Jump to content

Joshpantera

Moderator
  • Content Count

    3,883
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    47

Everything posted by Joshpantera

  1. It's a matter of perspective. There is a sort of meme that goes around suggesting a false dichotomy: either there is a supernatural purpose or no purpose at all. People come in to this thinking either from hearing others express similar sentiment, or just coming to this general conclusion on their own. But you have to factor in that christians themselves spread this false dichotomy of despair AND a lot of atheist's tend to play lip service to it as well. So it comes from both popular fronts. But is it true? While debating with LuthAMF, he kept trying to pin me to the ropes with this false dichotomy. The truth is that this is something that we don't actually know for certain. How could anyone possibly know for certain whether or not there is any kind of purpose for life aside from a mythological, and supernatural set of assumptions and assertions? Because just off the top of my head I can think of several scenarios that could have purpose involved in them without any mythological or supernatural assumption and assertions. 1) We exist in a simulation, and the simulation in and of itself has a purpose involved. 2) We exist in an eternal multiverse where infinite replication paradox exists. Everything would happen for a reason, even if the reason is simply because replication will necessarily play out over and over again. 3) We exist in a universe which evolves in the direction of self awareness and the evolution of self aware creatures is pivotal to the life cycle of a given universe. Perhaps self aware creatures playing key roles in the grand scheme which, may also involve repetition. 4) We exist in a universe which has as of yet unknown and /or unforeseen purpose, reason and meaning. Aside from that, Florduh's right. Life is what you make of it. Purpose is also what you make of it, whether it's happening per free will or deterministic factors. It's what ever you are making it out to be. It doesn't have to be any more complicated than that.
  2. Creation ex nihilo. Creation out of nothing seems to suggest as much. One problem I have with them over this is the question of god's omnipresence. If god is not nothing, and god is all present, everywhere present, that would tend to cause a contradiction with creation ex nihilo. Where in the scheme of an omnipresence does "nothing" exist? Which leads into how an omnipresent god could NOT be everything in creation, everything in existence, etc. Of course these are just contradictions among many, many contradictions and inconsistent beliefs. And in all of that christians are conditioned into having the idea that there ought to be nothing baked in from the start.
  3. You need permission to post in this section. Should be set up soon.
  4. @TrueFreedom @Jagdish is trying to post here in the spirituality section.
  5. To the question of why does existence, exist at all, some one tried a serious attempt at answering the question anonymously on a pantheist forum. It went like this: 'Existence, exists, because the absolute non-existence of anything at all is impossible.' And that seems arguable and full of assumption. But at the same time there may be more to it than many people catch at first glance. The whole issue coming from the BBT and beginning of the universe comes down to this necessity for an eternal source material. Attempts at a nothing = something argument turn out to be something = something after all. And that could be as simple as accepting that if anything exists right now, then something, somehow, had to have always existed, in some way (or many ways), or else nothing could exist right now. No eternal source material - no existence. The more I've thought about it, the more I've warmed up to his answer. It doesn't make existence any less mysterious, either. Because it's mind boggling how something has always existed. And yet, the alternative doesn't work out at all. So by default, it seems the non-existence of anything at all probably is impossible. It's pretty difficult to locate true, absolute nothing. This may be why. I'd also add that the whole thing could just be one of those species specific issues. At the minimum it shows how our species is wired to observe, think and interpret reality. It looks like we're very married to a something = something philosophy of reality.
  6. Smarter than judeo-christian contradictory nonsense. At least they call something infinite, eternal, transcendent and immanent and then follow through with the necessary implications. Where as judeo-christians make the same claims about god then proceed head long into contradicting their own claims. That's pretty stupid from my view.
  7. I find these stories interesting, but do so cautiously. My mother had some type of out of body experience during the birth of my sister. It was very real to her. She says that she was out and hovering above her body. But I also understand that there could be other explanations than taking all of this at face value. My grandfather, during his quadruple bipass surgery ordeal had an elaborate and well described journey into and meeting with, "the light." It was very real to him. Again, his sincerity doesn't do much to make it literally true as there are myriad other explanations for what he seemed to legitimately experience. I've been close to drowning death at least twice, and several stages into hypothermia during winter conditions over the course of my surfing over the last 30 years. I do know first hand what it's like to give up the fight for air underwater and transition into the peaceful stage and then to black out completely, underwater. But I'm one of the cases who experienced zero memorable consciousness during that time. Nothing at all. Just drifting out, a blank where time lapsed, and then coming to floating at the surface and coughing out water. I obviously didn't die, but I was somewhere near death. So I didn't have any elaborate experience, no light, no beings of light, or any of that sort of thing.
  8. It's no more or less insightful than Forest Gump, and ultimately, Forest Gump stupid as far as that goes....
  9. That's what I thought. It's been a while since this came up.
  10. You're right, it doesn't mean that. Has anyone suggested that it does?
  11. That's what it boils down to. I like that summary. That the point I was trying to make by saying: It's about visibility and detection as they collide, and sub atomic particles burst out briefly. We've discovered new sub atomic particles. And that's the other point. A back ground, Zero Point Field is something, it isn't really something coming from nothing. That's what atheist's and materialists who gravitate towards these arguments should keep in mind before going up against christians with this material (no pun intended). Drawing a line in the sand on a nothing = something argument is doomed in so many ways. And not worth taking up. I think it's far better to just concede that everyone is operating from a something = something basis, both the believers and non-believers alike. Do you disagree with the above Pantheory?
  12. But the main thing here is that this sort of anecdotal testimony doesn't prove or substantiate the claims of the experience. These beings of light told her time and again that trying to prove any of this to people was of no real value. What she experienced early on is something I completely understand. I had something of a similar experience but not via near death. It was more the case of allowing myself to drift towards an aware state of self identification with the whole. I wasn't dying or near dying. But I was conscious of the necessary interconnection between the totality and the perceived part. And how unavoidable identification with the whole is. How futile it is to resist such an identity. And how it doesn't matter one bit how we spin it, if we exist, then we are necessarily "existence itself." That's exactly what she experienced and described in those exact same words - though she did so via a drowning incident and thereafter. But trying to prove or substantiate the above seems highly irrelevant. It doesn't strike me as a situation where proving it matters one way or another. Because reality is what it is. If reality consists of a whole, where all of the parts are the whole itself, that's just the reality of the situation. Whether or not everyone sees or believes such a reality according to what it is, doesn't in any way change the reality. It just is what it is. There doesn't seem to be any need for a great commission or pressing need to proselytize people into seeing or believing it. And ultimately it's just an unavoidable situation. If you exist, you are therefore an aspect of existence itself. Cut and dry. End of story. Do you agree or disagree with the above? And if so, why? Thanks.
  13. Hopefully as technology infiltrates those regions people will start to question what they're being told and challenge claims, look things up. No doubt as the US falls in behind Europe, the third world would fall in somewhere behind the US as far as that goes. But to be honest, I hope that struggling people in third world countries find their way to this forum, read what we have to say, and take notice of our debates and interactions with christian apologist's (vain speculators claiming to have the "TRVTH").
  14. This informal debate remains open for any christian who would like to try and succeed where LuthAMF has failed to substantiate his claims about the bible, truth, etc. However this attempt has to be a serious one. No dodging. No taking up multiple pages without having answered the questions and substantiated the claims.
  15. That's an interesting way of looking at it. Campbell used say, 'sub atomic particles, whence?' They are coming and going. From where do they come and to where do they go? The idea being to outline a modern practical way of understanding the first function of a traditional mythology - putting one in touch with the mystery of their own life and existence. Which is the same underlying mystery as the existence of the universe, world and all things. In a lot of ways we are merely coming and going with longer time interval duration than the sub atomic particles that pop in and out of visibility in the particle collision chambers. In a philosophical sense everything comes and goes out of the ground of being and non being, or as what Alan Watts used to term, "the fabric and structure of existence itself." And that's what everyone and everything basically is, deep down and far in. Just the fabric and structure (what ever that turns out to be in a literal sense) of existence itself molded into what we see around outside of ourselves and what we see in the mirror. We come and go, but all the while the ground level and basis of what we are at these lower levels is something steady. What comes and goes are merely the appearances, forms and images that the underlying fabric and structure of existence itself takes on for a duration. And then those appearances, forms and images eventually recede and dissolve. But the existence factor underlying the coming and going was steady the entire time, and presses ever forward. This does tend to outline the "something from nothing" issue in a philosophical sense. Setting any particular cosmology and physical models aside. They all depend on some type of eternal source material: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANtpsunRYIs&t=214s And that boils down to the philosophical term the fabric and structure of existence. Something that has always existed. If it didn't always exist, then it would have been created. But then what created the fabric and structure of existence itself? Something else? If so, then what created that? It was either always in existence or created by something further back. So either way, either created by something that requires something else, or something that has always existed, we're still facing a something = something scenario. The scientific modeling issue is merely attempting to put descriptions and labels on whatever the "something" that is necessary for "everything" is. And religion merely personifies that "something" as if it were a deity, or supreme being that has always existed rather than taking the impersonal look at how existence itself could have always existed and is not a personification deity, or supreme being, god or any other such literal visualization. So people can get confused. Because christians insist on a something = something philosophy of existence. It seems like sometimes people (some atheists and naturalists) start to think that in order to contrast the christians a nothing = something philosophy of existence is the tool for the job. But that's not necessarily true. It's more the case of everyone involved arguing for a something = something philosophy of existence. And the arguments breaking down to a natural something = something philosophy of existence verses a supernatural something = something philosophy of existence. But even then, concerning the esoteric and mysticism, there are further arguments with christians between two rival supernatural something = something philosophies of existence. The mystical and impersonal supernatural philosophies and the personal theistic oriented philosophies. And both of those in contrast with the naturalistic something = something philosophies of existence. When Krauss and others get off on these kicks about nothing spontaneously becoming something, it usually turns out that what they are referring to as nothing isn't actually nothing, it's something. So that direction offers very little in contrast to the philosophical issues outlined above. And it seems to be just another case of two rival something = something philosophies of existence, cloaked as a nothing = something philosophy. The sub atomic particles coming and going from visibility and detection in the collision chambers seem to be none other than something equaling something, be it taking on a form and then losing the form or how ever we interpret it. Underlying the whole production seems to be this philosophical fabric and structure of existence itself, steady, and for all intensive purposes eternal and beginningless. And yet, that has all of jack squat to do with defaulting to YHWH, jesus or any of the christian mythology as being literally true just because they take a something = something philosophy. Take that christian apologist's!!!!!
  16. I'm pretty sure that trying to affect someone's reality without their express consent is a type of black magic. We were noting that somewhere else. Such as praying for people without their knowledge and consent actually amounts to little more than trying to perform "black magic" without knowing that that's what the "do gooder" christian is really doing. Oblivious to what they're engaging in. Thinking they're doing something righteous. Apply the same principle to this energy business and perhaps that's why he want's knowledge and consent from people so as to avoid the black magic factor? Maybe that goes into his reasoning for wanting express consent and knowledge thereof?
  17. "Stupid is as stupid does." - Forest Gump
  18. This summarizes everything that I was drawing out recently in the informal lion's den debate. First from William, second from LuthAMF. Both Calvinistic adherent's. And both refusing to fess up to their own vain speculations, which, they will not present as anything other than absolute truth and "real christianity." Both insisting that "theology" solves all apparent contradictions. And that if we were, "real christians," we would know how obvious it is that theology solves everything. When challenged to prove and demonstrate the claim, crickets. Tumble weeds. Pussy footing around and dodging. I went to the trouble of allowing this to play out so that people wondering about these claims can see what happens to these "vain speculators" when put on the spot, sat down in the hot seat, and challenged straight away to prove and substantiate themselves. As people like this pop up, they will be challenged to prove and substantiate themselves here. The problem is that they stick to their own and get away with these vain speculations and start thinking that there's merit to it all. Only to walk straight into a brick wall when facing ex christians who have already been there, already done that, and who have already broken through the wall and since moved on to places like, "no theology."
  19. If any one sees a trolling post that's gone unnoticed, notify me or one of the other moderators. I was serious. They stop now. Christians had better be prepared to follow the guidelines if they're interested in engaging this community. Serious debate is allowed and welcomed. Nonsense is, well, nonsense and there's no reason to have it strung out all over multiple threads and subforums.
  20. You raised another point about the sea level rise issue. The point being that not all circumstances are due to sea level rise, but other factors. And in some cases, like this one, the land is sinking down: There's a lot of contributing factors depending on the area in question....
  21. It's gonna look like an atomic bomb went off. I hope they evacuated most of the residents to the southern Islands. If this doesn't turn as expected I have multiple families coming over to evacuate the central east coast.
  22. FYI, I'm not sold on the correlation between climate change and hurricanes. As far as I can tell they remain within natural and expected parameters as concerns size, strength, and frequency. But we are now approaching the peak of the Atlantic hurricane season and currently have this to deal with over the next several days:
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.