicts his version should be anathematized. I don't think anyone was consciously trying to collaborate on a consistent picture of Jesus. The notorious difficulties of reconciling the accounts of the Resurrection seem to be evidence that they were not. But yes, it's best not to get distracted when talking with Christians about their doctrines. (That is something I generally avoid doing anyway, since I don't want to give offense.)
The Internet has democratized the old threat our teachers used to hold over us: "That goes on your permanent record." We knew that was a bluff. The only people whose misdeeds were recorded in indelible ink, back then, were husbands.

But now, thanks to Google, everybody really does have a permanent record. Thanks, Mark Zuckerberg!

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: Re:The Solution To The Mystery "Repurged." Thank you all for your time,patience and feedback,and wish you all the be

Postby TazAnastazio » Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:22 pm

Io wrote:
TazAnastazio wrote:Disclaimer : These are my OWN theories. Some are right, some are wrong, for others it is still unknown or debatable.

Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?


Because Io, having not studied all the involved scientific theories, or done the research, I cannot make my own opinion and be certain about things; besides I already mentioned the reasons why even scientists may not be absolutely certain about certain concepts. It is not a scientific writing based on experimentation and proof, but a philosophic. It is based on imagination/guesswork and reasonable deduction based on whatever information I have come across, destined to change as I acquire more information. This is why I stated clearly I believe that : "One thing is absolutely certain. The Infinite is the reason for all existence, objects and phenomena within the Infinite." I simply attempted to consider even the remotest of possibilities as much as my human mind could, and include it in my philosophy/theory for consideration by others and possible input from them.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
Has No Life
Posts: 11228
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby Lance Kennedy » Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:28 pm

Upton

About your signature.
Walt Whitman was talking a load of bull dust. From ignorance and a fake romanticism. Animals do not lead anything like a lovely and carefree life. Scientists study the stress wild animals are under by measuring the stress hormone cortisol which is found at elevated levels in feces when the animal is stressed. Guess what ? Wild animals tend to be under serious stress. Domestic animals not so.

For example, a study of elk at Yellowstone showed a MASSIVE increase in cortisol levels after wolves were reintroduced. With no predators, their stress levels were down (though population was way up ). Once they had predators, stress levels went through the roof !

Taz,

No one knows the meaning of infinite, and definitely not you. There is no such thing as "The infinite ". There is no evidence it exists, any more than there is evidence that any deity exists. So to draw conclusions about something that probably does not exist is kinda crazy !

User avatar
Io
Poster
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:56 am

Re: Re:The Solution To The Mystery "Repurged." Thank you all for your time,patience and feedback,and wish you all the be

Postby Io » Fri Jul 13, 2018 11:38 pm

TazAnastazio wrote:
Io wrote:
TazAnastazio wrote:Disclaimer : These are my OWN theories. Some are right, some are wrong, for others it is still unknown or debatable.

Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?


Because Io, having not studied all the involved scientific theories, or done the research, I cannot make my own opinion and be certain about things; besides I already mentioned the reasons why even scientists may not be absolutely certain about certain concepts.


Wouldn't those things come under the umbrella of  still unknown or debatable ? You said some are right, some are unknown/debatable and some are wrong.
You know, there's a methodology that we, we humans, have devised to ascertain as accurately as possible what is right and what is wrong whilst taking out as much human bias and error as possible...

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: Re:The Solution To The Mystery "Repurged." Thank you all for your time,patience and feedback,and wish you all the be

Postby TazAnastazio » Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:17 am

Io wrote: You know, there's a methodology that we, we humans, have devised to ascertain as accurately as possible what is right and what is wrong whilst taking out as much human bias and error as possible...


When dealing with the Infinite, the possibilities are endless, I just wanted to cover all the possibilities I could think of precisely because some of my hypothesis may be true, or not. I wrote-in the disclaimer, I made the proposition and let the reader decide by doing his or her own research. That way I touch all basis leaving no stone unturned. True be told, as of now; and I maybe a little stubborn here, going on a limb, or out of my mind a tiny bit, I cannot tell for certain that I believe that any of the stuff that I wrote are absolutely false. I don't know the science involved to tell the difference. I relied on input I received here, in this webpage. Some of it I simply didn't want to scrap because it took lots of time of contemplation. I had to include it and mention that I thought of it, but after further consideration and input I received I scrapped the idea. Besides we are talking about contemplating the Infinite here; vast, endless, Infinite possibilities ! Maybe there is some remote truth within the Infinite microcosm or macrocosm that would be revealed in the future. It could be I that thought of it as well, perhaps first.

About 2001, I had finished my shift at a chain bookstore, and was walking home on Westwood Blvd, California. I was probably thinking about astronomy/cosmology, perhaps because I had seen Hawkings' book or Dawkins', (I don't remember propably both) and in my mind came out of the blue (literaly/figuratively in this case) the thought of the moving white and other dots that seemingly appear when you look deep in the blue sky, then I thought of the seemingly infinite pixels of an old tv screen (cathode ray tube) , the type you get when there is no reception ( or perhaps the other way around ). Then I thought three kinds of pixels, infiniye outcomes! Later Growing up Christian Orthodox, I thought of the Trinity; (-), (+) and (0); Intelligence, Energy and Matter. That is how the minute particle theory sprang in my mind ( I squeezed that analogy as a supposition (what do you know, right?) in a paragraph of a 20 page paper titled " The theory of Everything and Nothing." Internet was not big in those days. Being that Westwood California is a university borough of Los Angeles (UCLA), how else could I have gotten feetback other than through the academicians that were visiting the cafeteria of the bookstore. I printed about 20 copies to give out to people. Call me crazy (again for the tbousandth time) I like to take in consideration even the impropable.

Growing up Christian in a small town in Greece, next to the northern border, where church was a mandatory habit of the townfolk (hamlet rather - also soccer after church) and coming across later in college with the scientific contradictions (Cosmos by Carl Sagan, evolution, agnosticism, atheism) I wonder what if truly (as we were taught in a class in Elementary school), science (showing how the world was created the teacher told us) and religion (telling us that God created the world), did not truly contradict each other. What if there was a bridge? What if I could find that bridge? What if I could find the bridges that connect all religions and philosophies? Above all, what if, if not answer humanity's answerable questions (no finite being ever will answer them completely), at least give satisfactory propositions! Enter Infinitism.

My hypothesis on scientific matters is tottaly separate from my theory on the Infinite in the manner of speaking that I could scrap them or include them and my theory would not be affected. Relativity does not nullify or prove the Infinite. It could be rather the other way around,also in a manner of speaking; the Infinite could include or exclude Relativity.

About my light travel and time existence and time travel assertions; it took me time, I contemplated extensively (obviously) around them, I don't want to scrap them. They are my thoughts, my theories, my "imagination" (even if it is not better than knoweledge). Besides think of it this way. I don't believe there is a Bigfoot running through the forests of Texas. Some people claim they saw one. I deduce that if the supposed witnesseses were not hallucinating due to fear and awe, or lied, they may had seen a gigantic orangutan that escaped a passing by circus, since there are no orangutans or gorillas in America, but there is that remote possiblity.
Last edited by TazAnastazio on Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28116
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

More insane religious claims

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 14, 2018 2:49 am

Io wrote: Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?
All the forum trolls do this.

Gorgeous keeps posting the same debunked Seth predictions, knowing none ever happened

Tom Palven keeps claiming the "1961 military industrial complex" is expanding while USA military expenditure has shrunk from 8% GDP to 3.1% GDP
.
Placid keeps posting we shouldn't read books, because he read that advice, in a book.

These trolls can't think of anything new to say, but still want attention, so they keep posting the same debunked nonsense.
:D

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: More insane religious claims

Postby TazAnastazio » Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:01 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Io wrote: Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?
All the forum trolls do this.

Gorgeous keeps posting the same debunked Seth predictions, knowing none ever happened

Tom Palven keeps claiming the "1961 military industrial complex" is expanding while USA military expenditure has shrunk from 8% GDP to 3.1% GDP
.
Placid keeps posting we shouldn't read books, because he read that advice, in a book.

These trolls can't think of anything new to say, but still want attention, so they keep posting the same debunked nonsense.
:D


I am not a troll. I just responded to a comment. In fact this thread took too much of my time as it is, and we have duscussed the subject extensively already.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby TazAnastazio » Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:06 am

Lance Kennedy wrote:Upton

About your signature.
Walt Whitman was talking a load of bull dust. From ignorance and a fake romanticism. Animals do not lead anything like a lovely and carefree life. Scientists study the stress wild animals are under by measuring the stress hormone cortisol which is found at elevated levels in feces when the animal is stressed. Guess what ? Wild animals tend to be under serious stress. Domestic animals not so.

For example, a study of elk at Yellowstone showed a MASSIVE increase in cortisol levels after wolves were reintroduced. With no predators, their stress levels were down (though population was way up ). Once they had predators, stress levels went through the roof !

Taz,

No one knows the meaning of infinite, and definitely not you. There is no such thing as "The infinite ". There is no evidence it exists, any more than there is evidence that any deity exists. So to draw conclusions about something that probably does not exist is kinda crazy !


About Lance's signature I wanted to comment earlier that animals don't need to perform brain surgeries either; but decided to pass, as the matter is obviously self-debunked.

Not so with Infinitism, but we have decided the matter extensively already :gp:
Last edited by TazAnastazio on Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: Is it more beneficial to individual health, to be a) A theist b) An atheist c) An agnostic

Postby TazAnastazio » Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:27 am

Lausten wrote: A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com


Lausten I read the opening post on your website. So your "crusade" is to discover who wrote the Bible, despite the fact that you believe it is full of fallacies ! Why? Do you admire it as a literal work and you cannot stand the anonymity of the authors and contributors? Or do you believe it includes some true historic facts and you want to discern truth from fable?

I for example accept that the authors of the Bible while putting also there own input, were perhaps God inspired (some have been, others may haven't been inspired by the divine - :offtopic: Homer too was asking for the muse to inspire him, and apparently she did, twice! :lol: ) and told the story of Creation and the reason for the Creation in a manner that would have timeless effect and would be understood by people living across the ages, of various level of education and understanding; like a childrens' book appropriate also for adults.

Or are you using the Socratic method, allowing the reader to come to the conclusion, the "Socratic truth" on their own; not wanting perhaps to contradict, oppose and exasperate anybody?
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: religion is a placebo

Postby TazAnastazio » Sat Jul 14, 2018 3:48 am

Matthew Ellard][quote="TazAnastazio wrote:then the people who wrote the biblical texts, and those who edited them and orchestrated such a masterful plot, truly deserve credit.
The Roman pagan religion already sacrificed sheep,goats and cows. It got an update when it claimed it sacrificed a human, called Jesus. Today terrorists are still blowing themselves up to become martyrs like Jesus. You think that is a good plot?

Not as good as War and Peace, but I guess God, in His Infinite wisdom, didn't choose to wait to inspire Tolstoy and be more marketable.
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28116
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: religion is a placebo

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:28 am

TazAnastazio wrote: but I guess God, in His Infinite wisdom....................
This the same God who slaughtered every innocent child, on Earth, in the flood?

Do you agree your God has the right to slaughter any of yours, or your family's children if you or any family adult, does something God does not like?

This makes sense to you and gives you comfort?
:lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Io
Poster
Posts: 181
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:56 am

Re: More insane religious claims

Postby Io » Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:44 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Io wrote: Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?
All the forum trolls do this.

Gorgeous keeps posting the same debunked Seth predictions, knowing none ever happened

Tom Palven keeps claiming the "1961 military industrial complex" is expanding while USA military expenditure has shrunk from 8% GDP to 3.1% GDP
.
Placid keeps posting we shouldn't read books, because he read that advice, in a book.

These trolls can't think of anything new to say, but still want attention, so they keep posting the same debunked nonsense.
:D


I know, but, unlike others, I've not had an epic drivel response in this thread yet and was feeling left out, so I thought I'd try to kick one off. And was I rewarded this time!

User avatar
TazAnastazio
Poster
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:06 am

Re: religion is a placebo

Postby TazAnastazio » Sat Jul 14, 2018 5:29 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
TazAnastazio wrote: but I guess God, in His Infinite wisdom....................
This the same God who slaughtered every innocent child, on Earth, in the flood?

Do you agree your God has the right to slaughter any of yours, or your family's children if you or any family adult, does something God does not like?

This makes sense to you and gives you comfort?
:lol: :lol: :lol:


I don't know Matthew, you tell me, has the Ark been found, or was it another alegory (parable)? Maybe there was a pandemic going on. How in the world would I know ?! Here is an interesting link :

https://www.google.com/amp/s/abcnews.go ... d=17884533

Matthew Ellard wrote: This is the same God..."


Was the God of the Bible the Infinite, or another being/other beings of the galaxy, Universe? I haven't figured that out yet, I'll let you know as soon as I get Devine inspiration or find out some other way. I'll ask my muse to enlightenment me, till then I'll keep you posted. If you ask why God in his Infinite/super wisdom decided to act in a particular way, the answer is the same.

The only reason I believe in God is because nobody has provided me with a link from my existence to beyond the singularity; and if they ever do, I don't see how that chain would link to anything else other than infinity.

As for your second question, the answer is simple and all over any religious script, the Bible being no exception;and because you are tired of hearing, you know which word, I'll put it in the traditional terms: " Who am I to disagree with God?! " And what good would it do anyway?!
These concepts are certainly true :
The Infinite is the reason for all existence and phenomena; while the future does not exist, it is the most precious thing of all ! While the ultimate positivity achievable would be the ideal, between negative choices, the best is the less negative one ! Humanity should always strive to counterbalance the emerging property of existence, negativity; with positivity.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9227
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: More insane religious claims

Postby Poodle » Sat Jul 14, 2018 8:07 am

Io wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Io wrote: Why are you posting things you know to be wrong?
All the forum trolls do this.

Gorgeous keeps posting the same debunked Seth predictions, knowing none ever happened

Tom Palven keeps claiming the "1961 military industrial complex" is expanding while USA military expenditure has shrunk from 8% GDP to 3.1% GDP
.
Placid keeps posting we shouldn't read books, because he read that advice, in a book.

These trolls can't think of anything new to say, but still want attention, so they keep posting the same debunked nonsense.
:D


I know, but, unlike others, I've not had an epic drivel response in this thread yet and was feeling left out, so I thought I'd try to kick one off. And was I rewarded this time!

CONGRATULATIONS!!! You may now mount an effigy of Taz's head (oh .., god forbid) on your wall. Personally, I'm still trying to sort out any iota of logic associated with Taz. I think it's hopeless, especially as the latest, greatest, scientific "theory" appears to have transformed itself into a spit-dribbling move about the realms of love for Jehovah. Ah well - the world is a strange place.
Alternatively, I recommend a cup of tea. Well, I don't really, as I can't stand the stuff, but it's a straight fight - tea or Taz? Taz or tea? I wish Freebill was back - he was much more straightforward.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 31160
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: The Solution To The Mystery

Postby Gord » Sat Jul 14, 2018 9:26 am

Anywho, here's some interesting science: http://www.castl.uci.edu/

It's the Center for Chemistry at the Space-Time Limit.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"Imagine an ennobling of what could be" -- the New Age BS Generator site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 28116
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: religion is a placebo

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:55 am

TazAnastazio wrote: I don't know Matthew, you tell me, has the Ark been found,
[color=#000080]Nope. The "ark" is Babylonian and not Judaic-christian, which copied the religion. Didn't you know? /color] :lol: :lol:


Return to “Belief, Nonbelief, and Philosophy”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests