So, the answer is 'yes'?
On Apr 24, 2:06 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, if everything is not subject to examination it would preclude the > examination of everything. > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 2:56 PM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > ...of course, that would include the belief that everything is subject > > to examination being subject to examination, no? > > > On Apr 24, 12:29 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > Ok. I'm not sure about the rest but it seems to me like one of the big > > > problems with organized religion is people believing they know what the > > > creator (if it exists) wants. > > > > Also, I doubt that god needs nectar from us. If he/she/it is up there > > then > > > he/she/it is probably too busy smoking some premo natures bounty to mess > > > around with nectar - unless hes got the munchies. Then maybe he wants to > > > pour some nectar on the brownies. > > > > As to belief being unmovable, I kinda feel sorry for anyone that > > inflexible. > > > Life is fluid. Everything is subject to examination. Maybe beliefs more > > than > > > anything else. > > > > On Sun, Apr 24, 2011 at 10:53 AM, the taoist shaman <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > i didint want to offend RP . seems ...... questionable , nieave , ,, > > > > to clame to know of hevenly things is to assurte having divine > > > > qualitys , belife is likend to an ant gathering nectar for a queen , > > > > to sit in the forest and only see the trees that are directly in frunt > > > > of u , and not all around , at the same time to be able to have an un > > > > moveable belife that works is a beutifule thing > > > > > Chuck Bowling wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 10:58 AM, the taoist shaman < > > [email protected] > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > damn chuck , RP sounds like a hindu , i belive all religion > > leaves > > > > > > room for interpretations , but to make definate and solid > > conclusions > > > > > > seems ...... ? > > > > > > Seems... What? > > > > > > > Chuck Bowling wrote: > > > > > > > Sorry if I sound insulting but this just sounds like a bunch of > > > > mystical > > > > > > > obfuscation. You're not by chance trying to sell some self-help > > books > > > > or > > > > > > > starting your own cult are you? > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 9:07 AM, RP Singh <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > God is aware in the sense that He is all or all emanates from > > Him > > > > and > > > > > > > > thus automatically He knows everything and doesn't have to be > > aware > > > > of > > > > > > > > things like us mortals. In my opinion , we should not conceive > > of > > > > Him > > > > > > > > to be conscious in the way that we are because our > > consciousness > > > > > > > > entails duality or is encompassed within borders. He is > > conscious > > > > in > > > > > > > > us , acts in us but in His separate state He is oblivious of > > all as > > > > He > > > > > > > > alone is and creation being changeable and subject to birth and > > > > death > > > > > > > > is just an illusion. In my view that which is not permanent can > > be > > > > > > > > called an illusion. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 6:53 PM, ornamentalmind > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > RP, are you suggesting that god is not conscious at > > all?...that > > > > all > > > > > > > > > god is/does etc. is unconscious? > > > > > > > > > > In either case, are you using one of the more common notions > > of > > > > what > > > > > > > > > conscious means…like being self aware and knowing what one is > > > > doing? > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 22, 1:45 am, RP Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> In my view , creation was not a conscious act of God , but > > > > rather > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> universe emanated from the unconscious mind of God. He > > doesn't > > > > look > > > > > > at > > > > > > > > >> us consciously , doesn't connect results with actions , > > rather > > > > > > > > >> everything is happening according to laws which exist in His > > > > > > > > >> unconscious mind. I don't think that any scripture can > > really > > > > lay > > > > > > down > > > > > > > > >> definitions of good and bad with His authority , rather > > thinkers > > > > > > among > > > > > > > > >> us can lay down rules which appear logical to them and > > accepted > > > > by > > > > > > us > > > > > > > > >> as such. I don't believe in an after-life and consider this > > life > > > > > > > > >> itself to be a spiritual experience. > > > > > > > > > >> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Chuck Bowling > > > > > > > > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:55 AM, > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > >> > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> >> Hey Chuck, > > > > > > > > > >> >> I guess it depends on what you belive God is. > > > > > > > > > >> >> If you believe that God is the creator then everything > > has > > > > Gods > > > > > > hand > > > > > > > > >> >> in it, if you further belive that God is omipitant then > > God > > > > you > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > >> >> exactly the way that God has designed you to be. > > > > > > > > > >> > I believe that god/goddess/gods etc. are icons. They are > > > > concepts > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > help > > > > > > > > >> > people cope with their own frailties and inadequacies. > > Whether > > > > it > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > >> > blame bad things on, attribute good things to, or to > > provide > > > > us a > > > > > > path > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > >> > continue our existence beyond the grave. > > > > > > > > > >> >> If you are a gardner, and you splice together two > > differant > > > > > > plants to > > > > > > > > >> >> gain a desird result, the plant does have a life of it's > > own, > > > > but > > > > > > > > >> >> works in the way you have designd it to. So in a real > > way > > > > you > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> >> manipulator of that plants life, your hand is in all that > > it > > > > > > does, as > > > > > > > > >> >> you have designed it. > > > > > > > > > >> > Here I would say that the original design was altered. A > > much > > > > > > easier > > > > > > > > task > > > > > > > > >> > than the original design. > > > > > > > > > >> > As I may have mentioned in a previous post, I readily > > accept > > > > the > > > > > > > > possibility > > > > > > > > >> > that some entity may have created this universe. And, I > > think > > > > that > > > > > > > > anything > > > > > > > > >> > with that kind of power would probably appear to be > > omniscient > > > > to > > > > > > us. > > > > > > > > >> > However, I also believe that it is VERY unlikely that any > > > > entity > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > > >> > have created this reality would bare even the slightest > > > > > > resemblance to > > > > > > > > >> > anything we describe as a god. > > > > > > > > > >> > The reasoning for that seems fairly straightforward to me: > > > > > > > > > >> > Most of the gods we have created seem to be pretty damn > > lame. > > > > I > > > > > > mean > > > > > > > > come > > > > > > > > >> > on. You want me to kill a goat, sacrifice a virgin, or set > > > > fire to > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > wax > > > > > > > > >> > stick in your honor. REALLY??? And you're going to send me > > to > > > > hell > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > >> > eternity because I thought the neighbor's wife was a hot > > piece > > > > of > > > > > > > > tail? > > > > > > > > >> > Jeesh. As gods go you suck dude. > > > > > > > > > >> > Another thing. You would think that god would find a > > better > > > > way of > > > > > > > > >> > correcting bad behavior than to fry people for an > > eternity. > > > > Even > > > > > > we > > > > > > > > lowly > > > > > > > > >> > humans know that setting someone on fire is not the best > > way > > > > to > > > > > > > > convince 'em > > > > > > > > >> > to mend their ways. > > > > > > > > > >> > Lastly but not finally. If god created this reality then > > at a > > > > > > minimum > > > > > > > > he > > > > > > > > >> > created one and possibly infinitely more universes. In > > this > > > > one > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > are an > > > > > > > > >> > estimated 300 sextillion stars. That's > > > > > > 300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 > > > > > > > > stars > > > > > > > > >> > if you're looking for precision. You would think that with > > all > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > stuff > > > > > > > > >> > floating around out there that he/she/it would have better > > > > things > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > do than > > > > > > > > >> > make sure that little johnnies prayers are answered with a > > > > brand > > > > > > new > > > > > > > > bike on > > > > > > > > >> > his birthday. > > > > > > > > > >> > My guess is that any entity capable of creating all of > > this > > > > would > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > us as > > > > > > > > >> > a minor infestation of germs at best. > > > > > > > > > >> >> On Apr 20, 5:40 pm, Chuck Bowling < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > >> >> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> >> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:32 AM, RP Singh < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >> >> > > Whatever work I do and the effort that I make , is it > > God > > > > > > doing > > > > > > > > it ? > > > > > > > > >> >> > > No , I do it all , but It is God who gives me the > > > > strength to > > > > > > do > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > >> >> > > Without His strength even the resolve to do anything > > > > wouldn't > > > > > > > > come to > > > > > > > > >> >> > > my mind. > > > > > > > > > >> >> > Now when you say that God is giving you strength can > > you be > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > >> >> > specific? > > > > > > > > >> >> > Is he providing your mitochondria with more ADP or is > > he > > > > upping > > > > > > > > your > > > > > > > > >> >> > serotonin or dopamine levels to give you a greater > > feeling > > > > of > > > > > > > > reward for > > > > > > > > >> >> > your accomplishments? > > > > > > > > > >> >> > And, if so, can you tell me exactly how he does that? I > > > > mean, > > > > > > is he > > > > > > > > >> >> > causing > > > > > > > > >> >> > re-uptake inhibition or is he actually producing a > > greater > > > > > > volume > > > > > > > > of > > ... > > read more »
