Do you believe in God and why

[Tippaporn]

4 minutes ago, Hummin said:

It can be sevaral lack of logic in your post. 
 

I believe anyone can create their own bubble of enlightenment and awesomeness and illusion of what they believe will happen after death, or let others manipulate you to believe what they want you to believe to make you join their cult, club or belief system 

Then please explain the holes in the logic, which is what I asked you to do previously.  Why laugh at a post but then refuse to provide a rebuttal?

I could give two sh!ts what anyone else believes and I have no desire to lead anyone to believing anything.  I believe you're superimposing your own personal beliefs onto my intentions for posting what I post.  There is no cult, club or belief system I subscribe to.

[Tippaporn]

17 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Im happy for you believing that

LOL.  You post your beliefs here and when others post information that doesn't agree with you then you simply say:  "Hey. I'm happy that you believe whatever you believe."  Can't you at least try to argue for the positions you take?  It does appear to be the case that you can't thus far.

I don't mean to criticise you for no reason, Hummin.  I like reading your posts.  But please don't simply wave others off without at least attempting to show where one's thinking is amiss, or why your thinking is accurate.

 

[Hummin]

12 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

It's said that until one understands who and what they are the rest of experience can never truly be understood.  I'll soon be posting what I consider to be the best explanation . . . at least partial explanation . . . of who and what we are.  I'll offer it as food for thought and let everyone else do with the information what they may.

I would like to know your methods, and if you had any out of this world experience on drugs or any other substances. 
 

Also good to know if you also have any super powers like something we for a century or so have called diagnoses who might can see things or reality differently than other people. 
 

A combination of above can lead to interesting experiences. 

[Hummin]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

LOL.  You post your beliefs here and when others post information that doesn't agree with you then you simply say:  "Hey. I'm happy that you believe whatever you believe."  Can't you at least try to argue for the positions you take?  It does appear to be the case that you can't thus far.

I don't mean to criticise you for no reason, Hummin.  I like reading your posts.  But please don't simply wave others off without at least attempting to show where one's thinking is amiss, or why your thinking is accurate.

 

???????? Its getting late here, and I believe we have been through most of our different views and our experiences by now.  But truth is I do not mean to laugh or ridiculous you orvanyone, and Im truly happy for you if you have found it, and see meaning to it. I comfort myself when this is over, it is the end of it. I have a great life now, and it is so little complicated compare the the road that led me to this state of mind. Of course great experiences for good and bad, but Im happy to say me is done after this. No regrets

[Tippaporn]

Just now, Hummin said:

I would like to know your methods, and if you had any out of this world experience on drugs or any other substances. 
 

Also good to know if you also have any super powers like something we for a century or so have called diagnoses who might can see things or reality differently than other people. 
 

A combination of above can lead to interesting experiences. 

I don't use any methodologies.  Life or existence isn't based on methodologies as far as I know and for reasons I'm aware of.  Drugs can certainly force an alteration of consciousness but alterations of consciousness can be induced easily enough without drugs.  Here again I believe the quandary results from a lack or misunderstanding of who and what we are.  For even a partial understanding would bring the realisation that consciousness is mobile.

Super powers?  I gain what understanding I can.  Same as everyone here.  Everyone has a different level of understanding.  There's no right or wrong, better or worse to any of it.

[Tippaporn]

14 minutes ago, Hummin said:

???????? Its getting late here, and I believe we have been through most of our different views and our experiences by now.  But truth is I do not mean to laugh or ridiculous you orvanyone, and Im truly happy for you if you have found it, and see meaning to it. I comfort myself when this is over, it is the end of it. I have a great life now, and it is so little complicated compare the the road that led me to this state of mind. Of course great experiences for good and bad, but Im happy to say me is done after this. No regrets

Well then, I'll let it rest.  Cheers and peace.

[mauGR1]

2 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

For even a partial understanding would bring the realisation that consciousness is mobile.

Super powers?  I gain what understanding I can.  Same as everyone here.  Everyone has a different level of understanding.  There's no right or wrong, better or worse to any of it.

Agree with the fact that consciousness is mobile, and surely everyone has a different level of understanding. 

What i don't agree with, but it may depend on semantics, is the last paragraph of your post. 

Although we can imagine that on other planes of consciousness there is no dual judgement as in the physical reality , there is indeed a hierarchy of different levels of consciousness from a human's point of view. 

As peaceful and carefree a dog may look, i never met anyone who would like to be a dog.

Although understanding is not the same as consciousness, it seems that the former stimulates the latter. 

[Tippaporn]

Not long ago I listened to a Brit reporter making an astute observation, at least in my opinion, on the major difference between the structure of government in Europe vs. that of the U.S.

"Culture is upstream of politics.  There is a fundamental difference between the outlook of Europeans and Americans.  And it is simply . . . I would go back to the words Lincoln himself used at Gettysburg . . . America is a nation conceived in liberty.  Europe are various nations conceived in feudalism and serfdom.  And we've had here in continental Europe a march that's lasted a millennia to arrive at the liberties that we have at the moment.

 

"Fundamentally, however, in Europe we have liberties because the state gives them to us.  And we recognise that . . . that is what we recognise, that the constitutions in Europe give us our liberties.  America is the only nation I'm aware of on the face of the planet, in the whole of human history, that basically starts from the direct opposite presupposition.  You start with the individual, which is God given natural rights and that individual then enters society and gives to the governments it's rights and it's limitations and says to the government what it should do.  And here we see a fundamental difference start to emerge between the Europeans and the Americans and that is to say that the Americans, being the people conceived in liberty, simply will not put up with this any longer."

In America the individual is recognised as possessing sovereignty granted by God.  In Europe, especially in the days of kings and queens, it is the ruling royalty which has been gifted sovereignty by God (at least that's what the ruling authority would like everyone to believe ).  That royal sovereign in turn awards rights to, or takes rights away from the rest of society as per his or her pleasures deem.  The common individual is not afforded natural rights.

The point I want to make with the above is to emphasise that all individuals are imbued with sovereignty.  But also that that sovereignty is not limited in any way whatsoever.  It is supreme sovereignty which allows the individual to create every last stitch of his or her own reality.  That type of supreme sovereignty has yet to be recognised by the masses in today's world.

The question of sovereignty is one of the main departures I take from religion.  At no point does God, or any other power, intercede in the affairs of the individual to the point of overriding an individual's choices.  For once that occurs, even in a single instance, individual freedom is lost.

All of this leads to the idea that we create our own reality.  Every last bit of it.  Any system of thought that fails to recognise that individual freedom is one of the unalterable laws of creation is doomed to attempt to artificially limit experience.  And to create the myriad problems which would naturally arise from the impositions of any such limits on the individual.

Of course with ultimate freedom comes ultimate responsibility.  The truth is that many do not want to accept the responsibility which comes with freedom.

Thoughts?  Debate?

 

[Tippaporn]

7 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

3 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

For even a partial understanding would bring the realisation that consciousness is mobile.

Super powers?  I gain what understanding I can.  Same as everyone here.  Everyone has a different level of understanding.  There's no right or wrong, better or worse to any of it.

Agree with the fact that consciousness is mobile, and surely everyone has a different level of understanding. 

What i don't agree with, but it may depend on semantics, is the last paragraph of your post. 

Although we can imagine that on other planes of consciousness there is no dual judgement as in the physical reality , there is indeed a hierarchy of different levels of consciousness from a human's point of view. 

As peaceful and carefree a dog may look, i never met anyone who would like to be a dog.

Although understanding is not the same as consciousness, it seems that the former stimulates the latter. 

In order to give my response what is your definition of dual judgment?  I'm not familiar with that.

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, Tippaporn said:

In order to give my response what is your definition of dual judgment?  I'm not familiar with that.

Good/bad

Hot/cold 

Beautiful/ugly etc

[mauGR1]

16 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Thoughts?  Debate?

Well, i just love splitting hairs, but except for semantics, i have to agree in general with the meaning of your reasoning. 

I don't agree instead on the dichotomy America/Europe. 

Imho, the fact that individual freedom is sacred is a sublime principle of politics worldwide, but, unfortunately, we can see individual rights constantly under attack in any nation, including USA. 

In contrast, one can say that humans are family, so we have to give our individual freedom for the good of everyone. 

It's a very fine balance, i think, that's why politicians, in an ideal world, should be the best minds.

When the leaders are misguided, you can imagine the rest ????

[Tippaporn]

50 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

3 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

For even a partial understanding would bring the realisation that consciousness is mobile.

Super powers?  I gain what understanding I can.  Same as everyone here.  Everyone has a different level of understanding.  There's no right or wrong, better or worse to any of it.

Agree with the fact that consciousness is mobile, and surely everyone has a different level of understanding. 

What i don't agree with, but it may depend on semantics, is the last paragraph of your post. 

Although we can imagine that on other planes of consciousness there is no dual judgement as in the physical reality , there is indeed a hierarchy of different levels of consciousness from a human's point of view. 

As peaceful and carefree a dog may look, i never met anyone who would like to be a dog.

Although understanding is not the same as consciousness, it seems that the former stimulates the latter. 

 

36 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

39 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

In order to give my response what is your definition of dual judgment?  I'm not familiar with that.

Good/bad

Hot/cold 

Beautiful/ugly etc

Okay.  The seeming duality of the world.  Seeming in the sense that good/bad, for example, are the flipsides of the same coin.

I disagree with the idea that creation is hierarchically structured.  It suggests that we're merely climbing the rungs of some cosmic ladder.  And to where then?  It's also suggestive of the existence of some pinnacle beyond which one can go no further.  Heaven?

Rather I subscribe to the concept that creation is unending.  There's no beginning or end to it.  Creation never ceases.  That there is no place we're trying to get to for that would imply the end of a journey.  The journey never ends.  Creativity has no bounds.  We create ourselves in as many ways as possible and each new creation adds to what is.  In other words, existence is about endless creativity and not the road to some 'place.'

In that sense everything which adds to what is is equally important.  Equally precious.  Equally eternal.  The concept of a hierarchy implies, at least to me, that higher forms are more worthy than lesser forms.  Which concept makes no sense when considering that the experience of the 'lesser' form adds to the experience of the 'higher' form.  And vice versa.  They're simply individual parts of a greater entity.

A dog or any other animal's existence is no less than a human's in terms of quality.  It's simply a different form which consciousness takes to express itself.  And who is to say that a dog's experience is any less pleasurable than a human's?  Why if it were known that a dog's existence was more pleasurable than a human's might not everyone want to be a dog? 

 

[mauGR1]

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

 

Okay.  The seeming duality of the world.  Seeming in the sense that good/bad, for example, are the flipsides of the same coin.

I disagree with the idea that creation is hierarchically structured.  It suggests that we're merely climbing the rungs of some cosmic ladder.  And to where then?  It's also suggestive of the existence of some pinnacle beyond which one can go no further.  Heaven?

Rather I subscribe to the concept that creation is unending.  There's no beginning or end to it.  Creation never ceases.  That there is no place we're trying to get to for that would imply the end of a journey.  The journey never ends.  Creativity has no bounds.  We create ourselves in as many ways as possible and each new creation adds to what is.  In other words, existence is about endless creativity and not the road to some 'place.'

In that sense everything which adds to what is is equally important.  Equally precious.  Equally eternal.  The concept of a hierarchy implies, at least to me, that higher forms are more worthy than lesser forms.  Which concept makes no sense when considering that the experience of the 'lesser' form adds to the experience of the 'higher' form.  And vice versa.  They're simply individual parts of a greater entity.

A dog or any other animal's existence is no less than a human's in terms of quality.  It's simply a different form which consciousness takes to express itself.  And who is to say that a dog's experience is any less pleasurable than a human's?  Why if it were known that a dog's existence was more pleasurable than a human's might not everyone want to be a dog? 

 

Apart the dog thing, i agree with your description. 

You took the example of the ladder, and i imagine that you don't like ladders ????

Well, I'm wary of ladders, i've had my share of incidents, but I don't dislike them ????

So, if i told you that, with your sensible words, you are building a bridge between the physical and the spiritual, would you agree?

One can choose different imaginary tools or vehicles, or representations, i can surely agree that the journey is infinite. 

[Tippaporn]

17 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, i just love splitting hairs, but except for semantics, i have to agree in general with the meaning of your reasoning. 

I don't agree instead on the dichotomy America/Europe. 

Imho, the fact that individual freedom is sacred is a sublime principle of politics worldwide, but, unfortunately, we can see individual rights constantly under attack in any nation, including USA. 

In contrast, one can say that humans are family, so we have to give our individual freedom for the good of everyone. 

It's a very fine balance, i think, that's why politicians, in an ideal world, should be the best minds.

When the leaders are misguided, you can imagine the rest ????

Well, I didn't intend my post intro to lead astray to politics but rather to point out the condition of ultimate individual sovereignty and freedom.  And to show how those ideas are currently operative in the world.  Since I subscribe to the the theory of the universe as idea construction then every idea shows it's effects in one form or another.  One can easily then recognise the effects in the world from not granting individual freedom and sovereignty and to then imagine the effects of granting full freedoms and sovereignty in contrast.  The world would be markedly different.  In a much better way, in my opinion.

But really the point of the post was to argue for the idea that each and every one of us creates our own reality in every aspect . . . from great to insignificant.  And that is the point for which I'm asking for thoughts and debate.

As far as politicians go, though, in my opinion any leaders are merely a reflection of society.

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

But really the point of the post was to argue for the idea that each and every one of us creates our own reality in every aspect . . . from great to insignificant.  And that is the point for which I'm asking for thoughts and debate.

Of course i agree that everyone is creator of his own reality, and thus has an influence on a bigger reality. 

Actually i got your point, sorry for not being clear. 

I repeat, there's a fine balance between the rights of the individual, and the well being of everyone. 

What if a powerful individual is more powerful than a small nation? Yes, it's happening. 

Plato, the great philosopher, made a great analysis of all this, but after 1000's of years things don't seem to be better.

Oops, i went into politics again ????

[Tippaporn]

1 minute ago, mauGR1 said:

Apart the dog thing, i agree with your description. 

You took the example of the ladder, and i imagine that you don't like ladders ????

Well, I'm wary of ladders, i've had my share of incidents, but I don't dislike them ????

So, if i told you that, with your sensible words, you are building a bridge between the physical and the spiritual, would you agree?

One can choose different imaginary tools or vehicles, or representations, i can surely agree that the journey is infinite. 

No, not building a bridge between the physical and the spiritual.  Rather as humans we are the spirit clothed in flesh.  Or the spirit clothed in the hair and skin of a dog.  The idea that we have a soul is incorrect to my way of thinking.  We are a soul, or whatever term for it that one wishes to use, cloaked in flesh and bones.

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

The idea that we have a soul is incorrect to my way of thinking.  We are a soul, or whatever term for it that one wishes to use, cloaked in flesh and bones.

Did i say that ?

I also know that we are soul with a body, rather than the opposite. Yet the physical body exists, and we are more or less tied to it.

Still, speaking strictly for myself, i have to build bridges, or ladders between the physical and the spiritual, while the soul will be watching. The spirit will then be connected to the material. 

 

 

 

[Tippaporn]

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Of course i agree that everyone is creator of his own reality, and thus has an influence on a bigger reality. 

Actually i got your point, sorry for not being clear. 

I repeat, there's a fine balance between the rights of the individual, and the well being of everyone. 

What if a powerful individual is more powerful than a small nation? Yes, it's happening. 

Plato, the great philosopher, made a great analysis of all this, but after 1000's of years things don't seem to be better.

Oops, i went into politics again ????

Mass reality from my perspective is nothing more than the co-creation of individuals each creating their own individual realities.  In other words, the interactions between individuals creating together.

The true fulfillment of the individual would automatically assist in the fulfillment of all other individuals.  Of course looking out into the world that seems highly contradictory.  Now if it's true that everyone is the creator of their own reality then it would follow that no one has the ability to create within anyone else's reality.  Certainly if even God cannot create in ones reality then surely no one else can.  As long as people believe that they don't create their own reality then they will assume that others must be creating at least a portion of their realities for them.  Whether God, chance or any other individual.  And hence the false idea, in my opinion, that someone can prevent the well being of another.

Granted, there's much more to the story of how that all works in all of it's practical detail.  Any full explanation requires much more information.  This is just a start for a fuller, more comprehensive understanding.  Hopefully it's understood that how reality works cannot be fully explained in a few sentences, or a few paragraphs, or a few posts.  And that information can initially appear to be contradictory to ones current view of reality.  Which is why it's important that anyone who does want to understand how it all works must be willing and able to suspend, not relinquish, their current beliefs while considering other information.

[Tippaporn]

18 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Did i say that ?

I also know that we are soul with a body, rather than the opposite. Yet the physical body exists, and we are more or less tied to it.

Still, speaking strictly for myself, i have to build bridges, or ladders between the physical and the spiritual, while the soul will be watching. The spirit will then be connected to the material.

There is no separation between the spirit and who you see in the mirror.  They are one and the same.

[mauGR1]

6 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

There is no separation between the spirit and who you see in the mirror.  They are one and the same.

Well, all i can say is, I'm glad for you if you've reached that point, but i have to admit that I'm still far from that, and I'm just grateful to be gifted occasionally of that magnificent feeling of oneness. 

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, The Hammer2021 said:

" Heaven, as conventionally conceived, is a place so inane, so dull, so useless, so miserable, that nobody has ever ventured to describe a whole day in heaven, though plenty of people have described a day at the seaside."

Given that no living person knows what the other side ( heaven ) is like, I'd be boggled if anyone was able to describe it. IMO it's wishful thinking as how some would like heaven to be.

I don't even know if I'll still be "me" after I pass over the great divide, or just go back into the pure consciousness from which, IMO, all life comes.

[thaibeachlovers]

31 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Did i say that ?

I also know that we are soul with a body, rather than the opposite. Yet the physical body exists, and we are more or less tied to it.

Still, speaking strictly for myself, i have to build bridges, or ladders between the physical and the spiritual, while the soul will be watching. The spirit will then be connected to the material. 

 

 

 

I believe that our bodies are just a biological transport mechanism, and the soul after death on this plane has no need of such.

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

don't even know if I'll still be "me" after I pass over the great divide, or just go back into the pure consciousness from which, IMO, all life comes.

That alone is worth a lengthy debate.

I think that examining consciousness in the state of sleep, including the dream activity, can offer some important clue though. 

[mauGR1]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I believe that our bodies are just a biological transport mechanism, and the soul after death on this plane has no need of such.

Yet, for some reason, souls appear to wish to incarnate again and again. 

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Yet, for some reason, souls appear to wish to incarnate again and again. 

Yes, but in a different body. IMO the body is disposable, though the soul ( our consciousness ) carries on.

[mauGR1]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Yes, but in a different body. IMO the body is disposable, though the soul ( our consciousness ) carries on.

I find relevant the fact that you, born a Christian, and apparently not having much interest in Indian religion/philosophy, have accepted the theory that souls incarnate repeatedly. 

Although i would not say that's an absolute truth, with the danger of being branded a dogmatic, there are indeed many clues that it works that way. 

[Tippaporn]

28 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Well, all i can say is, I'm glad for you if you've reached that point, but i have to admit that I'm still far from that, and I'm just grateful to be gifted occasionally of that magnificent feeling of oneness. 

It's not a point to reach, though.  The separation is artificial.  We could talk about the origins but that would not be important.  To say we 'have' a soul would be inaccurate.  To say we are a soul would be true.  Use any other synonym for soul, and there are many.  I guess a lot of people grew up with the religious belief that we 'possess' a soul which we then reclaim (perhaps, perhaps not) upon death.  Or that we have a spirit (another word that can be used interchangeably with soul) that we must unite with.  Or that we must unite with our source and once again become One.

The idea that separation exists then ties in with ideas that this world is only something we must, unfortunately, pass through to reach some exalted plane where, perhaps, we're finally free from pain.  Or that this world is a testing ground to prove our worth, or loyalty to a higher being.  A world existing only for the purpose of having us jump through hoops to get to where we really want to go (wherever that might be since there are multiple definitions of what that place is).  The fables created around this idea of separation are endless.

Now is you want to explore your consciousness then what you would find is simply this:  there is more to 'you' than you've realised.  Much more.  The effort of any discovery of your more expansive self would not be done with an eye to move past this world to some 'there' but rather the knowledge of other portions would enhance your experience in this reality.

Hopefully you don't take this as me beating a dead horse, mauGR1, and see my continuing posts as simply trying to add more clarification as I'm dispelling certain long held notions by many.

[Walker88]

Somebody is saying consciousness is 'mobile'. I guess in dementia and Alzheimers patients that consciousness has migrated somewhere else, far from grandma's head, eh?

 

To comfort themselves, people have come to the bizarre conclusion that even if a physical brain wastes away due to dementia until the person is in a vegetative state, instantly upon passing their memory and personality returns in perfect form and grandma remembers again how to make oatmeal cookies. Also, 5 year olds who die of cancer become all knowing upon passing, despite barely being able to count to ten when their neurons still fired.

 

Science in general, and study into dementia, has shown that consciousness is purely a physical entity. When some of the neurons stop firing and the chemicals no longer do their job, bits and pieces of that individuals memory and personality disappear. Upon death, all neaurons stop firing and everything that individual was ceases to exist. Entropy takes over and in time all the atoms that were once a person form other bits of matter and energy. Stardust to stardust.

 

Personally, if I were to believe any creation myth, I would say deity or deities are likely bacteria, and humans were 'created' in order to be vessels for the trillions of bacteria we all carry in our biome. Clearly it's a 'loving' group of deities who would make such fine vessels as Olympic sprinter Allyson Felix to carry their bacterial 'children'. Certainly my idea makes as much sense as virgin births or no meat on Fridays or dressing up females to look like giant eggplants or angels showing up on mountains, in deserts, in Palmyra, NY, or just in time for the Holidays.

 

The new images from the Webb telescope remind us of how utterly insignificant any of us 8 billion bacteria vessels are on one planet orbiting a mediocre sun, one of a trillion stars in a galaxy that shares spacetime with upwards of 2 trillion other galaxies across a distance of 93 billion light years which contains perhaps 700,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets (700 quintillion).

 

Enjoy the wonder, but best not to clutter it up with myth and superstition.

[mauGR1]

5 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Hopefully you don't take this as me beating a dead horse, mauGR1, and see my continuing posts as simply trying to add more clarification as I'm dispelling certain long held notions by many.

Not beating a dead horse, but preaching to the converted ????

As i repeatedly said, we have some differences in semantics. 

I know quite clearly myself the difference between body, soul and spirit....

Yet, if i went into details, it will be boring for everyone, and then you would say that all is one and that there are no differences, and everything is illusion, wouldn't you ? ????

 

It's typical nowadays for people, even ones who are fairly evolved, to express their opinions without ever listening to other opinions, what do you think ?

[mauGR1]

12 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Enjoy the wonder, but best not to clutter it up with myth and superstition.

Yours is a form of superstition, i could explain why, but it would be tiring, and you would not like it.

Enjoy your wonder too ????