Does God Exist?

I would say more than a few of us have picked up some clues on fucking.

We can know true nature and in so apprehending we are faced with awe, grandeur, or jaw dropping gratitude, kind of a speechless estate but all the same full of recognition. The grandiose can always be identified by their exceptional, unique or special connotations.

To be fair black holes are stellar objects. It is apt that we wonder of a stars twinkling.

You can't imagine how destitute I would feel if that actually were the case.
We do find those most agreeable however, whom we agree with. You won't be left off my list of people who impress in speaking like that but I think you would find the more the merrier. If my truth is good for me I wouldn't withhold it from anyone.

 

Interesting.

 

I agree with the caveat that one can achieve an understanding of the universe that is profound, and this is the point I keep trying to make that it is all about subjective experience. Now does that mean that the profound understanding is true? Yes, no, and maybe. Can a cell understand a human body---yes, no, and maybe---it certainly understands its subjective experience of it. The human as it is locally. Like the four blind men and the elephant----I'm sure you know the story.

"What, 4 blind men you say----wasn't it 3?" No, there was a fourth blind man, he said that an elephant is small, maybe a foot across or so, and gooey and smells real bad.

Granted, a lot of people might be like the 4th blind man, with our hands squeezing and playing in poop, but...

Today it is more than just math. We have space-time anomalies that identify an object of the mass of a blackhole. We are at the point where we must then ask ourselves, if this isn't a blackhole---then what is it? Theory suggests its existence, anomalies verify the suggestion, to say they do not exist would mean that we would have to come up with a different object of intense mass that is not suggested by the current theoretical framework---based on our current knowledge of the universe what can we conclude?

While I certainly enjoy holding my ground in a debate, I do not claim that I have the truth in regards to the cosmic nature of the universe---I do have a theory that I propose based on the current knowledge we have of the universe and my own subjective experiences.

My belief in God, or a higher power is based on my own subjective proof which came to me despite serious skepticism and rationalization. But it is a subjective proof, and only I can know what truly happened. It is not anyone else's proof and I do not expect anyone else to buy into it.

The implications of the double slit experiment are what they are. And like I have said many times, the dogmatic and reductionist nature of science has a hard time explaining it, and its twin brother, the Heisenberg paradox. The whole idea of alternative universes is an attempt at a materialist explanation for these odd phenomena. A lot of people have tried to claim different, and send me links to this paper, or that news article, or those experiments---and in the end, these papers and experiments do not actually resolve the real problem----it just sidesteps the problem, or attacks a minor question in regards to the actual implications.

The latest theory that derives Newton's principle of Motion is also just a theory, and a controversial one at that---but the math works out at a surprisingly accurate level. As far as using Alternative Universes to explain the potentiality of all states of a quantum particle---I think that is far more crazy than the idealist explanation.

I always like to challenge my beliefs. But yes---what happened late one night under a full harvest moon somewhere over 10 years ago or so, I do not question---I have questioned it ad nauseum, and could come to no other conclusion. The crazy things that happen on the Red Road I also do not question (well, I can't say that exactly, there is always a skeptical part of me, but I try not to question it), and the results always validate the experiences.

 

"But yes---what happened late one night under a full harvest moon somewhere over 10 years ago or so, I do not question---I have questioned it ad nauseum, and could come to no other conclusion. The crazy things that happen on the Red Road I also do not question (well, I can't say that exactly, there is always a skeptical part of me, but I try not to question it), and the results always validate the experiences."

well, so what happened to you? mountain.....sounds very intriguing and youhave sparked my curiosity, of course...._

 

nearly all of the harm in this world exists because people create it. (often unknowingly or unintentionally) nature accounts for a statistically minute fraction of that. none requires invisible forces to account for.

god or gods, may however exist or not as THEY see fit, without need nor probability of our knowledge of their doing so.

speculations upon the nature and existence of unseen (by which i mean completely non-physical, such as god or gods) things, contribute nothing to the kind of useful understanding of which you speak.

(people CAN learn how to avoid causing harm. but not by fallowing fanatically the cookbook formulae of beliefs. rather only by the still relatively simple understanding of the statistical nature of how reality works. the ONE positive contribution of essentially ALL beliefs, is to encourage people to WANT to avoid causing it. and even that, can exist and often does, without them)

when it comes to equating anxiety with peace, i must confess some degree of ignorance, as i generally regard them as opposites, as thus also i have experienced them.

 

Not totally. I'm certainly not on the plane with Einstein, but I think he was talking about space and matter with regard to gravity. I don't know if he was talking about universes.

 

One hundred percent of harm is a human perspective subject to belief in some ideal condition. Harm does not occur in a real sense but we can find ourselves experiencing distaste for our own specific views.

What I said was a mind without anxiety is kind.

 

Oh I didn't mean to imply that Einstein was talking about multiple universes.

The part about time and space dropping to zero at the speed of light became more evident from the work of Minkowski, a contemporary of Einstein, and if I recall correctly, one of the first to actually fully grasp his theory of relativity---but don't quote me on that (I might even be thinking of the wrong person). It has nothing to do with gravity, and everything to do with the speed of light.

 

you keep pulling "belief" out of nowhere.

harm is harm, no matter what you believe about it. this is a digression from the point. that the existence of god or gods is neither up to us, nor anything we might claim or imagine to know about them.

how much we effort we make to avoid causing harm, or how little, IS up to US, entirely. as is the kind of world we all have to live in, that results from our doing so, no matter what we believe or don't.

the question isn't about belief. it is about existence. and the answer is that it is beyond our knowledge.

where as our causing of harm, or avoiding of doing so, is ENTIRELY up to us, and our own responsibility. statistically more then individually, but all of US together, not some invisible mumbo jumbo that MAY OR MAY NOT exist.

nor does the existence or non-existence of anything beyond ourselves, justify the dishonesty of substituting ANY cookbook of belief, for choosing to make no effort, or even the opposite effort, to avoid causing harm.

 

Einstein failed to find the meaningful gravity, determining Light, at the one Godly justification of the existence for Knowledge. That would allow the infinite to exist for a finite natural Being of the world. Thus he held idolatry to Be for the countless alternative Universes, finite for the Being. Just the same his idolatry is about being in the world, not of the world.:scholar:

 

thought that was a given....lol

I must be living in the dimension next door or something....lol

 

Geeze Moonglow! I've written about it before. I have only posted a little over 1,000 posts, why don't you find it for yourself...!

Oh, but then there are all those dirty little secrets I've posted... Never mind I'll tell you...

(Just kidding, But rather than re-write the whole story here is a post from before, after someone asked about it

 

Do you guys notice that the question is always about the existence of god, and not whether or not heaven exists. I got to thinking about that and came to the conclusion that it is because we already have proof of heaven----boobs and vaginas----not even you atheists can deny that now...


(...oh man, I just destroyed any value I created in my previous post... Man I should have waited for several other posts to be posted before I rudely posted this... Darn it!!!!!)

 

I thank you for bringing this post back for me to read. I saw 84 pages to this thread and that is why I did not hunt for your story. It was just easier to ask you. You are a wonderful writer, and I enjoyed reading your story. Quite remarkable, really.... I am a just little upset about the squirrel tail...did some poor squirrel suffer losing it?

 

Thank you, I'm glad you appreciated it. And thank you for the compliment on my writing. I actually felt that was kind of a sloppy version, quickly slapped together, lacking in description, and details, and so forth. I am actually including this story in a book. The story of my stepdaughter is handled much better in chapter 1, the story of the tail hasn't really been put together yet---I am too busy writing the rest of the book. But the story of my stepdaughter starts out like this:

"It was a typical day in 1993: hot and muggy, and even the overcast sky earlier in the day provided no relief from the hot tropical sun. We were bouncing along in a dilapidated old taxi, one of the standard forms of transportation in the Philippines. We were somewhere in the countryside of the province of Cavite. It was not too far from the big polluted metropolis of Manila, but in this corner of the Philippines, life was obviously rural.

Normally I enjoyed watching the thick green undergrowth, the assortment of South East Asian shrubs and trees, and all the other myriads of tropical foliage go by any time we drove out of the crowded capital. But this time I was oblivious to all of that. My mind was too busy trying to make sense out of the bazaar healing of my stepdaughter that I had just taken part in. As strange and surprisingly effective as the healing was, the explanation for her problem as given by the simple peasant farmer who healed her, was completely crazy. That healing was the climax of what had been for me a very strange couple of weeks. And as I sat in the caved-in backseat of that run-down taxi, bouncing down some rural provincial road, I had to seriously reconsider all doubts I had about life after death."

The book has the working title of The Mind Dimension.

It wasn't long after that event that I met a sun dancer and was invited out to a sun dance, which led to sweat lodges and other things. That experience of the tail opened me up so that I could experience everything that has come after it. I would not have believed, and therefore not have experienced everything afterwards.

But the sacred is out there everywhere. My first experience during my first hanblechiya (Vision Quest) was a lesson that is probably as good for anyone that is willing to accept it as it was for me.

Lakota (Sioux) ceremony, like that of all tribes, involves the four directions. The Lakota start with the West, the direction of the Thunderbird---storms come from the West, water, and so forth, but it is also the direction of night and death and so forth (but death is merely a passing to another world or another birth).

Anyway, when you do a Vision Quest you will hold a chanunpa (pipe) and pray in the sacred directions, starting with the West (there are actually 7---West, North, East, South, Sky, Earth, and center). You might expect your visions or other things to happen in that order, and the messages may be conveyed to you based on the meanings or teachings of those directions.

On my first Vision Quest, I spent the first afternoon and into the night trying to pray in the directions. No one told me that you were supposed to try not to sleep, so when I got tired, I wrapped myself up and went to sleep.

Up in that mountain, the stars were so bright, that I, surprisingly, could see fairly well without a flashlight or anything. Sometime in the dead of the early morning---maybe 3:30 or 4:00 am----I suddenly awoke---just in time to see two bats fly in from the west---They were completely silent, swooping down over my face, and then up turning and back down across my face again and back to the West.

I sat there amazed and immediately knew it was my first lesson, a lesson from the west. But the actual first word that entered my mind as those bats flew in over my face, was "Stealth!" And then immediately I knew what the bats were telling me----it was as if they communicated to me, without saying anything. There wasn't even the high pitched squeek that bats always made. They were telling me that I had to be attentive and aware, and that the lessons I receive would be silent, subtle, coming in like a stealth plane. And indeed that is how each subsequent lesson came to me up there.

Some months later, I was reading up on Lakota traditions---and sure enough, the bat is a messenger of the Thunderbird.

Was a squirrel hurt? Well I never saw a tailless squirrel, nor did I see a tailless squirrel carcass. Considering that the squirrel tail must have come from another dimension because there was no tail there moments before. I assume there was no real need to harm an actual squirrel---but who knows?

 

I didn't pull belief out of nowhere it is necessary for the formation of perception. Harm can only be perceived in relation to a standard baseline or it is simply an abstract term.
example;
Show me harm.

Is good also good no matter what you believe about it? How about fair? Is fair, fair no matter what you believe about it? Nice is a good one or is only good good and nice nice? All of these words are symbols for conditions and conditions are determined in specificity by the experience of the one claiming them and this is done individually but also can be done in a group, (as in the case of instilling cultural taboo, i.e. conditioning)
The word condition coming from the roots con=with and diciere=to speak=to speak with . The ark of condition is entered, each one two by two, male and female creative aspect, each according to their kind. The condition of pursuit is pursuer and pursued. If either of those male and female or positive and negative, or aggressive and passive elements drops out of the conditional equation the condition unravels in terms of experience. Perhaps in the unraveling of pursuit the pursuer becomes the fatigued and the pursuit ends as the pursued becomes the liberated and on and on. When you say harm you mean the conditions of perpetrator and victim.

This is where you develop your less than meaningful statistics about the proportions of harmful events. You count victims of death or injury by tornado as negligible to those so positioned at the hands of men when in fact all harm is in respect to your baseline only. You don't blame and incarcerate a tornado because it's proportions are beyond your limitations. You blame a man because of your limitations.

That determination is conditional on god being a noun. If god is that which you invoke then you just made your god invocation.

And how much harm you actually cause is not as harm is measured by the observer not by a referee. The kind of world you have is inherited and your measure of experience in it is conditional on your version of events or your conditional agreements. For example I have had things stolen from me but my visceral reaction is not one of being victimized because possessions don't measure into my baseline of well being and since having and being are the same it doesn't even prove inconvenient.

This is not a working conditional claim. You can't provide an answer for something that is beyond your knowledge

Harm is an abstract term by itself, having no face.

How about you were created to create the good?

 

Interesting. As far as value in life, having and being are the same. As far as our relationships in life, those things we may have done in the past, they never end but wax and wane in relative importance in this moment.

The question does heaven exist has frequently been asked although not until now in this thread.

 

Thedope, you regard artifacts like instrumental systems of nature decaying, degrading as identically the same "eco-reality". Life is the same as the meditating ritualism: of the ruler claiming "I am the King". And then there is the famous painting of the positivist period in Poland, (Stanislaw Wyspianski) the skeleton king is wearing his crown.

 

Everything seeks to be itself from the hardness of stone to the lightness of gas to the instinct for self preservation. Ritualistic meditation is ritualistic meditation.
Painting is imagining the king is owing a debt. I am unaware of a time when I was not.

 

Explain.