OK, I'm willing to consider the existence of more advanced beings, but where did they originate? I would be unlikely to worship anything, but they might deserve a generous respect.
I believe I have disproven Atheism. Tell me, do you see any flaws?
- Thread starter Jadebrain_Prime
- Start date
- Status
OK, I'm willing to consider the existence of more advanced beings, but where did they originate? I would be unlikely to worship anything, but they might deserve a generous respect.
I have had a couple encounters with what I thought were Gods. One was a mushroom God, you can imagine how that one communicated to me, the other was the God of Salvia Divinorium, and a minor God nearby that didn't speak. I met them in another dimension while I was half imbedded in the wall of my apartment.
how about if they pretended to be Jessus or Mohammid would these people be easily coersed into an army or be driven into slavery on another planet. We are primed to be abused by our faith.
Too much tripping because your soel is worn thin!
Yes, that is an excellent point. If there ever were beings so advanced as to appear devine, would all religious people be forced by their own mentality to submit to them, lest they appear hypocritical?
They all seem to be waiting for some person thousands of years old to save us. It wouldn't be hard to do a few advanced technoly tricks to suck in blind faith.
Oh, wait, they are extra sensitive to demons and witches and stuff. A strange side effect of Christianity is that there is a whole pantheon of angelic beings; Satan, archangels, demons, cherubs, saints. How can they call it monotheism? It seems if you open the door to the possibility of one, logically, there could be more than one, too.
It amounts to another kind of ecosystem. How did this come to be? Is God the end product of a complex process, or the origin of a new one? If God is outside of time, it's origin could remain hidden because it didn't happen. That is- what if it did happen, and God is the end result of a process of evolution. Then, this being goes back in time and alters it, perhaps by seeding planets with simple lifeforms. It stays to see what happens, knowing that supreme beings will evolve again. In this hypothesis, God is born through a natural process but, from our point of view, never born.
It amounts to another kind of ecosystem. How did this come to be? Is God the end product of a complex process, or the origin of a new one? If God is outside of time, it's origin could remain hidden because it didn't happen. That is- what if it did happen, and God is the end result of a process of evolution. Then, this being goes back in time and alters it, perhaps by seeding planets with simple lifeforms. It stays to see what happens, knowing that supreme beings will evolve again. In this hypothesis, God is born through a natural process but, from our point of view, never born.
Last edited:
yea that would be us. lets hope they don't start eating moldy rye.
me included.
this is also clear to me.
but what isn't clear is why hasn't science, after pouring vast amounts of time and money into it, been able to create life in the lab?
explainable yes. doable?
i'm not really sure if i believe in a religious alternative.
can something be supernatural without being religious?
yes, i will agree.
The first part I don't know; however, my experience with human perception and integrity suggests that some possibilities may be that you're lying or you really found an environment similar enough to your dream that you consider identical. If I were a betting man, I would place my bets on the former.
Either way, I would recommend finding a way to provide evidence for any extradinary claims you are inclined to make. Testimony of this sort is uncredible.
As far as the holding on thing... if you really did experience that, it sounds exactly like vertigo. Typically its a result of salt buildup in your inner ear that temporarily messes up your equilibrium.
There's no evidence at all that there was a supernatural cause for life.
There are, in fact, a number of recent books on the subject. Try, for example, an Amazon search for a book called, funnily enough, Consciousness explained.
Yes it can, and has been by many evolutionary psychologists.
Try Stephen Pinker's book The Blank Slate, for a start.
No it isn't.
Convinced of what?
Do we need to create a star in the lab, too, in order for you to believe that stars are driven by nuclear fusion?
Why can only a being exist outside time?
yes it can feed bak loops its all mathemathics my friend its how it was created
No, I'm saying the guy that started this thread had it right.
He hit the nail on the head with perfect logic.
If anything is eternal, it exists outside of time, always was and always will be.
I've never heard it explained better.
I don't think it really disproves atheism, but it does accurately describe eternal existence.
If you ever had eternal life you always did, but we had to leave that omnipotence and come down here to be born and stand the trial of flesh, with a form of spiritual amnesia, to be tested, proved, and child trained in this created bubble we call time.
As you partake of "spiritual" food and grow in stature, the spirit man within you wakes up....and remembers omnipotence, the knowledge of all things.
The glory we had in Him before the foundation of the world.
What amazed me is how someone could just figure this out with logic.....
It's more likely the case of a Son of God hearing from his "theophany".
The omnipotent being that is existing outside of time is God, and had in Him attributes, genes, in which you as a Son of God are a part of God Himself.
Remember He called Himself the I AM....not was or will be.
This temporary mortal reality within time is where not only God himself learned obedience through that which He suffered, but saved us a small portion of suffering we could share with him, and through this affliction, to mold in us the very character of God.
The thing with an eternal quality, that was sent here to be manifested as a Son of God, is your soul or theophany that you begin to hear from after you are born again.
What we learn here through suffering is priceless, it's like a law of opposites is in effect.
Once you step back outside this dimension of time and cross back into eternity it would seem then to be impossible to change.
That explains a lot...the very meaning of life.
If you were looking for it, there it is.
Thanks Rokkon for bringing this up.
Last edited:
You cant disprove atheism without proving god exists and that isnt going to happen is it now.
You cant disprove atheism without proving god exists and that isnt going to happen is it now.
I think Athelwulf already did that.
spidergoat,
Sorry, I was going to send this in a Private Message as to not derail this thread, but I have been curious about Salvia and wanting to try it.
What are your thoughts on it?
Is it just a simple disassociative?
What was your experience?
Thanks.
To exist "outside of time" one would be static, therefore unable to interact in any form with anything "inside of time".
Think about it for a second...
Without the passage of time, you can not even think, for thinking requires progression of thought.
To say, "I AM", requires time because "I" must come before "AM".
Without time, there is no progression, no movement, no change, no thought, no anything - you are in a state of static existence (if one could even truly say that you "exist" at all).
I think I understand whay you are trying to say...
To be eternal you have to be unaging and unaffected by time?
While it may be true that to be eternal, your property of existence must be unaffected by the passage of time, in order to see the world as moving, changing and existing, you have to be existing IN time, right along with it.
If anything at all could possibly be referred to as existing outside of time, it MAY BE space itself, but not only is that an entirely different debate, space is not a cognizant being.
WOW, it is difficult to word this.
No raven, you got it on the first try.
Explaining eternity or eternal existence as occupying space outside of a time-flow would immediately mean that such an entity by definition cannot interact with a time-flow progression since his own existence will be affected by the elapse of time.
I love the thought and phrase examples since both require a perception and a progression of time. Which do not exist outside of time.
All of this of course is theoretical and unprovable, but here we are.
Side note Rokkon: existing outside of time is completely different from having the qualities immortality, invulnerability and omnipotence.
Explaining eternity or eternal existence as occupying space outside of a time-flow would immediately mean that such an entity by definition cannot interact with a time-flow progression since his own existence will be affected by the elapse of time.
I love the thought and phrase examples since both require a perception and a progression of time. Which do not exist outside of time.
All of this of course is theoretical and unprovable, but here we are.
Side note Rokkon: existing outside of time is completely different from having the qualities immortality, invulnerability and omnipotence.
- Status