Proof of God

[Riddler]

Riddler wrote
Since you enjoy playing logic games, how far back in a causal chain would you say it is necessary to project our imaginations before it is logically imperative that we stop and declare a primal starting point?

MySiddhi wrote

On that which is self-causal...!!!

'That which is self-causal' is the thing that we might expect to find at the imagined primal starting point. I was presuming you were familiar with the common AvT logical argument that begins 'there must be a primal starting point because you can't regress causality ad infinitum'.
My question therefore was: how far back in objective time can you regress before it becomes logically imperative that you stop?

MySiddhi wrote

Karma is still valid... it just simply is not cultivated from past lives but rather is from our forefathers... and we give it to our offspring.

I don't know what you're trying to describe there, but it isn't karma. Karma means 'action', and refers to action that we alone take and for which we are solely responsible. As such, it is cultivated and perpetuated in our every moment. It is in no way synonymous with either 'blessing' (hetero-bestowal) or 'sin' (hetero-responsibility).

MySiddhi wrote

The only sources cited in the NT is the OT.

Really? I await your citation of these with interest.

MySiddhi wrote

And Jesus plagiarizes Siddhartha.

Ooh! Just you wait till Lily sees that!

MySiddhi wrote

How do we know that Jesus was a Buddhist.?.. by the fact that many of Jesus teachings are almost word for word what Siddhartha taught.

Citations please. You do actually read the Bible, I take it?

MySiddhi wrote

Why do you continue to assume I believe in ex nihilo? Creation "out of nothing" is not even found in the bible! So all you are doing is appealing to the mass of ignorant Christians that can't even comprehend the absurdity of their own dogmas.

Hey, if only I could pick and choose my Christian audience so easily!

So anyway, what are you suggesting God created Creation out of? What does the Bible say He used?

Riddler wrote

'That which is self-causal' is the thing that we might expect to find at the imagined primal starting point. I was presuming you were familiar with the common AvT logical argument that begins 'there must be a primal starting point because you can't regress causality ad infinitum'.
My question therefore was: how far back in objective time can you regress before it becomes logically imperative that you stop?

That which is self-causal is eternal.

I don't know what you're trying to describe there, but it isn't karma. Karma means 'action', and refers to action that we alone take and for which we are solely responsible. As such, it is cultivated and perpetuated in our every moment. It is in no way synonymous with either 'blessing' (hetero-bestowal) or 'sin' (hetero-responsibility).

The main difference is that Christianity claims the actual individual identity of a person and their family line is responsible for their actions whereas Buddhism claims some supposed immortal soul is responsible for the actions of unrelated individual identities.

The real difference here is on personhood and inheritance. Christianity claims personhood is fundamental and inheritance comes from family. Buddhism claims personhood is an illusion and inheritance comes from an immortal soul.

You do actually read the Bible, I take it?

I probably have a masters degree in the bible. I often read from the original text through transliterations.

So anyway, what are you suggesting God created Creation out of?

All things are made of that which exists; God.

Or, as Epimenides put it; "for in him we have life and move and exist"

[Riddler]

MySiddhi wrote

The main difference is that Christianity claims the actual individual identity of a person and their family line is responsible for their actions whereas Buddhism claims some supposed immortal soul is responsible for the actions of unrelated individual identities.

The real difference here is on personhood and inheritance. Christianity claims personhood is fundamental and inheritance comes from family. Buddhism claims personhood is an illusion and inheritance comes from an immortal soul.

That's not an accurate assessment of Buddhism unless you're stuck in the early chapters, but that's not important just now. My question was not how Buddhism and Christianity are different, but how they are so similar that you, and Jesus, can claim to be Buddhist, despite the fact that you both disavow all of Buddhism's basic tenets.

I'll also restate my earlier question, which you declined to answer but now insist on making an issue of:

Why do we get our genetics and therefore instincts from our parents? As brand new entities freshly created . . . by a perfect God, what did we do to deserve that?

In your view, I didn't choose my family line: it was given to me by God at a point in my life (the very beginning) when I had done absolutely nothing that could have either pleased or offended Him. What sort of vicious bastard is this Guy, and what does He think He's done for me that deserves my eternal affection?

MySiddhi wrote

I probably have a masters degree in the bible.

I'm sure that's something you'd remember for certain if it were actually true.

MySiddhi wrote

All things are made of that which exists; God.

I'm not familiar with that one. Where would I find it in the Bible? Think hard: what did you learn on that masters degree?

MySiddhi wrote

That which is self-causal is eternal.

If everything is made of God (qv), then everything is eternal. Why call it God? Why not just call it Everything?

Riddler wrote

That's not an accurate assessment of Buddhism unless you're stuck in the early chapters, but that's not important just now. My question was not how Buddhism and Christianity are different, but how they are so similar that you, and Jesus, can claim to be Buddhist, despite the fact that you both disavow all of Buddhism's basic tenets.

I have explained the differences... the rest is the same.

I'll also restate my earlier question, which you declined to answer but now insist on making an issue of:

Why do we get our genetics and therefore instincts from our parents? As brand new entities freshly created . . . by a perfect God, what did we do to deserve that?

In your view, I didn't choose my family line: it was given to me by God at a point in my life when I had done absolutely nothing that could have either pleased or offended Him. What sort of vicious bastard is this Guy, and what does He think He's done for me that deserves my eternal affection?

Thanks for removing ex nihilo out of the question.

You say; "it was given to me by God at a point in my life"... does this assume you existed prior to being born?

Having never previously existed... you would have absolutely no say what so ever on who you were born too.

Would you rather have not been born?... in other words to not have existed?

I'm not familiar with that one. Where would I find it in the Bible? Think hard: what did you learn on that masters degree?

(Acts 17:28) For in him we have life and move and exist.

If everything is made of God (qv), then everything is eternal. Why call it God? Why not just call it Everything?

Short memory?

My post here is included in "everything". My post is comprised of energy which cannot be created nor destroyed (eternal). Yet this post is not energy itself... and certainly is NOT eternal.

[nkb]

I'm confused.

Why is anyone even engaging this delusional dipshit anymore? I mean, he has invoked the Illuminati, fer cryin' out loud!

Add to that conpiracies around the OKC bombing, the WTC implosion, and all sorts of other nutbag crap, and you know that you have someone who will not listen to any form of reason.

nkb wrote

I'm confused.

Why is anyone even engaging this delusional dipshit anymore? I mean, he has invoked the Illuminati, fer cryin' out loud!

Add to that conpiracies around the OKC bombing, the WTC implosion, and all sorts of other nutbag crap, and you know that you have someone who will not listen to any form of reason.

Maybe because ad hominem fallacy doesn't hold as much weight for others as it does for you.

[nkb]

In your case, it's not a fallacy.

Are you wearing your tin foil hat? We wouldn't want some aliens to steal your amazing proof.

[calpurnpiso]

MySiddhi wrote

That which is self-causal is eternal.


The main difference is that Christianity claims the actual individual identity of a person and their family line is responsible for their actions whereas Buddhism claims some supposed immortal soul is responsible for the actions of unrelated individual identities.

The real difference here is on personhood and inheritance. Christianity claims personhood is fundamental and inheritance comes from family. Buddhism claims personhood is an illusion and inheritance comes from an immortal soul.

I probably have a masters degree in the bible. I often read from the original text through transliterations.


All things are made of that which exists; God.

Or, as Epimenides put it; "for in him we have life and move and exist"

"My Lord" wrote: "I probably have a masters degree in the bible. I often read from the original text through transliterations."

..but do you have a degree in NEUROLOGY? Having a degree in the Bible is like having a degree in "Alice in Wonderland, Mad hatter diaries", "Winnie the Pooh mysteries" or "Lord of the Rings trilogy"..etc I suggest you see a neurologist if you believe the irrational anachronistic tales are true. I remind you this is the 21st Century NOT the 12th. Neurology has PROVEN gods & other deluded puerile concepts fed by ignorance are CREATED in the brain via neurons communicating with axons stimulated by electromagnetism. A product of 1/2 billion years of EVOLUTION. A compilation of ACCIDENTS.

If you have not STUDIED the 3,500 year old copy of the Book of the Dead, the papyrus of Ani, held at the British museum comparing it to Greek Mythology and the Sybilline sacred Roman books you could not know ANYTHING about the contends of that compendium of plagiarized tales, called the Bible. I suggest you remove the tunnel vision goggles and get EDUCATED in ancient history & the ORIGIN of religious beliefs. The Bible is only ONE out of thousand of religious texts which have been inspired by the consumption of entheogens ( mind altering substances).

Please visit two people, one infected by schizophrenia and another who has eaten clavicepts purpurea infected bread ( ergot) suggesting they put down on paper their nightly experiences and visits.

You'll see a bible been written in front of your very eyes. This is the result of brains under DISEASE or psychothropic substances. 2+2=4 not 6 as you insist. There is no god, for it is simply a delusion created by our evolved mutated primate brains to cope with death. An anesthesia to create a life after death to keep us going forgetting about our finality.

The TRUTH is, we are crazy evolved mutated apes aware of our death. So, please land, for a brain is an awful thing to waste. Study SCIENCE and be a mentally healthy, aka atheist, like us.

calpurnpiso wrote

be a mentally healthy, aka atheist, like us.

lol ok


Can you name anyone that has discovered anything of note in science that is or was not at least a pantheist?

What contribution have atheists given us besides babble philosophy?

[Riddler]

MySiddhi wrote

I have explained the differences... the rest is the same.

What 'rest' would that be?

I don't believe in God, nor (obviously) that Jesus was exclusively the son of God, nor that he was physical resurrected. I don't believe there is an eternal existence ahead of any of us in a stable environment called Heaven or Hell, and I consider the Bible to be a collection of bits of history well-intentioned guides for living written by some well-meaning Iron Age scribes who were not getting their inspiration from God.

. . . But apart from all that, I'm a Christian.

MySiddhi wrote

Thanks for removing ex nihilo out of the question.

You say; "it was given to me by God at a point in my life"... does this assume you existed prior to being born?

I also added 'the very beginning' after 'at a point in my life', probably after you'd started replying. Sorry for that. Just wanted to be clear. So no, it assumes precisely the opposite, though only for the sake of argument.

MySiddhi wrote

Having never previously existed... you would have absolutely no say what so ever on who you were born too.

My point exactly.

So what had I done to deserve the circumstances I was born into? If I'd never previously existed, then my God-appointed parents were of no previous relation to me. Why should I have to suffer (or indeed enjoy) consequences of the actions of two complete strangers?

MySiddhi wrote

Would you rather have not been born?... in other words to not have existed?

That question is invalid for either of two reasons that we are already chewing over: either I wasn't there to express an opinion until I actually did exist — or the current manifestation of 'my' consciousness is a natural progression of the condition in which it was previously manifest, in an infinite sequence in which (despite what some world-weary Hinayana Buddhism primers may have indicated) the non-existence of anything that has existed is not an option.

MySiddhi wrote

All things are made of that which exists; God. . . . (Acts 17:28) For in him we have life and move and exist.

If all things are made of that, then what are you and the other Christians postulating 'we' to mean? You seem to be presenting a picture of a schizophrenic deity, lonely in its self-imposed eternal existence, ripping self-perpetuating bits from its own entity and proceeding to threaten them (ie, itself) with all manner of nasties. No wonder the human race has rarely advanced beyond being completely fucked up. As you say, we inherit the sins of our Father.

MySiddhi wrote

My post here is included in "everything". My post is comprised of energy which cannot be created nor destroyed (eternal). Yet this post is not energy itself... and certainly is NOT eternal.

Your post, like all others, is an arrangement of light on a computer interface which expresses your thoughts and imparts meaning: manifest expressions of consciousness that already exists. It is a fusion of content and context (or kyo and chi as you and Jesus will recall from your Buddhist studies). As such, it can be said to qualify as a transient entity in the same way as any other temporary assemblage of energy and matter-based components.

Like it or not, such exchanges make my consciousness a part of yours, and yours a part of mine. Expressions are as eternal as those who express and receives them. Different readers here will of course interpret 'as eternal' in different ways, according to the functioning of their 'own' consciousness.

[Choobus]

This is painful to watch! Arguing with this foil hat nutter is like wanking off a corpse, except at least there's a chance the corpse will get rigor mortis and make things a little interesting.

[Riddler]

Mmmmmmmm. . . wanking off a corpse!

Of course it'll get rigor mortis. How else is it going to get hard?

[calpurnpiso]

MySiddhi wrote

lol ok


Can you name anyone that has discovered anything of note in science that is or was not at least a pantheist?

What contribution have atheists given us besides babble philosophy?

Babble philosophy? Your abysmal ignorance & christ-psychosis affliction is duly noted.
hey retard I suggest you LEARN about the ancient GREEK Scientists/philosophers, those ancient folks that could tell the DIFFERENCE between fantasy & reality by questioning everything. This doesn't necessarily apply to philosophy ONLY Greeks that wondered about the universe but DID NOT do experiments!. Obviously you are not aware we created GODS & other delusional belief with our BRAINS.

Tell me retard, do we CREATE thought with our BRAINS or does this organ PICKS them up from GOD/SPIRIT WORLD like a radio picks up waves? I think this questions ought to be simple enough for a Christ-psychosis infected retard like you to answer no? What is it?
BTW Pantheism means ALL GODS. It is an ancient concept of tolerance which is not needed today since today we know this concept is a creation of the brain. We can CHANGE it to suit our needs, just like algebra. God+Goddess=Son like a+b=c

Here is a list of Greek technologists learn:

http://www.tmth.edu.gr/en/aet/1.html

Read this 5000 year old Book from where ( taken from the ORIGINAL hieroglyphs after LEARNING how to read them 150 years ago where) ALL religious beliefs originated from.

Read this one:

then read this one

After you do, then we can talk like equals ok?

[Rhinoqulous]

Wow, I'm glad I slogged through this entire thread before replying to the first post. I was going to point out to MS that Spinoza's metaphysics is inconsistent with Christian (not to mention Buddhist) philosophies, and that his grasp of Spinoza is convoluted at best. Then I read the proceeding 14 pages. I'm not sure how to wrap 9-11 conspiracy theories, secret moon-bases, psychic phenomena, invisible lizard men, the Illuminati (fnord), and chronic (mental) masturbation into one tidy little post.

Oh wait, I think I've got it. MySiddhi, you're fucking insane.

Okay--jokes up --who is this guy really?