2 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

That's a reasonable assumption. To understand the creator of the entire universe with its billions of galaxies and trillions of planets and different life forms; Wow! what a feat! Such a person would be far more knowledgeable than the entire community of modern scientists of all disciplines. ????

 

Socrates advised 'know thyself'. 2400 years later, most people even have trouble knowing themselves, never mind knowing God. ????

Then why are  god heads so militand about something they don't even understand????

Not C, definitely not C

2 hours ago, ThaiRebound said:

Nobody can prove or disprove anything regarding the existence of a supreme being, so which is the best case scenario:

 

A. God doesn't exist, and therefore no continuation of consciousness

B. God exists and it becomes proven. We will be judged in the afterlife according to our actions from this point forward in time and based on the bible's laws.

C. God exists and it becomes proven, and a good afterlife is assured for all, but the internet will disappear for eternity in 10 seconds, including Netflix. (There will be a Blockbuster Video, but returns are 24 hours and you MUST rewind!)

Netflix is proof that god does not exist!

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

Netflix is proof that god does not exist!

Settle it with a DUEL! Repent, pagan!

NO!! Absolute <deleted>. God does not excist. Its just a fairy tale imho.

I was born and raised catholic...but since 25 years or so I am completely Atheist. I even refuse to enter Churches..temples or whatsoever religeous buildings.

 

All this religeous humbug has caused the world much suffering...pain... and deaths.

 

If I see the treath that Islam and some other extreme religeous fanatics are making towards the world nowadays its just frightening. They truly want us back in the stone age.

 

Hans.

Well..whatever one's position on the vexed question of "God" I am certainly amazed that the conversation has-in the main-been carried on in a civil and courteous manner for a couple of thousand posts.

 

Quite an achievement,really.

36 minutes ago, Hans007 said:

NO!! Absolute <deleted>. God does not excist. Its just a fairy tale imho.

I was born and raised catholic...but since 25 years or so I am completely Atheist. I even refuse to enter Churches..temples or whatsoever religeous buildings.

 

All this religeous humbug has caused the world much suffering...pain... and deaths.

 

If I see the treath that Islam and some other extreme religeous fanatics are making towards the world nowadays its just frightening. They truly want us back in the stone age.

 

Hans.

Hi Hans

one can be an Atheist and still be culturally christian.  I understand your frustration with all the ills the religious construct has brought as but there was some good and a sense of community. A smart operator can profit from the credit side of the ledger while avoiding the debit side.

I was brought up Greek Orthodox , Greek  culture is intertwined with christianity, a lot of it is beautiful, I love easter, it is week long process that includes family, friends and food, Ohh roasting the lamb over an open fire on Easter Sunday  with friends and family , the easter eggs, Friday before the epitafios, Saturday night the Anastasy. 

I don't want to give all these things up, I really don't know many in my family who believe it but we participate and profit from the Credit side of it.

The trick is to keep it in proper perspective.

Religion is delusion, but who does not delude himself in some way, If it helps, then the delusion is good.

  I dont begrudge someone their religious delusion,    If we could only separate the need for some of then to need to include us in their delusion, even under force. IMO it is becoming less and less,  The friction we see now is more political than religious, Politics are using religion for political agendas. 

1 hour ago, ThaiRebound said:

Settle it with a DUEL! Repent, pagan!

Lemon meringue pies at twenty paces?

3 hours ago, Odysseus123 said:

Well..whatever one's position on the vexed question of "God" I am certainly amazed that the conversation has-in the main-been carried on in a civil and courteous manner for a couple of thousand posts.

 

Quite an achievement,really.

That's a real shame for TVF, i tried a few times to change this miserable state of affairs, to no avail.

What is life without a little bickering, and some proper insulting and cursing, i'm fearing the worst

5 hours ago, Hans007 said:

 

 

All this religeous humbug has caused the world much suffering...pain... and deaths.

 

 

Hans.

Do you believe things or the world would have been different if there where no religion? Human nature, would be the same, ergo, just another wrapping, and same same resoult. 

54 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

That's a real shame for TVF, i tried a few times to change this miserable state of affairs, to no avail.

What is life without a little bickering, and some proper insulting and cursing, i'm fearing the worst

Ah! TVF.....????

 

I have just finished reading Steven Pinker's book;

"The Better Angels of Our Nature"

..and will soon commence "Enlightenment Now"

-a rational humanist look at things I suppose.

16 hours ago, sirineou said:

Then why are  god heads so militand about something they don't even understand????

Your question is not clear. I presume by 'god heads' you mean Kings and Popes of the past, or certain Muslim leaders of the present, who are militant in order to promote their religion.

 

It's all about power and control. In order to exert such control, one doesn't need to know anything about 'God' or the 'Creator of the Universe'. All one needs to know is how to convince the ignorant masses that one does have an understanding and connection with the 'Almighty'.

 

If anyone disagrees or expresses skepticism that you have an understanding of, and connection with God, then you burn them alive at the stake, or torture them, in order to discourage others from expressing similar skepticism, so that you can maintain your control and power. Got it? ????

2 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Got it? 

always had it????

2 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

If anyone disagrees or expresses skepticism that you have an understanding of, and connection with God, then you burn them alive at the stake, or torture them, in order to discourage others from expressing similar skepticism, so that you can maintain your control and power. Got it? ????

True, and the opposite is also true. Anyone claims to have a special connection to or understanding of God, they are crucified, and in modern days ridiculed, discredited and buried alive on social media.  ????

It's a more interesting question to ask about whether free will exists, because it seems to have a bearing on whether there is a divine personality versus a meaningless machine behind everything. All we really have to interface with and interpret everything we appear to collectively share the experience of is very finite and vanishingly small in its perspective.
 

https://www.jneurosci.org/content/38/4/784

https://news.ncsu.edu/2018/03/free-will-review-2018/

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00326/full

 

It seems more plausible to believe in the devil than in a benign god with a mysterious plan.

Mind you, nothing really makes sense, if you think about it long enough.

21 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

True, and the opposite is also true. Anyone claims to have a special connection to or understanding of God, they are crucified,   ????

It's the same principle. Jesus Christ was crucified because he claimed that his understanding of God was better than those in power, or in other words, he expressed skepticism that the Jewish priests understood God. This undermined their control, which wasn't acceptable. They persuaded Pontius Pilate to crucify him, even though Pontius Pilate was reluctant to do so because Jesus did not fit the usual definition of a 'rebel against Roman interests'.

 

..and in modern days ridiculed, discredited and buried alive on social media.

 

CMNightRider hasn't been censored in this thread, has he? He's made some very long posts promoting his religious views.  ????

Lol I wasn't thinking about him when I wrote that.

 

I was rather considering what the response would be if someone at a higher level of consciousness would start to make extraordinary claims about life and God. I think it's difficult for people to accept that there might be more advanced humans, at least in this field. There is a hierarchy in my opinion and not everyone is the same, as our modern PC society would have us believe. 

Furthermore, I don't think true saints and gurus are things of some remote past. The quest for spiritual mastery has not died out with Jesus or Buddha. There are scores of people who have attained this mastery since and many who are alive today.

My thought was, what would happen if such a person were to gain the attention of mainstream media? Would people react differently today than 2000 years ago?

Another interesting question is, how do you verify the spiritual level (or shall we just say "wisdom" to appease the atheists) of a person? Certainly not by how many books he has read...so how would you judge?

8 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Lol I wasn't thinking about him when I wrote that.

 

I was rather considering what the response would be if someone at a higher level of consciousness would start to make extraordinary claims about life and God. I think it's difficult for people to accept that there might be more advanced humans, at least in this field. There is a hierarchy in my opinion and not everyone is the same, as our modern PC society would have us believe. 

Furthermore, I don't think true saints and gurus are things of some remote past. The quest for spiritual mastery has not died out with Jesus or Buddha. There are scores of people who have attained this mastery since and many who are alive today.

My thought was, what would happen if such a person were to gain the attention of mainstream media? Would people react differently today than 2000 years ago?

Another interesting question is, how do you verify the spiritual level (or shall we just say "wisdom" to appease the atheists) of a person? Certainly not by how many books he has read...so how would you judge?

Right...how could one tell? You assert 'there are scores who have attained this mastery...and are alive today', when the correct statement would be...'there are people who CLAIM to have attained...'.

 

So how does one really know? Not by how many books, nor by how many claims. The answer is we don't know...and this includes you and others making such claims, not just us nasty atheists. Anyone can make any claim about anything...doesn't make it so, without some way to demonstrate their 'mastery' of said mystery. 

1 hour ago, Skeptic7 said:

Right...how could one tell? You assert 'there are scores who have attained this mastery...and are alive today', when the correct statement would be...'there are people who CLAIM to have attained...'.

 

So how does one really know? Not by how many books, nor by how many claims. The answer is we don't know...and this includes you and others making such claims, not just us nasty atheists. Anyone can make any claim about anything...doesn't make it so, without some way to demonstrate their 'mastery' of said mystery. 

I think we could test this by a practical analogue.  Normally, early on a Sunday morning I awake in a substantially depleted state of spiritual consciousness, yet even the most restrained of my cycling buddies do not strike me as sparklingly enlightened.

2 hours ago, Skeptic7 said:

Right...how could one tell? You assert 'there are scores who have attained this mastery...and are alive today', when the correct statement would be...'there are people who CLAIM to have attained...'.

 

So how does one really know? Not by how many books, nor by how many claims. The answer is we don't know...and this includes you and others making such claims, not just us nasty atheists. Anyone can make any claim about anything...doesn't make it so, without some way to demonstrate their 'mastery' of said mystery. 

First off, I would say that with almost 100% certainty, a spiritual master or enlightened individual will never proclaim to be be more or better than anyone else, nor would he/she claim to hold the ultimate truth. If one does say he's higher than others or has reached enlightenment, then that means his ego is talking, which makes his claim worthless.

 

Second, when you come across an enlightened individual, you may not see any difference in the look, but you will feel a difference within yourself. A master is someone who has transcended his ego and attained complete stillness inside. He is like a perfectly polished mirror where you can see yourself without being judged and with unconditional love. You won't be able to resist that and be attracted like a moth to the light. Your consciousness will be elated without the need to meditate or take psychedelic substances, just by the mere fact that you are close to him.

You can not put the degree of spiritual realization in numbers, but you can see it by its symptoms. The way a person acts and how others react to that person. The amount of compassion and love this person emanates are compelling indicators of his realization. 

 

How do we know a quantuum physicist doesn't just talk BS. I wouldn't know, nor would you I believe. But there are other physicists who have studied the same field who will be able to verify his claims or discoveries. Check out the Schoen scandal! He was a scientist who briefly rose to prominence after a series of apparent breakthroughs with semiconductors that were later discovered to be fraudulent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schön_scandal 
Peer reviews are key!

The same way, others who are high up the realization ladder, will be better suited to spot a fake from the real thing pretty easily.

The same way I could easily spot if a student had studied for an exam or not when I was a teacher. Following this example, a primary student will not be able to judge the knowledge of a secondary student, because they simply don't have the tools or the framework for that.
So, you are correct in saying that you or I are not suited to judge a master's level, yet there are ways to identify mastery.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

First off, I would say that with almost 100% certainty, a spiritual master or enlightened individual will never proclaim to be be more or better than anyone else, nor would he/she claim to hold the ultimate truth. If one does say he's higher than others or has reached enlightenment, then that means his ego is talking, which makes his claim worthless.

 

Second, when you come across an enlightened individual, you may not see any difference in the look, but you will feel a difference within yourself. A master is someone who has transcended his ego and attained complete stillness inside. He is like a perfectly polished mirror where you can see yourself without being judged and with unconditional love. You won't be able to resist that and be attracted like a moth to the light. Your consciousness will be elated without the need to meditate or take psychedelic substances, just by the mere fact that you are close to him.

You can not put the degree of spiritual realization in numbers, but you can see it by its symptoms. The way a person acts and how others react to that person. The amount of compassion and love this person emanates are compelling indicators of his realization. 

 

How do we know a quantuum physicist doesn't just talk BS. I wouldn't know, nor would you I believe. But there are other physicists who have studied the same field who will be able to verify his claims or discoveries. Check out the Schoen scandal! He was a scientist who briefly rose to prominence after a series of apparent breakthroughs with semiconductors that were later discovered to be fraudulent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schön_scandal 
Peer reviews are key!

The same way, others who are high up the realization ladder, will be better suited to spot a fake from the real thing pretty easily.

The same way I could easily spot if a student had studied for an exam or not when I was a teacher. 

As you can see, there are ways to identify mastery.

 

43 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

 

That proves it because he said it? Umm...what? C'mon! The others may this or that, but the real one this or that...or the other. Explains nothing and means even less. 

5 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

That proves it because he said it? Umm...what? C'mon! The others may this or that, but the real one this or that...or the other. Explains nothing and means even less. 

Maybe you should read the last paragraph again then. 

14 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Maybe you should read the last paragraph again then. 

Reread. Even with the additional text, same conclusion...means nothing and demonstrates nothing. 

You or...

It means nothing to you because it just passed over your head obviously, which again just proves what I said in the last paragraph.

Perhaps i can help, you are talking about something that you can see only if you want to see.

If you don't want to see, you'll probably never see it.

2 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

It means nothing to you because it just passed over your head obviously, which again just proves what I said in the last paragraph.

Deflection and...

which proves nothing, not even once...so much as "again". 

Au contraire mon amie

I said a primary student won't have the tools nor the framework to judge the knowledge of a secondary student or the teacher's knowledge.

Please tell me this isn't so. Show me proof this isn't so. 
 

3 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Lol I wasn't thinking about him when I wrote that.

 

I was rather considering what the response would be if someone at a higher level of consciousness would start to make extraordinary claims about life and God. I think it's difficult for people to accept that there might be more advanced humans, at least in this field. There is a hierarchy in my opinion and not everyone is the same, as our modern PC society would have us believe. 

Furthermore, I don't think true saints and gurus are things of some remote past. The quest for spiritual mastery has not died out with Jesus or Buddha. There are scores of people who have attained this mastery since and many who are alive today.

My thought was, what would happen if such a person were to gain the attention of mainstream media? Would people react differently today than 2000 years ago?

Another interesting question is, how do you verify the spiritual level (or shall we just say "wisdom" to appease the atheists) of a person? Certainly not by how many books he has read...so how would you judge?

I see a big distinction between being 'enlightened', and believing in and understanding the nature of a 'Creator God'.

 

I associate the word 'enlightenment' with Gautama Buddha. As I understand, the Buddha did not endorse the existence of a Creator God because it was something which was 'unknowable'. The Buddha's purpose was more practical, to reduce suffering, rather than waste time speculating on the unknowable.

 

Lao Tzu and Confucius had a similar view.