hint - the very basis of understanding god's nature begins with the understanding that material life is unnecessarily difficult
thanks, thats all we needed to know
Last edited by a moderator:
Does God Have Free Will?
- Thread starter Cortex_Colossus
- Start date
hint - the very basis of understanding god's nature begins with the understanding that material life is unnecessarily difficult
thanks, thats all we needed to know
That's fascinating, and I've now set fire to everything I own just to lead a less difficult life. However, and it's a big however... You didn't answer the damn question.
Third time lucky perhaps:
"Do you actually have any experience of god, (and thus know things about him), or are you just basing your claim on the claims of a book?"
certainly I have experience of god
(PS - and judging by your response on how to do away with the material, its obvious you don't)
Such as?
It was called sarcasm. However, if your statement were true that material things equal a more difficult life, then removing those material things - regardless to the method, would result in an easier life.. no? Anyway I'm hungry, gonna go eat some immaterial food.
knowledge of one's relationship with the material world for a start
even if you burnt everything you possess you would still be left with your material desires - unless of course you advocate a process to remove material desires, in which case, lets hear it ....
your god doesnt exist,(its too contradictory to be real)
IF he did you wouldnt need to ask any questions.
like the bible says:""whatever the believer asks for in prayer shall be given to him""
test it and see !if it works 100% of the time it would be pretty good proof for god,me thinks
anyways
god is just a CONCEPT some ancient simpleminded folks INVENTED to explain the unknown in nature.
too bad some people are so unevolved even today to believe in those fairy tales
the next question is whether conditioned life is the medium of displaying the potency of one's unimpeded, unbridled desires
I was asking for something tangible, not a personal view of how the world works. I was talking about 'experience', not some person looking at a banana and thinking it must mean that the universe was created by a giant chimpanzee. Anyone can read anything into anything, it's not what I was asking for.
Die. Once dead theres's no material desire because you're dead.
Of course this is where you start telling me all about your imaginations - fairies come up after sunrise and dance with leprechauns while a giant invisible banjo playing waffle floats over mount olympus. It's valueless.
Having said that, I wouldn't see the purpose in advocating a process to remove material desire all because some ancient Indian that couldn't afford a hamburger said so.
the material world is tangible
the nature of its function is also
and as as the most accessible of god's potencies (in conditioned life) it is the primary gateway to entering into an understanding/experience/discussion about god's nature
(would you say it is a personal view, as opposed to an experience, that water quenches one's thirst?)
if thats the case why do you get all moany and groany when faced with the loss of material things such as your body and things related to your body?
your view that life ends with the body is also valueless, much like the delight an in debt businessman feels when the phone lines go down (because he can't receive anymore bills) is valueless
there is a concrete realm of the absolute which can be realized by the soul, if he conceives a sincere hankering for the same by the grace of god. This sincere hankering is generated by substantiative discourses on the Absolute who, although he is inconceivable to our present limited understanding, is symbolically presented to us by the revealed scriptures enabling us to devote our rational consideration to the subject.
...... But one who is wholly satisfied with his temporary activities on this worldly plane, is not likely to feel any genuine attraction for such a quest.
BG 2.29: Some look on the soul as amazing, some describe him as amazing, and some hear of him as amazing, while others, even after hearing about him, cannot understand him at all.
BG 15.9: The living entity, thus taking another gross body, obtains a certain type of ear, eye, tongue, nose and sense of touch, which are grouped about the mind. He thus enjoys a particular set of sense objects.
(BTW a fool is defined as someone who cannot see the folly with material desire)
SB 2.7.42: But anyone who is specifically favored by the Supreme Lord, the Personality of Godhead, due to unalloyed surrender unto the service of the Lord, can overcome the insurmountable ocean of illusion and can understand the Lord. But those who are attached to this body, which is meant to be eaten at the end by dogs and jackals, cannot do so.
Hmmmm......
1) Yes, the material world exists.
2) The nature of its function?
3) Yes you have experience that water quenches the thirst.
Summary
You have experience and knowledge that the material world exists and water quenches your thirst. Bravo! Uhh, now could you possibly find it in yourself to tell me what experience you have with concerns to god. That is what I actually asked.. uhh..
When you're dead? Uhh... I said to remove material desire you only need to die. Once dead lg people tend not to be moany and groany about the loss of material things. Are you awake yet?
It is also the only thing that is evidenced. When your life ends, you're dead. That's the difference see.. when you're alive your alive, when you lose that life, you're dead. I could continue seeing if I can say the same thing in a variety of ways but one would hope you got the message, (although it is you so perhaps not).
Yeah yeah, or like how a taxi driver always charges you to take you somewhere or how a cigarette packet always looks emptier when it's empty. *ZzZzZz*
There is a concrete realm of the absolute which can be realised by leprechauns that love eating gooseberrys.
Only by deluded shitwits.
Snakelord
Your ignorance?
(in other words is the experience of yourself and persons like yourself on the subject sufficient?)
anyway, if you get a spare moment to break free from the pleasing aromas of your delight, I would be eager to hear your slant on the satisfying rewards of hotly pursued material desire
most people who wear your shoes think the material world is meant for their enjoyment (either personal or extended) - of course the material world tends to oblige us in the exact opposite way (aka death, old age and disease etc) - until one can perceive the intrinsic suffering nature of the material energy, its safe to assume that the topic of god is a closed book to such persons
then kill yourself and stop your groaning
evidenced by what?
Your ignorance?
then what of persons who have different experiences?
(in other words is the experience of yourself and persons like yourself on the subject sufficient?)
I think we have already discussed the leprechaun/FSM/IPU/celestial teapot thing and its quite obvious that the real cause is simply an atheist pretending to be stupid and being very good at it
that is the reserves of the logic you can muster?
anyway, if you get a spare moment to break free from the pleasing aromas of your delight, I would be eager to hear your slant on the satisfying rewards of hotly pursued material desire
Actually if you think about it rationally
because god is omniscience god can not be rational. Rationality involves thinking and God can not think but can only know.Weird thing this God.
Michael
weirder still would be if your description of god was water tight, since a god that makes decisions or influences the world requires thinking/feeling/willing.Actually if you think about it rationally
Weird thing this God.
Michael
Omniscience does not actually prohibit one from exhibiting these characteristics, - it does however make one's thinking/feeling/willing infallible
I wouldn't use the word 'meant', but as a species we do tend to use and enjoy that which exists, (the material). I see nothing wrong with that at all and apart from your worthless claims that enjoying the material leads to one being killed by hurricanes I fail to see any adequate explanation as to why there is a problem using and enjoying that which exists. You go on to claim that it doesn't belong to us but can't support the claim. We have already established that you don't have direct perception of these beings and thus any claim that they exist or own anything is complete and utter make believe on your part.
Obviously you're not awake. I love the material and have no issue with it. As evidence over dozens of posts, you're the one that should kill themselves. You hate the material, hate your own body, hate everything about this existence, and subscribe to scripture that even states one is sinning if they intend to cook food for personal enjoyment. Your life must truly suck ass.
Evidenced by the fact that every single person dies. They then go on to rot, (which includes their brain). Now, you can make believe that leprechauns come and bring them back to life, or aliens from the fifth dimension come and use an eternal life giving zap ray on them but your make believe does not change or affect what is actually evidenced.
They have a different experience? You mean when they die they're not actually dead? Who did you have in mind lol?
That's how the theist who spends his entire life in cuckoo land would like to believe it is. Everyone elses crap is just crap but your crap.. no that's genuine. You'd like to blame the atheists for it, but then you'll do anything to defend your own brand of crap.
Say what?
You defined a fool as someone that "cannot see the folly with material desire". Needless to say, that is not the definition of the world fool - other than in the diseased mind of certain theist freaks that can't stand living.
You know, one of my hobbies is to enter competitions. Online/postcard comps/local papers whatever. I do perhaps 1,500 comps per week. Most are easy to enter, (answer one simple question), and some are more tricky, (tiebreakers).
I have for a long while wanted an mp3 player but never actually took the time to go and buy one. So one morning the door rings and it's the postman. He has a packet for me, (this happens quite often, in fact last year I averaged it out at around 2 packets per week). In most instances I have no idea whats in the packet.. it's honestly like christmas every week. Anyway, so I'm like.. cool, wonder what this is. It turned out to be an mp3 player, (and season one of hex). It was great. I still have the mp3 player - listen to quality music when I walk the dog yada yada yada. I find it very satisfying.
Other comps won include a butler for the day with £100 for drinks, (was great, had some people round, some alcohol, food and fun and a butler to do all the work). I also saw the Arsenal vs West Ham game where the Hammers wn 3-2. While I don't really like football they provided free food and drinks all night, I met Ray Winston - albeit briefly, and had a really great time.
I enter comps with a desire to win material things. I have never had a problem with it - and even just entering is quite satisfying.
Snakelord
as for establishing my direct perception, I think we have established that we are not even close to approaching the subject due to a few communication difficulties at the position of theory and practice
and finally the ultimate problem with enjoying material things (enjoyment separate from god as opposed to the notion of mere enjoyment) is that material things exist in the material world and the material world is ultimately built on notions of force against one's will, primarily headed up by everything being temporary
The point is however that your notion of ceasing the material involves ceasing your very existence since you can not conceive of anything beyond material existence - theists on the other hand have a different application, hence your ideas on how to cease the material are not at all practical (and not even successful)
BG 7.15: Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me.
“
so given that your body is likely to get old quite soon, which means that your senses will weaken thus you won't be able to keep up with winning all sort s of mod cons (ever seen an 80 year old try and work out how to use an ipod?) and social engagements (ever wondered why old people like to sit on benches) even though you may have raging desires to be fulfilled, its not clear why you have such a grand engagement
the evidence that material things don't belong to us is that we are ultimately not responsible for their manifestation and also that the very make up of our material self (ie the mucus bag) does not persist, what to speak of anything related to the mucus bag.
as for establishing my direct perception, I think we have established that we are not even close to approaching the subject due to a few communication difficulties at the position of theory and practice
and finally the ultimate problem with enjoying material things (enjoyment separate from god as opposed to the notion of mere enjoyment) is that material things exist in the material world and the material world is ultimately built on notions of force against one's will, primarily headed up by everything being temporary
on the contrary my life is quite good, namely because spiritual enjoyment offers a higher grade of happiness.
The point is however that your notion of ceasing the material involves ceasing your very existence since you can not conceive of anything beyond material existence - theists on the other hand have a different application, hence your ideas on how to cease the material are not at all practical (and not even successful)
and there is evidence that the brain is the final last word in consciousness?
aka- your ignorance
perfected theists of course - but you could even extend it to the numerous people with NDE claims
so you think the real cause behind such attempts at argument are not atheists pretending to be stupid?
it is the definition of the word fool given in the context of the scriptural references
BG 7.15: Those miscreants who are grossly foolish, who are lowest among mankind, whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons do not surrender unto Me.
“
so given that your body is likely to get old quite soon, which means that your senses will weaken thus you won't be able to keep up with winning all sort s of mod cons (ever seen an 80 year old try and work out how to use an ipod?) and social engagements (ever wondered why old people like to sit on benches) even though you may have raging desires to be fulfilled, its not clear why you have such a grand engagement
Perhaps you need to spend some time figuring out what 'evidence' means and entails. Your above example shows you haven't got the slightest clue whatsoever.
The difficulty only arises because of your absolute undeniable cowardice.
Spiritual heh.. Still stuck here in a material existence using material things with your thoughts focused on something other than the existence you have. It doesn't sound all that good.
1) It's not about the ability to 'conceive of things'. I can imagine any old nonsense you care to daydream up. What we have here is you making something up that you can't in any way support and then throwing a girly fit because I don't accept your imaginations as reality.
2) Killing oneself is the end of life as far as all the data supports. If you want to imagine fairies and lands of honey and ice cream then it requires a little more than your say so.
3) The only substantiated evidenced thing in this discussion is that when you die you cease giving two shits about your former material existence. Period.
Absolutely. You can die of cancer, aids, pneumonia or old age but these are mere technicalities. When it comes to the crunch we all die of the exact same thing: brain death. When brain death has actually occurred nobody ever stands up and says "hi". There are no wafty spirity thingys waiting at the bus stop, there are no evidenced lands of fairies and magical sparkling waterfalls or any indication whatsoever that brain death is anything other than when you cease to exist.
Now don't let me stop you.. you can believe and conjure up in your imagination any old crap that you want to. You must however be honest to yourself and realise that it is just your imagination.
If you disagree kindly provide evidence for anything other than death being final. Do not say "well this book says". That's plain stupid.
Such as? Did they message you from the spiritual realm? Lol.
Not really, no. Purely out of interest I might as well point out the the N in NDE stands for near. The D in NDE stands for death. Put them together and you end up with... near death, which.. I almost feel saddened that I need point it out,... is not death, it's near death. I will post you a medal right now if you can work out the difference. Come on lg, you can do it... squeezzzzeeee.
No rational person would. Leprechauns, the fsm and gods all share something in common.... The absolute lack of any evidence whatsoever. What is evidenced is that man creates these idiocies in a last ditch effort to explain the things around him, to somehow bring reason to chaos. Theres a boogeyman but you can avoid him if you shut the closet. It is a way of combatting a natural fear. There's saluting magpies, throwing salt over your shoulder, saying bless you to a sneezer even though the bubonic plague went out of fashion centuries ago, blue 6 armed elephant headed gods that despise the very world they created yada yada yada. None of which has anything to actually support it as being real. If you then take it upon yourself to try and convince the world that saluting a magpie is a necessity then you must and should expect someone to tell you all about what you must or must not do with concerns to psirens. They're both equally idiotic but equally valid in the realms of such discussion.
But not the actual definition of the word. Glad we got that settled.
What an absolutely sickening and depraved notion. I will get old eventually so why bother enjoying anything now... Oh how I pity you.
Snakelord
and if you want to talk about imagination, its your imagination that such a process to give up material desire is successful
determining the distinction between the body and the self is quite elementary and discernible even in this self same existence
“
there is however an alternative to pursuing happiness outside of such bodily concepts, which means that one can be happy now and in the future as opposed to merely winding oneself up for a future of misery as the price to pay for one's immediate happiness
its not evident that you are born with nothing and die with nothing?
then put aside your ad homs for just a moment and explain how one can arrive at the point of evidence bereft of foundations of theory and practice
as opposed to the 24 hr meditation of the gross materialist on hankering for things that he hasn't got or lamenting for things they already have?
it certainly is about conceiving things - you conceive that the way to give up material desire is to simply die - theists have a different conception of how to give up material desire
and if you want to talk about imagination, its your imagination that such a process to give up material desire is successful
the data collected by who exactly? empiricists?
I don't think I have ever said the substance of spiritual perceptability is dependent on my say so - I have said that it does depend on giving up material desire, heralded by approaching the subject matter of scripture with rational consideration
the problem is that one chapter of unbridled material existence leads to another chapter of material existence - and the issue is that this is neither pleasant nor necessary
your statement is invalidated by NDE's and other persons who have returned from such states as brain death
your attempt to fill in the gaps of your logic with over bearing confidence is not particularly successful
given your current level of knowledge (the whole theory->practice->values thing) what would you require as evidence?
no
determining the distinction between the body and the self is quite elementary and discernible even in this self same existence
clinically/empirically/scientifically they were dead, and such observations were proven to be wrong - if you state that brain death = death, then a person who has entered a state of brain death and returned with life clearly negates your theoretical foundation
given your opening rant about evidence, I am surprised you mention the word here, particularly with the accompanying tentative claims that follow
you realize that your abridged version of the history of humanity is not supported by anything that resembles evidence or even a coherent argument (the argument "some people got it wrong therefore everyone got it wrong" is not coherent)
therefore its not a general normative quality of saintly persons to request people to salute magpies - they do however have quite unified stances regarding the cultivation of material desires, aka lust, anger etc
“
it is however a word used in the discussion of scriptural texts and we do happen to be having a discussion (although sometimes i wonder) on the subject ......
you miss the point - your approach to the pursuit of happiness will certainly land you in despair since the central vehicle to your happiness is the material body, which has a predictable course (no matter how many adrenalin glands of monkeys you get transplanted)
there is however an alternative to pursuing happiness outside of such bodily concepts, which means that one can be happy now and in the future as opposed to merely winding oneself up for a future of misery as the price to pay for one's immediate happiness
It is not possible to rationally contemplate a notion when one already knows the answer.
Is is possible, lightgigantic, for God to learn something new? Can you?
How does that equate to anyone not owning anything? It means the don't own anything 'eternally' because they die lol but that's not an argument to say they don't own anything, it is indeed simple idiocy.
You can call it whatever you want but it doesn't detract from the fact that every single time I have asked you try everything and anything possible to avoid answering a very simple question. A prime example features in this very quote of yours: "how one can arrive at the point of evidence bereft of foundations..." It's irrelevant to the question. Here it is yet again: Do you have direct perception of god? The answer requires nothing more than a yes or no. It doesn't require foundations and theories and practices on my part, just a simple yes or no on your part.
Here is where you'll attempt some more cowardice and say "how will you know I'm lying". Of course we've already been through that a few times and I have answered it.
Saying you're being a coward is not a personal insult or worthless remark attempting to hurt your character, it's an observed undeniable reality. Yes or no lg.
So in other words "as opposed to living in a material existence and using/enjoying that which exists".
Sorry no contest.
You're being silly. When you're dead you don't have desire for material things, because you're dead. There might be claims as to other methods, but you're really in no position to argue that death doesn't stop one from having material desires. Oh wait, this is where you impress me with your make believe in afterlives, second lives and dog lives right?
As opposed to?
And what evidence to you have to show this to be the case?
Not in the slightest, (NDE's were explained). As for 'other persons who have returned from brain death'.. like who?
Oh here we go with the pointless attempts at insulting my intelligence. C'mon lg, surely even you can come up with something better. As for the question, gimme whatever you got.
Ok, so "perfected theists" are just those that realised they have a brain?
Clinically yes. Not brain dead.
"A near-death experience (NDE) is a distinct subjective experience that people sometimes report after a near-death episode. In a near-death episode, a person is either clinically dead, near death, or in a situation where death is likely or expected."
None of these cases involves people that are actually dead. Clinically dead yes..
"Clinical death is now seen as a medical condition that precedes death rather than actually being dead."
Hence the term "near death..".
Such as who?
So you concur that leprechauns the fsm etc are as valid in discussions such as these because of the common traits they share? Your above quote didn't actually provide a response to that. Do you now detract your statement that they are used by atheists to pretend to be stupid, (a bizarre remark in itself)?
Are you telling me that because you've checked or.. just because you think so?
O..k, that wasn't the argument. The argument was that none of the examples cited, (saluting magpies etc), has nothing to actually support it as being real.
Maybe I should draw pictures, you clearly have a problem with reading.
O...k. Out of interest name me a saintly person.
Well, name me some so I can check.
Yes it is a word, a word with a specific meaning. If some text decides to corrupt that meaning it is of no value, because that is not the meaning of the word. Much like if some text said that the clouds were made of marshmallows, it wouldn't mean the clouds were made of marshmallows. If we were discussing that text and you said the clouds were made of marshmallows because that text said so, I would still call you on it, because they're not made of marshmallows.
Yeah I'll die. So that's reason to not enjoy things now? Don't be foolish.
Michael
“
one could know that water quenches thirst
one could know that fruit juice quenches thirst
feeling thirsty, one could think whether one wants to drink water or fruit juice
“
one could know that water quenches thirst
one could know that fruit juice quenches thirst
feeling thirsty, one could think whether one wants to drink water or fruit juice
not in the sense that you are probably thinking, but god can certainly have more increased experiences (ie one pleasurable moment is succeeded by an even more pleasurable moment)
certainly - how about yourself?