Cosmos may well be without effort but we are in a constant struggle of becoming... Btw, the theists would protest now - it took 6 or 7 days, woman, 7 long and arduous days, damn it (if you include the legitimate break one must have by law!!! )!!!
Yes I was and am talking with you .. I am the brunt of most of my jokes .. I have lived 63 Winters and from each of them I have emerged with a different concept of who I am and my place in the world I live .. Death and rebirth
So you in an instant changed your mind about the cosmos being in effort...lol Wow first admittance of being able to learn something new TCM your next And I think shamic lore would state we as physical beings come from and return to an spiritual state and for few we experience that complete state of being while still being in the physical and it's called enlightenment which doesn't mean you have to be something or a certain way, just be... Enlightenment is truly independent of any action really...lol Thus true enlightenment is of no effort or thinking at all Which is funny cause most who have religious experience see a difference or place that the two worlds of spirit and the physical meet but some here want only the physical to exist so they can secretly rule from the other side where all creativity and knowledge are from hence another sith lord pretending to not be into spirit but secretly using it behind everyone's back...lol Hard to see the dark (TCM) side of the force is ...lol
this thread is fast becoming like a runaway toy train running around the christmas tree in circles.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8NcR95zw8c the protagonists have had ample time to point out just where they stand now. this thread seems to move faster than it can be moderated.. but could we please get back on topic now? see the start of this thread. [i repeat myself, i know..] If God is Omniscient then Human is not free. As the title of this thread says, in other words free will doesn't exist If God is omniscient . Please discuss/comment on it.
On some level we are imposing our free will to discuss the topic freely in spite of God's presumed Omniscience .. Is that correct? Maybe it's just unbridled exuberance .. We certainly would have been pulled over if we were driving
Dude, several of us answered the question long ago and because the variable God in in dispute by the athiest hence the topic which includes the variable God is also in dispute I think I answered yes since God is what everything is or could ever be or was all in one moment so the will is always of God even if humans fall from spiritual realization and thus into the dark side of the force plagued by raw emotions like anger, rage, hatred, fear, aggression as ways to achieve a goal but leaving out any ethic or acknowledgement of all life having value and inherent self-existing respect "If one is seduced by the dark side, then he will become an agent of evil" which to me is thinking that one can create his own universe separate from God like the stories of devil depict and thus on earth everyone is divided and addicted to division or duality so much so they use deception to control others rather set themselves and others free from darkness Truly it's just competition backed by fear worshiping the partial and the machine instead of what all life comes from in the present now or God ...lol
Our science has not progressed to the point where we can identify the processes which allow us to think about why we contemplate our life in the universe and everything, how we can realize we are more intelligent than our chimpanzee cousins, and why we recognize ourselves in a mirror when our dogs cannot. We do not yet know a unified field theory or theory of everything (TOE) is a proposal that applies to both QM and NE physics and there are several of them including loop quantum gravity and String Theory. Unfortunately, none of them has provided a testable prediction in order to be verified. Does all these mean that science is incomplete , no, that means our knowledge in that field is limited and we need more data to solve all these issues. But discussing the nature of consciousness/Self/mind/I idea/Amness etc. here is every bit as pointless as debating what happened before the Big Bang. We do not know, and nothing we discuss here will get us any closer to understanding the subject.
World War 1, the trenches, we all read the stories of Christmas, both sides coming out of the trenches and showing each other family pictures and celebrating Christmas. Then going back into the trenches when the fighting continued, praying to God to stay alive and see their family again. Two men that shook hands minutes ago, who both prayed to God to stay alive, face each other and fire their weapons, one of them dies, one survives the war and goes home to his family. Does God take sides, or doesn't he care?
I think the need to choose comes from uncertainty. You need to buy a new cell phone, for example, but not knowing which model is best for you and not having a brand preference, you are faced with a wide range of possibilities and the uncertainty that brings...on the other hand your relative is a dedicated 'I phone' man, whenever he needs a new cell phone he simply buys a 'I phone' . There is no uncertainty for him, no need to agonize over decisions - his intended actions are perfectly clear. Also, if all future events can be the subject of perfect knowledge (omniscience), future events are to omniscience as our immediate past is to us, immutable. Therefore we either live in Block time state (eternalism), or our behavior is perfectly predicable on the basis of what we are psychologically, and how we respond to external stimuli.
All true science is applied cosmology so the ultimate in being able to discover something is to be non-different than what you wish to discover and to try to view the infinite cosmos through a machine with any data will prove inconclusive since the whole system answers we seek actually lie within our own being. Emphasis on the word BEING. I think science has it backwards in that it feels it needs to become something to know a unified field theory but in truth it only needs to be a honest non-artificial reflection of what it desires to know What's more interesting than that though is does the access to this permanant part of life that manifests the impermanent have an mental quality to it such as the star wars theme would imply with use of the force, etc...The matrix also implies a similar analogy as to what is potentially possible? So really it's about interest of discussion! Is it interesting to fathom or have ideas or experience as testimony that there are things to reality science can't prove? Or is it just as interesting to know that science is limited to artificially accumulating data to hopefully have an bigger picture of the way life is organized on an infrastructure level? I like sci-fy but usually it is mostly in the realm of what science can prove. Every so often it pushes into the realm of teleportation or time travel but those elements in current science don't exist yet for that study. I like however the shamanic truths because they do not reflect limit rather unlimited being of anything being possible and it is to my testimony that we are living in a era of limits on planet earth! Question is, do we come from and return an limitless nature that is unending and eternal? That's what interests me!
See what you are talking about when you use the word. They're always, without fail, talking about emotions, suffering, anguish, love, joy, pain, and the fullness of the human experience. When you're talking of an inexplicable something that puts all other human somethings into perspective. Seeing things in broad perspective with a new understanding can have the effect of euphoria, peace, a sense of well being. We all gain these inches in understanding as we live the human life. Sometimes it's more than an inch and that can be mind-blowing. Except the "thing" we attribute all that to - the soul, non-physical self/consciousness or rebirth and the spirit, whatever - doesn't exist. It's just too easy to create that nonsense as a thing separate from that experience. When all along it's just life doing what it does with or without your experiences, ideas, or feelings. Life doesn't care about your perspective. It just wants you to get out of its way and look. On the contrary, if "God" is not meaningful, then it is nonsense to say "God does not exist", just like it would be nonsense to say "God exists". The word "God" must be meaningful in order for every one to meaningfully express atheism or theism.
You must be on something rather "heavy", as you obviously missed every single point, to the point of not being able to understand even the ABC or worse still - in your head everything is upside down, so you somehow managed to connect my points with their opposite and that which I attack suddenly becomes something that I defend... No wonder you're a patient for 9 years already... Nope, it's a wasted effort to continue with you in any way. 'Nuff said!
Sid_16 is right. Let me illustrate some things. @TCM I describe my objects, lol. I am ‘Yen’, scientist, special subject Organic Chemistry, Synthesis and laboratory technique, with more than 25 years of professional experience, graduated with honors (International degree: MSc). This qualifies my object consciousness in a way. And I am ‘spiritual’. The conflict which is reflected at this thread is in fact the problem that there are 2 groups talking about different matters. Religion or spirituality is about being-consciousness. But let me first quote: “You're basically saying gravitation was thought of before the centrifugal force was thought of, which is complete nonsense.” It actually does not matter, both require each other. Fact is to describe the solar system Gravitation requires centrifugal force and vice versa to describe the balance. Centrifugal force / Gravitation hadn't been discovered, no, their ideas are dependently required. Historically Gravitation was mentioned in the 9th Century (Musa) as a force of attraction. Lamaze then enhanced it. Both were Persian. Huygens described (1659) centrifugal force before Newton already! Historically 'Gravitation' was first, but was an idea of a force of attraction. The term Gravitation came later. The idea did NOT exist before, hence 'Gravitation' did not exist before the 9th Century-->Individual reality has changed. The people today are well educated concerning object-consciousness. Science has its revolution and technology is a product. Our world now is a result of this object-consciousness. I said religion and science have one reality. They are dual, they cover 2 different aspects of reality. In this thread my posts are about being-consciousness. Measures of science don’t apply here (yet). Incomprehension comes from the claim of scientific measures. Science is not about being. Being-consciousness cannot be put into a scientific hypothesis or theory. Incomprehension also comes from a displeasure to deal with being. (From the glory of science). It’s like one has a microscope and is telling about what’s happening with some bacteria whereas the other without that microscope laughs about and says all the time: Prove it! Instead of just taking the microscope to look through it and to watch by oneself. I try to build a bridge by describing an experiment. “Radical change in consciousness” Experiment: Does an individual perceive the world as it is or are there some distortions / delusions? Setup: One is asked to focus awareness to the present moment. Means: To concentrate the mind (awareness) into the body, to feel each of the cells. When recognized that the setup has been reset, means awareness is lost on the body, then the one is asked to relocate the focus again. The one who is doing this experiment has to document the experiences. The experiment’s duration: ‘one’ lifespan. I am talking of the results in this thread. I hope there is now more understanding of it. That what is unveiled at this ‘experiment’ is not provable, it IS. One can say it is devotion to that what is and when you know god is a term for that what is then you have an answer of the thread title. Don’t demand a proof of being. It is senseless. The experiment itself just focuses consciousness to there where life is happening To the present, to the NOW. It is the most natural experiment one could do. It is nothing freaky spiritual. Your eyes will be opened, you are awake. Religions are about different setups of this experiment, mixed with historically colored experiences of different persons and cultures. It is education in being consciousness. Our world does not shine, because it is retarded. The second part of reality had been cultivated by other cultures, but the western world now is lacking of. God is dead---->Being consciousness is not educated.
Yen sir, are you really a scientist as described above Please don't contradict yourself here. Was this example (laws of the nature) I cited bellow not applicable before 9th century? And was the ball remained in the space till 9the century if it was thrown before that? For example, think of throwing a ball up in the air then catching it when it falls back. The faster you throw it, the higher it goes and the faster it is moving when it falls back to be caught. It leaves you hand going up at the same speed it returns to be caught. Escape velocity is the same only faster. Things in the universe usually work in a symmetric fashion like this.
The shaman doesn't hurt anyone and compared to what religion and science has done to the worlds people he is peaceful and I was talking about the dark side of the force and this thread is about God, it never was about science since science can't even begin to interpret what a will of god is? Of all people posting I never left out emotion or human feelings but science will leave out humans regarding can humans interpret what science can't with their machines? So to the atheist they can't even comment on what they refuse to believe exists. It's moot to respond at all! Senseless! Being at the consciousnesses of the body and the consciousness of the spirit are two things, one includes actual enlightenment not simple human insight but an total connectedness! Again I'm not the one saying life is outside one's self, that is the ongoing missed point of all my posts...lol Funny how you've given life personality now!? What it want's or if it cares or not...lol Life is not outside of one's self and that is how the Shaman interprets what he can, cause he is resonating with the infrastructure of life which is what animates all life. Never said or implied one time a separate point of view for the shaman has to align himself with not what is manifest but with what manifests everything and that is a complete way of knowing from what is at the root of all things!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I did however point out that if science is not as sacred as the reality it investigates then science being separate will only produce partial proofs and theories on their way in trying to discover an real unified field theory It's not about if god is of meaning or not, if god is the underlying infrastructure and bases for all life then it's going to include an natural science that describes the universe not is beside it but one with it. Point is can a unified field theory be accomplished by science? No! Can a shaman know from within how the universe works without a machine? Yes, but this thread of God is an spiritual bash zone so no way can a human and their soul know something comprehensive and reall from the limited mind set of artificial, linear time based partial science So how is bashing someone on medication or not helping your "points". I didn't miss your points their just without basis and any logic so I debunked them for what they are, without any genuine experience of god or the unknown! Now you put me in the seat of a child not knowing basic abc's and that's suppose to convince someone your hernest? Your no supporter of medical cannabis like you false testified, you only care about yourself and your agenda and that's a sickness that needs attention and healing for lack of better word! You never debated one point ever in this whole thread and never will cause your experience with God or higher knowing is non-existent! I mean what the f@#k is any person of science have to post about god in the first place? It's an fairy tale to them and that's it! No consideration or working with persons with religious experience just competing and projecting that people who have spiritual experience that gave them comprehensive universal understandings are drugged, delusional nutjobs You never engaged my ideas in a positive way ever so don't try to sound like you've tried for you can't and don't want to so playing victim and saying I can't relate or get your points that you don't even make is such utter bulls**t! I see two people posting in this thread: One who likes limits! One who likes the unlimited! What does that alone tell you about them? It says one likes being partial in scope and understanding but at the same time will never be accountable for that position and places blame of incompleteness upon the shaman who can relate to the cosmos in an complete way It's like who's got he hot coal in their hands and then do they give it to someone else cause it's hot. Well that partial limited mind knows it's embarrassing being limited so it blames limitations on spiritual people cause science machine cant validate the shamans experience I mean as helpful as science is when you hurt yourself it's still quite limited and why would a shaman who has had a unified with the cosmos experience want to have a partial experience? Why? So I think this is just a human ego game of who is best and who has something complete or partial then blame games then if the shaman doesn't want to be limited by artificial science he is bad guys and secretly working against the science agenda to get all credit for all discoveries! So the person that likes limits has an control type of personality which is the atheists posting in this thread. The shaman makes an point and the atheist flips out cause he's in control mode and insecure that someone might have some information he doesn't which is actually paranoid! Whereas the person who likes the unlimited does not the have the control issue! He can let science temporarily rule the earth, giving only what is partial. The shaman doesn't go around creating genocide to hoard resources nor does he start wars in the name of god or industry. He just leaves people the f@#k alone an has his experience that need not be validated by outside information or science and that threatens science cause science must appear as if it is whole and is embarrassed it is partial so it always needs a scapegoat just like gov'ts and politicians and bogus religions need scapegoats or red herrings So the game of science is an ego based game that is insecure and threatened by what claims completeness cause science is currently partial and incomplete without any real big picture A total human insecurity control game externalized onto people who worship nature and how it works spiritually or comprehensively without machines! I mean the science vs. spiritual sounds like it's fancy and an elevated dialogue but really it's just people competing with other people for reasons of ego, jealousy and fierce competition...lol Regular old human vs. human competitive games without even needing science at all to be played out yet they still require an sacrifice to save face...
“One of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.” Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion This is a very ignorant statement.
@gorski: Your statement makes perfect sense. I'd rather walk away from this silly argument keeping friends than to lose them to an argument which makes no sense to begin with. On that note, here's a hilariously funny article using quantum physics to try to answer an age old question. http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume7/v7i3/angels-7-3.htm To everybody: Please don't try to analyze it. Just take it for face value and laugh about it. To Me, it epitomizes the utter sillyness and futility of this thread. Peace everyone
Do you think when the Homo sapiens (as an example before the 9th century) had thrown a stone I think it didn’t come back to earth? Did they know that it is due to ‘Gravitation’? To the Homo sapiens ‘Gravitation’ did not exist, it is you that assigns your idea of Gravitation to their life. I've put Gravitation into quotation marks because I know such a reply could be made. To give gravitation its existence one needs to perceive a phenomenon separated from the individual’s idea and must assign an idea to the phenomenon. In other words: 'Gravitation' (idea) must be thought to exist. People who don't have this idea of Gravitation don't fly away, lol.