Question My Beliefs, But Be Prepared To Answer For Yours :)
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
hey thanks for the first like from you bro, i really appreciate you making my notification get highlighted again...
Brazko
Well-Known Member
It's not needed to do so to claim Pantheism. I already explained the reason why some do in the examples I left. Tell me what you didn't understand about them? I mean, other than what people can mistake it to be, or what some people get off on others hoping to confuse it's meaning with. That can be said about any term whether defined or not. People will mistake/misuse them to mean something of their conception regardless. That stance of arguement isn't saying much.
Pantheist include Buddism, Taoism, Native American etc... None of these religions of Pantheism need reference to a God... However, communication between all would be comprehended if the word God was used and interchanged when speaking in any form of context or, concept.. Could it be? Yes... but that lies soley on the cognitive functioning level of that individual...
The only Metaphysics added are the mystical experiences provided by nature.. QP is observed under a microscope and through numbers.. The observance of the happenings, probabilties of existence and non existence, and the relation of interactions are mystical in aspect. It's mystical not because its metaphysical, but because it astounds and exists outside of scientific knowledge, absent the case being of unknown knowledge. Maybe this is where you may find discretion in old/ancient terms used to describe newly founded science. Whereas the words don't equate to the same meaning applied, however, the knowledge existing in that new science has been applied within the same principles before scientific confirmation.. A good example of this would be Acupuncture.. Whereas ancient knowledge/terms describe the same thing modern science confirms and are applied in the same manner.. There is only a struggle and conflict when one doesn't conform to the same language... That struggle to me isn't based in language, as much as it is in cognition.
"When the mind makes a generalization such as the concept of tree, it extracts similarities from numerous examples; the simplification enables higher-level thinking"
^^^^^Layers^^^^^ = higher-level thinking
And to the question of forces of nature, yes.. Same meaning..
Nature of the Universe Rules All.. God rules All, The Tao Rules All..
Reincarnation and Consciousness falls under the same umbrella, but it's pointless to regurgitate when the same line of thinking is proposed to everything outside of defined terms of scientific confirmation. This lies in the cognitive ability of the individual. Everything that is needed to understand is presented within the religious philosophy or can be entertained and understood through cognitive scientific refinement that explains the basis of that primitive analysis.
Much of which you failed to understand is the case.
I'm sorry phuk but I can gather much of what you say even when what you're saying isn't much..
It seems you are more concerned with persuading someone to not use or say that word because it already has a defined meaning. So being unbias and unsentimental to your position of thought, I'm sure that you are petitioning to eradicate such use of terminology outside of its designated scope and meaning worldwide for the betterment of mankind.
I'm sorry but true analytical thinking isn't a desirable trait unless you're trying to fuck calculators.
Luger187
Well-Known Member
we do that because your explanation for why something happens is faulty, and we are providing a better explanation for why it happened. instead of complaining, why not refute our arguments with logic and common sense? prove us wrong and quit bitching. you are like a child
Hepheastus420
Well-Known Member
Yeah no problem bro, it was just a warning that they are just gonna keep stating the same things and going in circles to prove religion is bad, we can just as easily make a thread dedicated to all the negative attributes to atheism but of course they are just gonna disagree with it.
Hepheastus420
Well-Known Member
Hey oly I thought this would make you feel better and laugh. 
Hold on, ha iPod is being weird. Ehh for some reason I can't post a pic right now but it's like:
ATHEISM: the belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self- replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. - makes perfect sense.
Hold on, ha iPod is being weird. Ehh for some reason I can't post a pic right now but it's like:
ATHEISM: the belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self- replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. - makes perfect sense.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
What is the distinction between naturalism and pantheism?
Luger187
Well-Known Member
lets hear it https://www.rollitup.org/spirituality-sexuality-philosophy/464095-what-negatives-atheism.html#post6253298
there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone. i disagree with you, but if you provide a valid claim that has substance, i may still disagree, but i will see that claim as valid and include it in my thoughts. we can both be right, while still disagreeing.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
We say the same things because the defense of dogmatic religion is always the same:
Religion is true
Religion does good
Atheism does bad
We can demonstrate the flaws in each of those assertions quite clearly and conclusively. Once these topics are covered, their proponents have nothing left in their arsenal except petty attacks irrelevant of the facts and self delusion.
Brazko
Well-Known Member
Nothing besides one being an accepted Scientific term and forbids inclusion of any other term..
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, I meant how do you study the deeper aspects of spirituality?
As MP pointed out earlier, each of us can feel what someone else might consider a "spiritual" experience, but what does that constitute? Are there standards to follow or consider? Do they have to be consistent? An "experience" by its definition would seem to me to be something individual to each person, completely subjective, so that would exclude it from requiring consistent standards for evaluation.
So basically, what the question really comes down to is 'How would I know what I'm feeling is actually something "spiritual" and not just my own imagination?', how do you distinguish between the two? This is a problem theists face that I've never got a rational explanation for. There doesn't seem to be a way around it, which explains the necessity of faith, in my mind. That's the slot that fits the void created by this logical problem. You insert 'faith'... "you've gotta have faith.." because you can't explain it any other way. 'Faith' is just a word that was created the try to answer an illogical question.
How do you expect people to accept that, given the enormous consequences atheists like me have pointed out like starvation, global conflicts that harm millions of innocent people, etc.?
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
If there is no distinction then I accept the position as one which with I have very little conflict. However, judging by the 3 encyclopedic entries and 2 pantheistic websites I just visited, and going by conversations I have had with pantheists and pantheistic authors I have read, if you believe there is no distinction between naturalism and pantheism, I have to question which one of us misunderstands the position. The central distinction as I understand it is belief in a unity and that one can change ones state in relation to that unity. Of course unity can be explained away as the universe, and the state of relationship can be explained as your understanding of the universe, and at that point I have no problem with the position other than redundancy and superfluousness, which while being the most forgivable and understandable of mistakes, is a distinction.
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
funny how you blow shit away like it is nothing. says a lot about you and your so called beliefs
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
you see that, i said that along time ago but it was not accepted, but now that an atheist says it, it is ok and acceptable... you all(atheists) are a bunch of hypocritical d bags that dont accept anything a believer says, even though you all follow their research like crazy
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
a better explanation? are you serious? you are trying to explain me better then what i experienced? man you all are fucking fooolish!!! what retard can say what you just said? only you...
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
i know, that is what is so funny to me... and they claim to stick to the rules of debate when they continually deflect stuff that is valid...
thanks again bro... it is good to know that we aint alone on herer
thanks again bro... it is good to know that we aint alone on herer
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
i disagree with you just because you are an atheist, just like you will disagree with valid stuff we post all the time cause we are believers... stop your bitching and be productive
olylifter420
Well-Known Member
Luger187
Well-Known Member
blow what away? what did you say that was important? i didnt see anything of substance in that post. just nonsense about how we are hating on you...again
yes. experience is not the be-all end-all of reality(DUH!). just because you experience something DOES NOT make it real or 100% fact. there are people that literally see people or objects that do not exist. they KNOW it is real, but it is not. we have an explanation for why this happens. that explanation is better than the one of the persons, who says "its just there, dont you see it?!".
we know that the feelings you feel while in prayer are nothing but brain functions. you may feel a connection with god, but you are not. we can recreate this feeling with a device.
learn to think about things before you say them
Luger187
Well-Known Member
show us something we deflected that was valid please
disagreeing is not the issue, you dumbass. the issue is you guys dont provide 'valid stuff'. apparently you post it all the time, so please enlighten me and show me some.
who is the one being counterproductive here? lol