Arguing against religion

General discussion on the subject of religion, losing religion, and having no religion to lose...
Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Sat Jul 23, 2016 10:31 pm

Poodle wrote:Been here before, Azania?
You never left.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Sat Jul 23, 2016 10:39 pm

Angel wrote:
Azania wrote:
Angel wrote:
Azania wrote:
Angel wrote:
Azania wrote:
Angel wrote:
Azania wrote:
Angel wrote:
Matthew Ellard wrote:
Azania wrote:We are nothing but consciousness.
No. Simply because unconscious people still exist. :D
How do you decide when and if
they are unconscious ? They may be
just ignoring you.
It is not that they are unconscious or ignoring you because the idea of a state of unconsciousness and ignorance is in consciousness. Like I said you are only consciousness and everything and everywhere is in your consciousness. From the perspective of the unconscious it is just a lapse in memory that is all. If you have been unconscious yourself you remember nothing of it. All that the others can say about it is that you were unresponsive. To you it was just a blank. Do realise we function totally out of our memory, when this memory totally fails or blanks out we call it unconsciousness, when it partially fails and we can no longer recall the content or the information that the consciousness has recorded to memory we call it Alzheimer's or dementia. The moment the consciousness sprouts it is recording information from its environment, it mirrors everything and everything is mirrored in memory, all that you think you know is merely a collections of images that the consciousness has been recording but what happens in real life is not contained in the memory of consciousness it happens spontaneously in the now.
If I am only consciousness then how can I be
unconscious ?
Speak for your own experiences ~ they can toss me around and not get a response but
I remember things from where I go from
my body. Amazzzzzing things!!!!

Like now?
And now?
And now?
I remember typing that and even what
I'm going to type next but it is only in the now?
Memory is now. Consciousness is always. One.
Divided = fail. Multiplied is many of one.

There is nothing wrong with the memory itself, it is the content that creates problems. Like the idea of God. Because there are so many ideas about God we have religious wars. Memory is now but it's content must be recalled. You need not remember now because it is always the case. So when I say I am only consciousness it can only be out of my own experience which can only be now. If I am rendered unconscious it would be impossible for me to say anything about it because of the lapse in memory. Can you say anything about your deep sleep apart from I feel well rested once it's over ? Similarly from the point of my own experience I can only say I am conscious, I cannot say I am unconscious, this also applies to you and everybody else.
In my life ~ God existed before the idea of
God existed just as my family existed
before I knew what they are. Just as
friends exist before they r friends. It's a
Faith thing lol

What's wrong with the content of my memory?
Does it not suite you?
What r witnesses for then?
I have witnesses but they
r chicken and won't speak
with me.
You can't speak for my experience lol
The most you can do is witness it. How good
is your memory?
Do you not think that before any mentation of any kind can occur you must be there first for it to occur to?. Otherwise how can all these thoughts of God, family and friends arise?

The content of your memory is a conflict of interest. There is you as a point of awareness then there is the idea which you have of yourself as a focal point in consciousness. In consciousness all your ideas that you have about yourself, God, family and friends are here. And of course I cannot speak for your experience but for the experiencer I can, for it is only one. What you are in essence and substance I am too, we are one of the same.
Oh ya ~ do u define mental activity as coming
from the brain or the mind?

They existed before I did.
I came to know them.
I am not God. Lol
I'm just the messenger .
You can shoot me but I don't
know what good it will do you.
I am one with ?
I don't quite know yet.
I am one with u when u r one with I.
Can u look in the whites of the eye?
See the light in the dark?
The same substance? That's for science
to prove. The same essence ? Not sure?
Always more questions than time.
Mental activity is the work of the mind. The concept of a brain exists in the mind. Where else could it be, inside your skull? - is a lump of matter.
What keeps you going when you are
out of your mind?
The mind.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Sat Jul 23, 2016 11:17 pm

Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote: Unless you expand your awareness beyond the limitations and restrictions of science you will never verify what you think you know by your own experience which is knowing the totality and fullness of all that there is in reality. In scientific analysis the observer is never accounted for hence the reason why there is no end to discovery because the event horizon or the observer can never be reached, touched or contacted - this is also your science by the why.
The words of a wannabe guru. But why would someone who wants to fool people with fancy words, telling them they have powers they don't know about , come to a forum titled "Letting Go of God"? Does he actually believe himself? And if he does, why doesn't he just use those powers to make himself a cheeseburger out of nothing? That would be time better spent. Better for all of us.
Probably for the same reason why somebody would think they are being fooled by somebody using fancy words. so it's for you to tell me.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Sun Jul 24, 2016 1:56 am

Azania wrote: Probably for the same reason why somebody would think they are being fooled by somebody using fancy words. so it's for you to tell me.
But who is the fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? If the fool sees himself as the fooler then it would be foolish to flollow where he sees his awareness of his own fooling following in to the harbors of the mind where there is no fool or follower only the one who is and we are all fools and we are all followers and we are all fancy. Fancy the fool who follows in the wake of the sleeping foolish one who is but isn't. Follow fool foolishly fancy following flow flaw fallow fool.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10570
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Poodle » Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:22 am

Beautifully and succinctly put, Lausten.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26429
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by scrmbldggs » Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:53 am

Azania wrote:
Poodle wrote:Been here before, Azania?
You never left.
Good spotting, Poodle. It's flaccid!
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:42 am

Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote: Probably for the same reason why somebody would think they are being fooled by somebody using fancy words. so it's for you to tell me.
But who is the fool?
Lol! I don't know, that's the reason I'm asking you to tell me because you are the one that seems to think you are being fooled. What reason have I to fool you or even lie to you? What could I possibly gain?
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Gord
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 34488
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: My nightmare
Location: Transcona

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Gord » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:25 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Azania wrote:
Poodle wrote:Been here before, Azania?
You never left.
Good spotting, Poodle. It's flaccid!
Aw, not that "your words are just farts in the wind" person.... :jaded:
"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
Is Trump in jail yet?

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Sun Jul 24, 2016 10:39 am

Gord wrote:
scrmbldggs wrote:
Azania wrote:
Poodle wrote:Been here before, Azania?
You never left.
Good spotting, Poodle. It's flaccid!
Aw, not that "your words are just farts in the wind" person.... :jaded:
Lol! Ordinarily I would say " am I missing something?"
But to say such things here would be inappropriate it seems.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Sun Jul 24, 2016 12:20 pm

Azania wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote: Probably for the same reason why somebody would think they are being fooled by somebody using fancy words. so it's for you to tell me.
But who is the fool?
Lol! I don't know, that's the reason I'm asking you to tell me because you are the one that seems to think you are being fooled. What reason have I to fool you or even lie to you? What could I possibly gain?
There's a difference between being fooled and seeing that someone is trying to fool you. One of them buys the Deepak Chopra book, the other doesn't.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Sun Jul 24, 2016 12:55 pm

Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote:
Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote: Probably for the same reason why somebody would think they are being fooled by somebody using fancy words. so it's for you to tell me.
But who is the fool?
Lol! I don't know, that's the reason I'm asking you to tell me because you are the one that seems to think you are being fooled. What reason have I to fool you or even lie to you? What could I possibly gain?
There's a difference between being fooled and seeing that someone is trying to fool you. One of them buys the Deepak Chopra book, the other doesn't.
In your imaginary world of thoughts and feelings that may be the case but in the real world it is much more simple, the difference is between knowing or rather not knowing in your case.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Angel
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1640
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:23 pm
Custom Title: LOVE

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Angel » Sun Jul 24, 2016 2:59 pm

Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote: Probably for the same reason why somebody would think they are being fooled by somebody using fancy words. so it's for you to tell me.
But who is the fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? If the fool sees himself as the fooler then it would be foolish to flollow where he sees his awareness of his own fooling following in to the harbors of the mind where there is no fool or follower only the one who is and we are all fools and we are all followers and we are all fancy. Fancy the fool who follows in the wake of the sleeping foolish one who is but isn't. Follow fool foolishly fancy following flow flaw fallow fool.
Society forces people to be followers
of fools as that's all they have for leaders
with socially forces laws to make you
their fools.
Are you proud of yourselves yet?
Being the big bully's that you are.
So you can break my heart. Big Deal.
May you all rest in my peace <3
Has A Nice Day :lol: <3

Ps ~ if you know who I am then why do you treat us so?

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Mon Jul 25, 2016 3:03 am

the difference is between knowing or rather not knowing in your case.
Not that much of what you say is coherent, but this is even less than usual. To have a difference, you need two things. "between" doesn't mix with "or rather".
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Mon Jul 25, 2016 10:51 am

Lausten wrote:
the difference is between knowing or rather not knowing in your case.
Not that much of what you say is coherent, but this is even less than usual. To have a difference, you need two things. "between" doesn't mix with "or rather".
There are only two things to consider, the real and the unreal. In your imaginary world if it's not logical it's not acceptable, that's your problem, well actually your minds. What is does not go according to the thought process that goes on in your mind, simply because the real is not a process. So from the perspective of the mind whatever I say you will find disconcerting or even incoherent. In these matter you must put your preconceived notions aside and think for yourself.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:17 am

Azania wrote:
Lausten wrote:
the difference is between knowing or rather not knowing in your case.
Not that much of what you say is coherent, but this is even less than usual. To have a difference, you need two things. "between" doesn't mix with "or rather".
There are only two things to consider, the real and the unreal. In your imaginary world if it's not logical it's not acceptable, that's your problem, well actually your minds. What is does not go according to the thought process that goes on in your mind, simply because the real is not a process. So from the perspective of the mind whatever I say you will find disconcerting or even incoherent. In these matter you must put your preconceived notions aside and think for yourself.
Did you read the book on how to manipulate people? Because I can see you're trying. But you skipped the chapter on what to do when someone sees you are full of it. Have you read anything about quantum physics. Not logical. Quite real. Have you ever been in love? Where's the logic in that? If there is only your consciousness, how do you know so much about this other "real" world?
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

Matthew Ellard
Obnoxious Weed
Posts: 30516
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am
Custom Title: Big Beautiful Bouncy Skeptic

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Matthew Ellard » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:22 am

Azania wrote:There are only two things to consider, the real and the unreal. In your imaginary world if it's not logical it's not acceptable, that's your problem

100% wrong. Unlike you, we educated people can devise simple repeatable experiments that define if something is real or not. You will never get that far with your fuzzy philosophy.

It is you who has been left behind by the introduction of science. A relic from the Dark Ages of cultural religious history.
:D

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26429
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:48 am

:hmm: Looks like placid and gachchy been breeding. But the result looks too much like Shaka for gachchy to be the dad.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:35 am

Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote:
Lausten wrote:
the difference is between knowing or rather not knowing in your case.
Not that much of what you say is coherent, but this is even less than usual. To have a difference, you need two things. "between" doesn't mix with "or rather".
There are only two things to consider, the real and the unreal. In your imaginary world if it's not logical it's not acceptable, that's your problem, well actually your minds. What is does not go according to the thought process that goes on in your mind, simply because the real is not a process. So from the perspective of the mind whatever I say you will find disconcerting or even incoherent. In these matter you must put your preconceived notions aside and think for yourself.
Did you read the book on how to manipulate people? Because I can see you're trying. But you skipped the chapter on what to do when someone sees you are full of it. Have you read anything about quantum physics. Not logical. Quite real. Have you ever been in love? Where's the logic in that? If there is only your consciousness, how do you know so much about this other "real" world?

If you knew yourself as you are you would not even ask such questions. Nothing you can think of is real. Even the concept of quantum physics is merely a reflection of reality on the smallest level. Primary is the knowledge that you are - the living reality!
First comes awareness. Out of awareness there is the consciousness, in the consciousness there is the mind. In the mind the world and your body appears. The two are essentially one. As long as you are focused on the body your awareness will not go beyond its reflection in consciousness. Go beyond the consciousness into awareness and all will be clear.
In the real world there is only love, in the material world this is expressed as love in action or love to be. Not being anything in particular since pure being is a universal concept, the laws of physics do not apply here. Being is love, beauty, harmony and intelligence, they are immaterial and have the stamp of reality. So in the real world there is no such thing as being in love, you are the love, loved and the beloved. This is the real world you come to know by being real.
It's all very simple, where you see separation I see none. Of course there are differences but separation goes against the fact, all is one. Consciousness is one
I see things as they are, you image them to be something else, it is that simple. When I look at something I see consciousness. When you look you see a tree, bird or an insect. These are only names superimposed on something that is essentially nameless.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:05 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Azania wrote:There are only two things to consider, the real and the unreal. In your imaginary world if it's not logical it's not acceptable, that's your problem

100% wrong. Unlike you, we educated people can devise simple repeatable experiments that define if something is real or not. You will never get that far with your fuzzy philosophy.

It is you who has been left behind by the introduction of science. A relic from the Dark Ages of cultural religious history.
:D
it all depends on how you look at it. The observed, the observer and the observation are all mental constructs. Whatever you do in the light of awareness eventually leads you to the real, you arrive at something so near and so great that all science near or far pale into insignificance. Of course from the empirical any experiment repeated, repeated and repeated eventual bring results if not by you somebody else simply because it is the consciousness that imparts the reality to it. Another age time and place they may not be replicable since empirical science is not valid for all time the nature of consciousness is alway changeful. You must realise all the scientists and their sciences, regardless of discipline exist in your mind only. So in this sense whatever you do in the light of awareness is virtuous, whatever you do in the darkness of ignorance can only be ignorance.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:12 pm

scrmbldggs wrote::hmm: Looks like placid and gachchy been breeding. But the result looks too much like Shaka for gachchy to be the dad.
Lol! Who the hell is Shaka and gachchy? I can only surmise you have been here too long.

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5279
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by gorgeous » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:33 pm

Einstein---"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:25 pm

Asshattiea wrote:I see things as they are, you image them to be something else, it is that simple.
Classic "mystery religion" stuff. This is what the Gnostics tried to do back in the early AD centuries. They were beaten back into the hills. My guess is this fails because it is essentially weak. It's weak philosophically because it has nothing to build upon. It is more about breaking from observed reality and simply claiming there is knowledge to be had than it is about building on basic truths and discovering knowledge that can be discovered. It's weak organizationally because it attracts people who are disillusioned with the failures of educators, leaders, conquerors, etc. but it doesn't attract those who have any concrete plans for solving real problems, like getting clean water where it's needed or keeping the air breathable and the food growing. It promotes navel gazing and hoping that knowledge will pop into your head.

I'm okay with the idea that a small group of people would continue to pursue this. Why not? As long as they submit whatever they "discover" to rigorous testing. As long as they don't make wild claims and try to recruit vulnerable people and take advantage of them.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
gorgeous
Has More Than 5K Posts
Posts: 5279
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by gorgeous » Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:36 pm

those who speak truth have always been murdered by those who are scared of the truth....and science evolved from philosophy and to philosophy it is returning....what is real, does the mind create all?....is anything really solid?....nope...
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:47 pm

Lausten wrote:
Asshattiea wrote:I see things as they are, you image them to be something else, it is that simple.
Classic "mystery religion" stuff. This is what the Gnostics tried to do back in the early AD centuries. They were beaten back into the hills. My guess is this fails because it is essentially weak. It's weak philosophically because it has nothing to build upon. It is more about breaking from observed reality and simply claiming there is knowledge to be had than it is about building on basic truths and discovering knowledge that can be discovered. It's weak organizationally because it attracts people who are disillusioned with the failures of educators, leaders, conquerors, etc. but it doesn't attract those who have any concrete plans for solving real problems, like getting clean water where it's needed or keeping the air breathable and the food growing. It promotes navel gazing and hoping that knowledge will pop into your head.

I'm okay with the idea that a small group of people would continue to pursue this. Why not? As long as they submit whatever they "discover" to rigorous testing. As long as they don't make wild claims and try to recruit vulnerable people and take advantage of them.

There is no mystery in what is real. It is as plain as day only you have to open your eyes to see it. In your imagination where things appear then disappear is a world full of mystery. Those of you who have not fully understood the powers of the imagination simply remain asleep there.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26429
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:51 pm

Ah, the religion of those that can't cope with the "fact" that their god in his/her omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence is an incredibly evil and vicious animal.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26429
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by scrmbldggs » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:52 pm

My apologies to all things animal.
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Tue Jul 26, 2016 4:28 pm

Azania wrote: There is no mystery in what is real. It is as plain as day only you have to open your eyes to see it. In your imagination where things appear then disappear is a world full of mystery. Those of you who have not fully understood the powers of the imagination simply remain asleep there.
The "open eyes" analogy always cracks me up. I could read the above two ways. Which is the point. And I don't really care which one Azz thinks it is. I'm not even sure he cares.

1 - What is real is that which you can imagine. There is power in imagining. Imagining is what brings you into the real world.
2 - Imagination is powerful, it can fool you. You imagine a reality that isn't real and you can be drawn to it, ignoring reality and paying consequences for that ignorance.

There's no mystery in what is real? Really? How did the universe begin? Does it have something we can call a beginning? How well do my senses reflect reality? Why does only one sperm an egg during fertilization, and why do sometimes two or three do that? What is the purpose of a platypus?
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 4:30 pm

gorgeous wrote:those who speak truth have always been murdered by those who are scared of the truth....and science evolved from philosophy and to philosophy it is returning....what is real, does the mind create all?....is anything really solid?....nope...
Where is your mind, are you not conscious of it? Your mind exists in the consciousness. Consciousness is the creator of all things but consciousness itself is dream like. In a moment puff! It is gone. There is nothing in it that is solid.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 6:03 pm

Lausten wrote:
Azania wrote: There is no mystery in what is real. It is as plain as day only you have to open your eyes to see it. In your imagination where things appear then disappear is a world full of mystery. Those of you who have not fully understood the powers of the imagination simply remain asleep there.
The "open eyes" analogy always cracks me up. I could read the above two ways. Which is the point. And I don't really care which one Azz thinks it is. I'm not even sure he cares.

1 - What is real is that which you can imagine. There is power in imagining. Imagining is what brings you into the real world.
2 - Imagination is powerful, it can fool you. You imagine a reality that isn't real and you can be drawn to it, ignoring reality and paying consequences for that ignorance.

There's no mystery in what is real? Really? How did the universe begin? Does it have something we can call a beginning? How well do my senses reflect reality? Why does only one sperm an egg during fertilization, and why do sometimes two or three do that? What is the purpose of a platypus?
You can have it anyhow you like I'm not here to convince you or anyone for that matter. The knowledge is here for the taking only there are no takers. It really makes no difference what we think, at the end of the day we know nothing, only that we exist. As a body you will soon be dead along with your memories of a world that only existed in your imagination. When the dream disappears another one reappears. In the end it is the same as it was, is and always will be. You dream about life before death, you dream about life after death, the dream continues unabated. It makes no difference to the consciousness as a whole.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 12:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10570
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Poodle » Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:50 pm

Azania wrote:You can have it anyhow you like I'm not here to convince you or anyone for that matter ...
Then what are you here for? The only other reasons for anyone to join a forum such as this and then spout the juvenile philosophy you espouse are lunacy and stupidity. You are the latest of a long line of pseudophilosophers, although you appear to be exuding very similar {!#%@} to at least two earlier incarnations. However, carry on - you are providing excitement for Gorgeous and amusement for everyone else.

Oh - this post exists only in your mind. It is not real, any more than a feather falling to the sun.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 10:09 pm

Poodle wrote:
Azania wrote:You can have it anyhow you like I'm not here to convince you or anyone for that matter ...
Then what are you here for? The only other reasons for anyone to join a forum such as this and then spout the juvenile philosophy you espouse are lunacy and stupidity. You are the latest of a long line of pseudophilosophers, although you appear to be exuding very similar {!#%@} to at least two earlier incarnations. However, carry on - you are providing excitement for Gorgeous and amusement for everyone else.

Oh - this post exists only in your mind. It is not real, any more than a feather falling to the sun.
Lol!! You have answered your own question, and mine for that matter. But I wouldn't have stooped to the level of infancy just to express something that appears to be pretty obvious. But as you suggest, it's all in the best possible taste.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10570
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Poodle » Tue Jul 26, 2016 10:22 pm

a) I didn't suggest anything at all.
b) I'm pleased to see we're in agreement on your reasons for being here.
c) I completely agree that what I said was obvious. Your own agreement is gratifying.

Meanwhile, in the news, the US has withdrawn from Vietnam.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:04 pm

Poodle wrote:a) I didn't suggest anything at all.
b) I'm pleased to see we're in agreement on your reasons for being here.
c) I completely agree that what I said was obvious. Your own agreement is gratifying.

Meanwhile, in the news, the US has withdrawn from Vietnam.
Forget it. You are far too slow.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10570
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Poodle » Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:10 pm

Perhaps - but not so slow as to be unable to recognise you.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Tue Jul 26, 2016 11:47 pm

Poodle wrote:Perhaps - but not so slow as to be unable to recognise you.
Well at least you've recognised something, even if it is only your memory.
Last edited by Azania on Thu Aug 18, 2016 1:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Real Skeptic
Posts: 26429
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: somewhere

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by scrmbldggs » Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:01 am

:hmm: I see we've got our own fictional quote generator. And it's automatic!
.
Lard, save me from your followers.

Azania
Access Suspended
Posts: 260
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2016 8:37 pm

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Azania » Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:20 am

scrmbldggs wrote::hmm: I see we've got our own fictional quote generator. And it's automatic!
Lol! By the looks of it you've always had it. Automaton seems to be the routine here, but you hardly notice until somebody comes along and disrupts your mechanical flow.
An obtuse mind often clogs the cognisance of consciousness to the point were repetition becomes mainstay and your awareness pales into insignificance.

User avatar
Poodle
True Skeptic
Posts: 10570
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Post-bloom
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Poodle » Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:31 am

Nature is inherent in self-righteous potentiality.

User avatar
Lausten
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3818
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 6:33 pm
Location: Northern Minnesota

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Lausten » Wed Jul 27, 2016 11:01 am

Azania wrote: You can have it anyhow you like I'm not here to convince you or anyone for that matter. The knowledge is here for the taking only there are no takers. It really makes no difference what we think, at the end of the day we know nothing, only that we exist. As a body you will soon be dead along with your memories of a world that only existed in your imagination.
As I said way back, any woo-woo made up religious stuff always comes back to reflecting what is obvious and observable. I could argue that my actions make a difference in some small way to a few people for a short time. Fleas arguing about who owns the dog.
Last edited by Lausten on Wed Jul 27, 2016 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
A sermon helper that doesn't tell you what to believe: http://www.milepost100.com

User avatar
Angel
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1640
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2005 6:23 pm
Custom Title: LOVE

Re: Arguing against religion

Post by Angel » Wed Jul 27, 2016 3:19 pm

Poodle wrote:Nature is inherent in self-righteous potentiality.
But nature doesn't know if it's
right or not~ that's what people
are for. To dominate it.
Are you proud of yourselves yet?
Being the big bully's that you are.
So you can break my heart. Big Deal.
May you all rest in my peace <3
Has A Nice Day :lol: <3

Ps ~ if you know who I am then why do you treat us so?