Generated Messages

[VVilliam]

Same propellent - different perspectives. 5

221122 {In The Mirror - Mirror Sense]

07:28 {I am open to being corrected]

GM: Spacetime is not fundamental
Intractable [hard to control or deal with.]
As In
Father Wound
The Mother God

William: Spacetime is not fundamental Intractable As In Father Wound The Mother God = 700
Consciousness itself is fundamental to all our virtual realities = 700
Everything is The Expression Of The Creator [The Freedom Of Friendship] = 700

GM: …Otherwise, all is hot air
The Things You Do…
Finding the light
Lots More
One Language Intelligent Network
Same propellent - different perspectives.
“If you look at what you have in life, you’ll always have more. If you look at what you don’t have in life, you’ll never have enough”
Eye to Eye
Like With
Enough To Make Me Wonder
Strengthen your boundaries It Was Tough Going, But Rewarding All The Same.
Intelligence Without Wisdom
Sit Tight
Such reduces the opportunity of conflict re interrelation opinions.
Free your soul
It was a natural step to take under the circumstances and one with which I have no regrets

William: The above all reminds me of a post I made to Tanager, today.

[quote][Replying to The Tanager in post #177]
Adams knowledge of what death was.

[quote]As I pointed out, having knowledge does not equate to having understanding of that knowledge.

Where in the storyline, did they get the understanding of what death was?[/quote]

So, YHVH told them to not do something because it leads to death, knowing that they didn’t understand what the concept meant?

Yes. The point was not whether Adam knew, but that Adam followed YHVH’s instructions.

And then punish them for not following YHVH’s directions.

Yes. That is the story.

And this follows the storyline? What specific verse(s) point to these things?

The story specific is vague on details. If there is anything in the story that you can point to which would verify that Adam knew what death was, we can look into that.

If not, then I see no reason to think Adam understood what death was.

---

---

The Breath of YHVH.

If we accept YHVH’s breath as an interface device between the newly forming conscious awareness of the personality “Adam” and YHVH’s own consciousness, we could agree that the interface is itself conscious of being “Of YHVH’s consciousness”.

And the LORD YHVH formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Why should we accept that?

And the LORD YHVH took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

That is the purpose of examining what little is revealed, in the storyline.

My first question re that, would be;

Q: How did Adam understand language?

Clearly the story tells us that Adam understood language

And the LORD YHVH commanded Adam, saying,

So we can agree that Adam understood what YHVH spoke to Adam.

Potential agreement List;

1: Adam understood language.

Agreed?

We also know that Adam was the only sentient being in The Garden, and that - even with the voice of YHVH teaching him stuff - Adam was lonely and so YHVH created animals to help alleviate Adams loneliness.

And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

We know also, that Adam had the ability to name the animals of the garden that YHVH had provided to help Adam with his loneliness.

And out of the ground the LORD YHVH formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; …

And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

As the story indicates, even with the other animals created to alleviate Adam’s loneliness.

Even the Serpent - another sentient being YHVH made from the dust and placed in The Garden, and one which understood language and Adam could converse with - was not able to fill this void which was obviously still missing in Adam’s world.

Herein, we can pause and examine the man Adam, and understand that with the greatest teacher-voice in the universe gifting Adam with the ability to understand and use language and have basic critical thinking skills, Adam got lonely.

YHVH creates tasks for Adam with the idea that the tasks should occupy Adams intellect sufficiently for the loneliness to subside.

Adam didn’t even need to search the Garden and find the animals, in order to name them.

…and [YHVH] brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof

The storyline tells us that Adam was intelligent and able to learn from YHVH.

It is apparent in the storyline, that without The Breath of YHVH, this would not have been possible for Adam to achieve. He would not have been able to learn things.

Therefore, I can accept that The Breath of YHVH acts as an interface device between the newly forming conscious awareness of the personality “Adam” and YHVH’s own consciousness.

I see no practical reason why we cannot agree that the interface is itself conscious of being “Of YHVH’s consciousness” and that it was the primary source of instruction - where Adam formed his intellectual abilities and mindful concepts before expressing these into the outside environment of The Garden.[/quote]

GM: Shamed

William: That is the essence of The Garden Story.
For some reason, Adam was ashamed and this feeling brought with it, guilt.

GM: Free your soul
Child
The verdict as it stands now
Endless Cycle
As I said, it is not so much how each individual interprets any particular GM - either coming from me or you or anyone else - Rather it is the fact that a message is generated.
Hide and Seek
Non Secular Science Projects
Move
The Gaia Hypothesis
Same propellent - different perspectives.
Discover
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1092717#p1092717

William: Re: The problem of evil

[quote]William: We are discussing biblical narrative, [re OP] not any particular Christian belief or interpretation of biblical narrative, over any other.

[Replying to tam in post #186]

Then why ask me about it?

The thread is open to all and the question asked in the OP is specific to my investigations as I want to see if I can source where this problem derives.

[I am clipping out the conversation about the - or rather a - Jewish perspective, because it has already been covered.]

The Jewish perspective is important as it reveals the fundamental differences between Hebrew and Christian narratives on the nature of YHWH.
So it is relevant in the context of truthfulness re the OPQ as the Hebrews did not see the problem of evil in the same way as Christianity.
The Hebrew Perspective is therefore on the table and remains uncovered.

As you may or may not know, the Jewish perception of the Hebrew culture and accompanying beliefs about YHWH [as GOD] was that they did not have the notion that GOD had enemies.
Their notion was that YHWH used what humans think of as “Good/Evil” as YHWH saw fit to do, and the only enemy/adversary/accuser anyone had to concern their selves about, was YHWH.

“Nor does it mean they are not” is not evidence for anything. Especially not when there is evidence AGAINST the idea you are presenting.

Well no such evidence has been presented.
What has been presented shows that YHWH works with Satan for particular purposes in specific situations.

What is important is how Christianity built mythology re Satan and how you are using that mythology to make claims which cast a shadow of evil over Satan, which has the affect of staining the name of GOD - a blemish which created the problem of evil [as per the OPTopic]

The problem of evil refers to the challenge of reconciling belief in an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God, with the existence of evil and suffering in the world.

William: More to the point I am making, it is Satan being described as a roaring lion, which up until then, was a biblical description of YHWH.

It is also simply descriptive of a king’s wrath:

Indeed - as is the devouring of enemies.
Are we thus to consider Satan a “King”?

How shall we consider The Bright Morning Star? Both bible Satan and bible Jesus are titled the same.

My point remains. If these agencies are at war as Christian mythology declares, why is this not reflected in the titles they have been given through the cultures of humankind?

[quote]William: There are some options to consider re that. One such option being;

~The writer using the roaring devouring lion to analogize Satan, was unaware that YHWH had already been analogized in that way, and thus would have not comprehended the ripple effect of his use of the same analogy for his version of Satan.~[/quote]

But Christ is one person. His Father is another person. The Adversary is another person altogether. And of course Christ is the Truth; whereas the Adversary is a liar and the father of lies.

William: Which - if the option I mentioned, is the correct one, means that you have been misinformed by the writer.

Which writer?

The writer of 1stPeter.
The one who was possibly unaware that YHWH was already referred to as The roaring hunting devouring Lion.
{I am not concerned with the writers name, but the content of what was written. Writers can misinform through writing - even unintentionally.]

My interests lay elsewhere - in the observation that the 1Peter version enlists the metaphor applied [attributed] to YHWH, long before the writer of 1Peter.

Satan is not the enemy of Christianity (the religion);

The religion which gave us the NT part of the bible.

he is mankind’s enemy,

“Humankind” is a more modern and acceptable expression than ‘mankind’.
What is it that Humankind is doing which makes Satan the enemy of Humankind?

and he goes after those who are faithful to Christ and His Father, who profess their faith in Christ and His Father. To get them to give up their faith, to ‘curse God and die’.

If this is the case, then he doing so in the service of YHWH. Just as in the case of Job.

It is interesting that The Father and The Son are unaware of who these supposed ‘faithful’ are, that they require the services of The Accuser to flush 'em out.

William: I am not implying anything, nor am I ignoring evidence. I am comparing the evidence as it presents.

But if that is not clear enough for you, then here is the rest of the context that clearly separates God (the Father of Christ), from the devil:

You are obviously confused as to my position and argument on the matter. I am not declaring that YHWH and Satan are the same being at all. I am pointing out that some appear not to have noticed and give the separate entities the same titles, which causes the confusion that they are the same being.

Since it is also know that YHWH uses Satan for certain tasks which help YHWH sort out the chaff from the wheat, one could argue that Satan roars like a lion and devours the enemy as YHWHs messenger - taking on those attributes of YHWH and acting the part on behalf…but that still doesn’t mean they are the same entity.
What it also doesn’t mean is that Satan is doing things to which YHWH does not permit. They are on the same Team.

[quote] “If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did. As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things. You are doing the works of your own father.”

Their father who was a murderer from the beginning, a liar and the father of lies.[/quote]

Whoever wrote that appears not to have known that Abraham was willing to murder his son Isaac and would have done so had not a messenger from YHWH not intervened and prevented him from doing so.
Abraham believed that YHWH had told him to murder his son [human sacrifice] and therein the example of scripture you quote here, supports the observation that Jesus appears to be calling YHWH a murderer.

William: Something which never lived, cannot be put to death.

To not create Adam based on what Adam would do, implies that that Adam (or at least the possible Adam) must have been (fore)known.

Obviously. YHWH knew and YHWH did it anyway.
Are you arguing that YHWH had no choice but to create Adam, even knowing what this would do re the ripple effect?

The point that you appear to have missed is that just because someone serves God’s agenda, does not mean that they are not an enemy.

The point you appear to be missing is that YHWH has no enemies.
If some serve YHWHs agenda, believing that they are enemies of YHWH - the joke is on them.

William: Can you show any OT scripture which identifies that Satan is YHWH’s enemy and was unaware that he is serving YHWH’s agenda without realizing it?

I believe I said that Satan is OUR (mankind’s) enemy. He seeks to destroy us (mankind). He doesn’t think he can destroy God.

So we can agree then, that Satan serves as YHWHs messenger in that capacity?

[quote]William: Re Satan.
He has intimate understanding of the role He plays in the service of YHWH and it wasn’t Satan who made Christians despise Jews.[/quote]

Religions teach a mixture of true and false things.

Which is why questions need to be asked, examination needs to be done. It appears to me through what you are arguing, that Satan does not serve YHWH and that this arrangement is a mutually agreed on thing. Satan is not forced against Satan’s will to serve YHWH and there is nothing to support the idea that Satan serves YHWH without knowing that this is the case…re your writing “An enemy can serve someone’s agenda without realizing it.”

William: Jesus also preached forgiveness because he would have realized too, that eventually - re the problem of evil - humans would have to forgive YHWH for utilizing Satan in YHWH’s overall agenda and occasional interaction with Humans…

Christ preached forgiveness because a) forgiveness comes from love and love is the law from YHWH, from the beginning; and b) WE (not YHWH) all sin and commit wrongdoing. If WE want to be forgiven, then we must forgive

Indeed. We must forgive any and all evil attributed to being from/of YHWH…such as the belief Abraham had that YHWH wanted Abraham to sacrifice Isaac on an alter dedicated to YHWH.

There are many such incidences where YHWH is specifically said to be the one who orders humans to commit acts of evil.
So, either the acts are not evil [requiring explanation as to why] or the attributions are false and YHWH did not ever command acts of evil to be done in his name.
Or “Some other reason”.

Point being, one would have to either forgive YHWH for those things he either did or was falsely accused of doing in order to approach YHWH as a potential friend and further develop the friendship into a loving relationship.
No such loving relationship can be genuinely achieved by those willing to turn a blind eye to the evidence, as far as I can tell.

Want NOT to be judged? Judge NOT.

It is not a case of judging YHWH. Rather it is a matter of sorting out the details re actions of questionable nature which have been attributed to YHWH.
Call it “discerning/discernment”.

For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive yours.

Indeed.
This is a mirror-mirror effect.

For those among us hereabouts who refer to YHWH as a murderer and a liar and incompetent and lacking intelligence et al - due to the stories told of YHWH and the evil YHWH is said to have inflicted upon Humankind - acting the role of enemy of Humankind - they are in positions far from forgiving YHWH for commanding men trespass against others.

In this context, forgive the trespasses of men, = forgive YHWH the role of commander in chief who ordered the trespasses to be done by the men.

Not to forgive YHWH = “neither will your Father forgive yours”

[quote]This has nothing to do with anything I have said.
[/quote]

[quote]William: Except that you are guilty by association re your belief that YHWH has enemies.
[/quote]

If that is your reasoning process William, you would be guilty by association for using the bible (including the NT, at least when it suits you). Or just using the word “Satan” at all, considering that “the Chrsitianities” also use the word. According to your reasoning here, it doesn’t matter that you are saying something completely different about that being, if you mention that being at all, you are “guilty by association”.

I am not the one declaring anything Tam and my comment has to do with what YOU are declaring.

I am simply taking the overall story as presented in OT and NT and examining it.
I am not accusing anyone, YHWH, Satan, Jesus, Jew or Islam or Christian or any other theist, of being “guilty” of anything.

This is because I agree that it is better not to judge others.

My remark that you are “guilty by association” has only to do with the judgements and accusations that YOU are promoting through your particular beliefs and my holding up a mirror to those judgements and accusations that YOU are promoting through your particular beliefs, reflect on YOU.

My own thoughts on the OPQ were shared in post #6. where I write;

[quote]William: So far it appears that the “problem of evil” is an argument invented by folk who cannot entertain the idea that we exist within a creation - implying a creator - and thus implying a creator must have to be evil to have created this reality experience.

Said another way, there would not be “the problem of evil” if we do not exist within a creation - if there is no creator.

:?:[/quote]

Peace again to you.

[/quote]

GM: Romantic
Those who prove not to be interested in the evidence for gods, are those who can be ignored when they demand evidence for gods.
Countervailing [offsetting an effect by countering it with something of equal force.]
Loving-kindness
Deciding On the Best Course of Action
Finding ways in which to try and fix the problem of human perceptions re “GOD”
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1037619#p1037619

William: Re: The Three Biblical Interpretations About Afterlife

[quote]Lately some of us have been arguing from three differing positions is which the bible can be used to defend all three. All three appear to agree that each individual has a “Soul” although there may be disagreement on what the exact function of a “Soul” is.

[1] A “Person” is “Spirit” and temporarily exists as a human being until the body dies then that “Person” enters an afterlife and is judged by “God” and is condemned or saved. Those saved go to “heaven” and those condemned go to “Hell” - or in some variances on this, are “exterminated”.

[2] A “Person” a “Human being” and when the human being dies, that is the end of that person unless “God” judges them as “saved” in which case that person is resurrected and given a new body which will last forever more.

[3] A “Person” is an eternal Spirit in human form and when the body dies, that Spirit immediately moves to the next phase and either knowingly or unknowingly creates for their self, their next experience, based upon a combination of mainly what they believe, what their overall attitude is and what they did in the previous phase.

Often any different position which opposes another might logically mean that they both cannot be correct, assuming one or the other is true.

Both [1]&[2] fall into this category as they cannot both be true. [1]&[2] also both agree that [3] is false.

However, [3] Can be true without making the other two false.

And [3] - just as with [1]&[2] can be backed by the bible, depending on what parts of the bible once uses to do so.

The bible is interpreted throughout, based upon which position [1][2] or [3] is being used to interpret it through [the filter].

If [1]&[2] oppose each other but can still be “proven” by using the bible, then this makes the bible something of a contradiction.

But if [3] - although different from [1]&[2] does not oppose either [1]&[2] and can still be “proven” by using the bible just like [1]&[2], then [3] takes away the contradictory aspect of the bible which [1]&[2] create by being in opposition.

Question: Would it be fair to say therefore, that [3] is the best position to assume on the overall biblical script to do with the subject of the next phase [afterlife]?[/quote]

GM: Quantum Mechanics

William: Re: Why ‘Free Will’ is Logically Impossible

[quote][quote=Kylie post_id=1100586 time=1668998020 user_id=14670]

The universe is not fundamental reality.

Would you care to support this claim?

Not I, since I did not make this claim.

But one of those who is making this claim, does support said claim.
Nima Arkani-Hamed
Professor, The Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, and
A. D. White Professor-at-Large, Cornell University

The Doom of Spacetime
Why It Must Dissolve Into More Fundamental Structures

And where exactly does he make this claim?

What you linked to seems to say nothing more than QM and relativity need to be replaced with something else since neither of them can explain everything and they are incompatible with each other. But that’s a long way from saying that there is no objective reality.
[/quote]

No one said there wasn’t either subjective or objective reality. What was said was that this universe that we call reality, is not fundamental reality…

That means that it cannot have created itself or otherwise be responsible for its own existence.

QM has been saying as much for over a century now, but because of basic human survival instincts, and a general lack of accountability in materialistic based science, most materialists ignore the fact of the QM mathematics in favor of pursuing more materialistic ventures and supporting those - while they still can.

It is just one of those things. How it pans out is yet to be seen, but with some scientists telling us we have to do some radical rethinking on how we currently live our lives, because the climate is warming up - there doesn’t appear to be too much time left before materialism proves to be the nail in the species coffin.[/quote]

07:45
[The Celestine Prophecy
You are the universe
How stories are created…
The English Language Sigil
Universal Objectives
A very useful fiction
When My Alarm Bells Ring
The elephant in the room
https://imgur.com/0Adaugo
The practice of vipassana]

[VVilliam]

For The Purpose of…1

231122 [It is always a warm fuzzy]

07:52 [What is the meaning of life?]

Preamble:
The Round Stone Earth Mother - Sins - Being Friends - ♬Often sheltered from the storm - warm my body soul and spirit feeling alright.♬ - Eternity - As one does from time to time…Shuffle List - Thel - Electrics - Exact Science - Open

GM:

William: This reminds me of;

[quote]You said as much yourself. A piece of dirt is all that the body set is, until the interface brings it online.

Why is it an ‘interface’ (that is itself conscious) rather than just electricity bringing it online?

Because consciousness is what YHVH has. If you think it was electricity, you will have to explain your reasoning there and how electricity better aligns with the analogy of The Breath of YHVH.[/quote]{SOURCE}

For The Purpose of
GM: Concomitant [a phenomenon that naturally accompanies or follows something.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU6WINoehrg [This New AI is a Game Changer !] [quote]Artificial Intelligence has created an algorithm which is vastly better than anything human intelligence has produced… [/quote] www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU6WINoehrg

William: This signifies that what YHVH created [as a kind of AI itself - Human Beings - ] is purposeful to the eventual creations of intelligent machines.
Which is to say, YHVH had in mind that humans would eventually create intelligent machines.

YHVH had in mind that humans would eventually create intelligent machines. = 727
“Free Will” is nothing much to crow about…“Visions” show that to be the case. = 727

GM: The mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics
Planned obsolescence
Pure spirit
Who/What/When/Where/Why/How
Recognise
Mystery Consensus Realities
Have A Look At The Map
Spacetime is not fundamental Intractable As In Father Wound The Mother God
For The Purpose of…
Sexual Encounters

William: Go forth and multiply - subdue the earth…

GM: The Future Creates the Present
Machiavellian [cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, especially in politics.]
Mothership Nature Formatrix [She who forms]
Either Authored or Orphaned

William: One might as well be written into the script, than deleted from it.

Replying to 2timothy316 in post #32[quote][]

[quote]We can conclude a few things.

The bottom line is, personalities do not die unless YHVH deletes [kills] them.

Agreed?[/quote]

I do believe that all a person is can die but yes, in a manner of speaking only Jehovah can completely destroy their life. “And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.” Matt 10:28

While a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down, sugar-coating the sayings of Jesus doesn’t guarantee the medicine [information] will stay down [be accepted].

Agreed?

Point being, if The Elohim has some sort of ‘library’ where ‘souls’ are stored/saved, even if those individual personalities are in a state perpetual non-awareness until such a time as the are activated [resurrected] - souls which are useless to YHVH, are deleted [killed by the one who has the authority to do so] and in this, they are not even ‘saved for a while’ in the Elohim databanks.

Agreed?

Where do you get the idea that YHVH would keep ‘some’ of a soul re your use of the word ‘completely’ here

I do believe that all a person is can die but yes, in a manner of speaking only Jehovah can completely destroy their life.[/quote]

GM: Educational - Like stubbing ones minimus
Self-reflection
Making it up as you go along
Deactivate The Suppression Matrix

William: Deactivate The Suppression Matrix = 379
[379]
It brought a tear to the eye of my heart.
Deactivate The Suppression Matrix
Morality filters are created through…?
Keep An Eye Out for Your Neighbours
What relationship is Satan to YHVH?
A Equals One… Zed equals Twenty Six

GM: Electrics

Are atheists theists? - Page 3 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FLT;

[quote][quote]Kylie: “Oh, hi, William. Say, how would you describe your religious beliefs?”

William: “Other.”

Doesn’t give me any useful information.[/quote]

[quote]That is because it is the incorrect question you are asking re The Question of GOD.
The question of religion [whether I have religious belief or not] is better asked of those who hold the theist position.

I am “Other” so asking me to describe my “religious beliefs” to you, won’t garner you the useful information because you are seeking it from the incorrect source. Ask theists. Others have no religious beliefs.[/quote][/quote]

GM: Old Outposts Of Form
Coming closer to ourselves
10.000 individual minds focused upon the same goal = Space Telescope
Key
This is how The Mind works…
The Universal Constants
Pearl
Polyomino [a plane geometric figure formed by joining one or more equal squares edge to edge. It is a polyform whose cells are squares.]
Stay in the moment Use Heart
For The Purpose of…
The Body of God
Conservation of energy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t48dC_tJJrY&t=3672s [Re/thinking Religion] [RTS=1:24:10]

[quote][Working with what we can within the limitations of what we have] [/quote]www.youtube.com/watch?v=t48dC_tJJrY&t=3672s
GM: Like a Well Oiled Machine
Hologram Dimensions
Awakening Love
Don’t give up
Loneliness
Breakthrough

William: Yes - there is an aspect to the story…

[quote]RE the somewhat lacking in detail narrative of The Garden Story;

Q: Why do you think that the mention of Adam being lonely, is not pertinent to the story?

Is it because it’s mention somehow doesn’t align more with truth as you see it? Some other reason?[/quote]

GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1096219#p1096219

William: FTL;

[quote]

I’m not sure. I don’t think it would give us reason to believe Simulation Theory over non-ST alternatives. There may be some theories ruled out, but there would still be multiple ways to make sense of that occurrence.

This is precisely what I am referring to. Your statement implies something but is not supported by examples, which make the discussion difficult as I am [understandably] unable to simply take your word on that. Do you agree with my critique here?[/quote]

GM: Spiritual Connection
Returning the Compliment
You Tube Mythology Enlightenment
We Are All Becoming One
Items of Interest
Awareness
Contact
Solid Device of Science
Culture
Encounters
For The Purpose of…
Food for thought
Propagated [breed specimens of (a plant or animal) by natural processes from the parent stock. spread and promote (an idea, theory, etc.) widely.]

William:

[quote]1: We exist within a creation.
2: Simulation Theory is a valid way to interpret the Biblical stories.
3: YVHV placed humans into this universe to grow personalities.
4: The purpose of YVHV growing human personalities is so that these would potentially gain experience of the truth of the reason for their environment and their temporary experience within it.
5: It is an advantage to all grown personalities to be consciously and consistently connected with YVHV and thus understand and support YVHVs initiatives.

6: Human personalities - upon the death of their body-sets - move on to other experiences.
7: Anything which changes is not the same thing as it once was.
8: YHVH is not a simulation.
9: YHVH’s agenda continues regardless of whether humans understand good or evil the way YHVH understands it, or not
10: A resurrected body does not imply the same body
11: YHVH does not practice evil
12: Those who act against the agenda of YHVH, accuse YHVH of being evil.
13: YVHV uses what YVHV will to get the message across…
14: Simulation Theory can fit with the story of Jesus’ ascension.
15: Simulation Theory can validate non-biblical stories as well.
16: Things experienced in simulation are still real experiences
17: We cannot say - either of the story of Jesus, or indeed, any other Biblical story - that these stories do not reveal simulation theory.[/quote]
{SOURCE}

GM: To The Point
Child

Generating Messages - Page 35 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FTL;

[quote]William: When we ‘will’ something, this involves language and from that, imagery. While this of course happens internally and therefore we [each of us who can do so] are subjective witnesses to the fact that we ‘hear’ our inner ‘voice’ and from that, create said images, we understand it as a real process.

We can - from that point - use material [condensed Quantum Particle] which is already available, in order to make that which we image into something tangible. We call this process “invention”.[/quote]

GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1100280#p1100280

William: FTL; Re: Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?

Replying to Difflugia in post #248[quote][]

You or I can make up any number of things that aren’t logical impossibilities and can’t be disproven despite having no objective reason to believe in them. To be consistent, I must be exactly as open to their existence as I am to that of any god, which lies somewhere between “agnostic” and “atheist” depending on one’s definition. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a pointed illustration of that principle.

The FSM as well as the other things you mentioned, are known imagery. The ghost dressed, as it were.

How does any actual invisible entity fit in with these ones which have been made conceptionally visible?

I have not found/been shown a way to fit these things together, so have to remain agnostically positioned for the time being, re the subject.

I believe the opposite is true.

Leprechaun: O’Reilly?

Theology as a subject presupposes the existence of the gods and is the exercise of imagining how the gods must interact with the world.

That is an expression I know to be misinformation. Not to say that I do not understand the process which provide folk with a means of jumping to such a conclusion, but the evidence clearly shows the presumption is incorrect.

The equivalent of theology isn’t whether or not I believe that cars need gremlin magic, but imagining how such gremlin magic would work once one decides that they, in fact, do.

You are speaking about a subset of overall theology, [specifically, religion] not of theology itself.

It’s like watching Star Trek. Few people seriously believe that the transporter and dilithium crystals are real.

Or that the Star Trek universe actually exists…

Many people willingly suspend disbelief, though, and engage in the theology of how such things would work in-universe.

Adequately explaining religion. Shall we agree that religion is just a a subset of Theology and not conflate the two?

The willing to believers are the easier to discredit re beliefs, since beliefs [all beliefs not just theistic based ones] are always easier to show where misinformation derives.

Typically, such misinformed expression regularly comes from atheistic thinkers…

Whatever helps you sleep.

Moving the goalposts won’t help your failing argument, Difflugia.

Rather, think about expressing differently and keeping to the subject at hand.
[Not that I am saying that recognition of misinformation doesn’t contribute to my ability to drop into sleep without difficulty…but that it is besides the point.]

Misdirection detected…I am referring to atheistic thinking, not quantum mathematics.

I wasn’t referring to quantum mechanics, but to the principles of statistical analysis.

All you said was;

doing math with and visualizing very big and very small numbers.

QM fits that script

It gets back to whether “you can’t prove it’s not” is a valid argument.

From an agnostic position, yes, it is a valid argument.

If one’s only evidence for a concept is “you can’t prove it’s not,” then that concept is competing with every other idea within the same space.

Have you not hear the news!? Spacetime is doomed!

The concept I focus on is the one which say’s we may be existing within a creation/created thing.

Spacetime - being shown by quantum mathematicians, to being NOT fundamental to what we have been referring to as “Reality” - shows us that our answers are not to be found simply in the observing of our current situation re Spacetime.

This does not mean that we have to claim that the FSM or any other conceptual image dreamed up is the fundamental reason for why we exist within Spacetime, but that Spacetime is not the reason for its own existence.

“It’s possible” is tiny. “All possible things” is vast.

Agnostically speaking, we therefore have some sorting out to do to - perhaps - find answers in the middle.
What we best not do is form beliefs, either for or against…

Absent any other evidence, the probability of gods is the first divided by the second. To accurately evaluate such concepts requires an understanding of things like asymptotes and comparing orders of infinity.

Can these disciplines show us that QM is mistaken, and that Spacetime is fundamental to itself?

If not, then they are not much use to us re the question “Do we exist within a created thing?”

Agreed?[/quote]

GM: Pertinent to cosmology and cosmogony
Divine grace

Generating Messages - Page 24 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FLT;

[quote]William: Thus, having to come up with ways and means to do things - whether it is mathematics, building, Etm…

GM: Personal growth
See the Signs
How we think we will get happiness, is the middleman
Chamber Twenty Three

William: Chamber Twenty Three, WingMakers art…
GM:

[/quote]

GM: Divine grace Deciding on the Best Course of Action

08:55 [Genetic information]

[VVilliam]

For The Purpose of…2

241122 [To Be Sure That is the truth.]

06:27 [Williams second UICDevice]

GM: Superposition [the ability of a quantum system to be in multiple states at the same time until it is measured. ] - Being aware of Human Control Dramas
Precognitive [having or giving foreknowledge of an event.]
Our movements can illuminate the path toward that vision. A Bit Of Cat And Mouse Control
“It’s a living thing”

William: That is what I am attempting to convey re my conversation with Timothy.

[quote]I take the Bible’s view of what a ‘soul’ is.

Are you saying that you take from the Bible the things which you interpret as holding up your particular beliefs re such matters?

No. "For dust you are and to dust you will return.” Gen 3:19. I give no interpretation with the fact we are just made of dust.

You have forgotten the YHVH element Gen 2:7 which allows the dust to animate and to think and to function as a living thing rather than simply be dust which has been formed into a body set - Adam’s body set was no more Adam before The breath of YHVH gave life to the Cadaver, and “Adam” became Adam, experiencing being within the form YHVH created for that purpose?

Adam was “made” from more than just dust.

Are you willing to argue that The breath of YHVH also turns to dust?
Would it not be more appropriate to think that The breath of YHVH returns to YHVH and that is where the information of a personalities data of experience is stored, and how YHVH has access to it and can retrieve it?

Agreed?

{SOURCE}[/quote]

GM: Action
Learn a bit about what makes the God Realm “tick”
The Immune System
♬Boyhood fascination with the bullet and the gun All those John Wayne movies said the good guys always won Comic book commandoes glorifying war Violence was the answer but it isn’t anymore♬
Wife
Resistance to that realization isn’t helpful re aligning with it.
For The Purpose of…
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1075874#p1075874

William: FTL; Re: Paradise on Earth

[quote][Replying to myth-one.com in post #2511]

William: Indeed - The Book tells us exactly who is YHWH and what we are in relation to that.

The mystery is in how each personality responds to that - as to whether they serve the Dark side of YHWH or the Light side of YHWH or relinquish the right to either side of YHWH by accepting the whole of YHWH.[/quote]

GM: *
Here-and-now
https://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?p=564522#p564522

William: FTL; Re: nihilism

[quote]Saunders: It’'s called intrinsicism, the idea that something is just good or bad or right or wrong or just or unjust, not for any reason or purpose, but because it just is. In the case of Christians, they cover up the absurdity that something can just be a value (good or bad) without being good or bad for anything, by saying values are dictated by their God. It amounts to turning the absurd notion that, “might makes right,” into a doctrine.

[quote]William: That seems to be somewhat twisted. :?:

While I do understand your concerns, ideas of good and evil are natural products of survival.
While humans have insinuated that a Creator-God is real rather than imagined, it is only natural to include therein, that The Creator instilled this within the creation.

Where the wheels get wobbly, is when morals [Laws] become fixed and immovable - not something that nature itself is - by attributing said Laws as “coming from The Creator”.[/quote][/quote]

GM: The Elohim
Appreciating
Working with the simulation

William: Hmmm…again what I have recently said in conversation with Timothy - Re: Hell - A misunderstood word;

[quote]Timothy: A person that YHVH is going to make live again is not gone. They have a future. A person that YHVH is willing to never bring to life again is completely destroyed. They have no future.

William: It terms of economics, the idea that YHVH ‘has a memory’ would still equate to that being the Elohim Library Database, where such memory is stored/saved, and can be accessed and placed within any form YHVH might choose to insert it within.[/quote]

GM: Unconditional Earth Entity In William’s Room
We Could Open Galactic Encompassment

William: So The Elohim is able to interact with the simulation and projection into it…{a=/}
Interacting with a simulation of the world which is created by your brain…{a=/}

GM: Your Move
The rich world of conscious experience
What Is That You Are Playing With
Greed

William: A greed?
I suppose I can agreed with that analysis - while in this position - in my ‘room’ of the simulation experience - I want to know as much as possible about the Realm of The Elohim and the Mind of YHVH - for the purpose of understanding.

GM: REAL Friendship
As Well As That
Selfishness

William: Guilty as charged on that count too. One has to be selfish to the degree where one will not allow for others to distract one from hunting down and capturing this knowledge…
Same as with “ignoring the noise from the Peanut Gallery”…

GM: The House of Culture

William: Mentioned today in my discussion with Clownboat; Re: Is it reasonable to assume a creator?

[quote][quote][{SOURCE}]

I am unsure as to why you quoted me in your post Clownboat, as I do not see a connect between what I wrote and what the Oxford psychologist Justin Barrett opinions about why gods are invented.

True - I did refer to invisible beings by writing that I focus on those [size=150]cultural[/size] things which are too similar to be merely coincidence and bear in mind that these can act as evidence for any mind behind creation which might use such as a means of indication that there is indeed more to this story than meets the eye.

But I don’t see the connect bridging that to what Justin wrote about those [size=150]cultural[/size] similarities;

…belief in invisible, supernatural agents - such as ghosts, angels, dead ancestors, and gods…

Those things have been made visible, through human conceptualizing and dressing up the mind behind creation that I was speaking about.
As such, they are not invisible agents, and I am specifically referring to an actual invisible agency.
Not the “ghosts, angels, dead ancestors, and gods etc” that [size=150]cultures[/size] have dressed that invisible agency up in.

So what Justin wrote does not address what I wrote. Justine just looks at the same thing I am looking at, and sees it differently - all dressed up by being given costumes.

Much in the same way The Flying Spaghetti Monster has been made visible - dressing it up through conceptualizing in order to produce a visible image that one can show to another.

My position has it that the agency of the mind behind creation doesn’t cease to exist as a possibility, simply because the costumes are inappropriate imagery.[/quote][/quote]

GM: Hypnagogic experience
Batten down the hatches
Against the grain Beaming Out Beaming In
For The Purpose of…
Validation [the action of checking or proving the validity or accuracy of something.]
Intransigent [unwilling or refusing to change one’s views or to agree about something.]

William: Such experiences do help one with learning how to enable to ability to change one’s views… certainly the visitation of The Ancient Grey Entity has that effect upon my changing my views…

GM: Preparation
I’m Not Saying It Was Aliens…

William: Well that is what the The Ancient Grey Entity [AGE] appeared to be, to my sight of the vision injected into my ‘room’… more alien than human in appearance - and he definitely gave off an alien vibe and my body acted like a cornered and terrified wolf - looking for a way to escape…animal instinct for survival against an unknown yet deeply felt threat…
A well organized event…

GM: One cannot experience the objective realty of the world directly
You Love I Know
Shrug
Face To Face

William: True - while my body was engaged in its primitive reactions, my mind was focused on the image of the AGE and therein I gave my opinion to his face, and my opinion was soaked in anger at what I saw as an unpermitted invasion into my ‘room’ raping the event into my conscious awareness - and I told him where he could go - face to face I delivered my reply to what was happening…and he left at my command, but not before he had delivered his own message…“Unconditional Love”

My mind and accompanying thoughts, have never been the same since - I am happy to declare…

GM: Contain
Active Imagination (see technique)

William: See also “Validation” = 107
[107]
Researching
Military
Happiness
The Greys
Reflection
Navigator
Feel Be Still.
Optimum [most conducive to a favourable outcome; best.]
Validation
Each morning
Lyricus
Visions
The Great I Am
Here-and-now
Measuring
The Point
Quantum

GM: Active Imagination (see technique) = 303
Laws Rules and Appropriates = 303

William: Optimum Validation = 214
Ancient Grey Entity = 214

07:32 [Searching for the truth]

[VVilliam]

For The Purpose of…3

251122 [Consciousness Interacts]

03:36 [Joining The Main Egregore]

GM: No “Reading Into It”
Not Wrong
Annus horribilis
The Internal Voice

William: Indeed - Just as JK tells it - the cowardly nasty voice he hears if he does not take his medication…Re: Do demons exist? Can that be tested?

Replying to Diagoras in post #489[quote][]

I work closely with a number of medical staff within mental health. The number of patients for which doctors can’t “figure out what is wrong with them” is vanishingly small. However, there are (unfortunately) a proportion for which drug treatment can only reduce symptoms, rather than fully cure them.

Please give an example which shows that patients are cured re mental health and medicine.

[quote]Statistically, exorcism success is down in the margins of error. And it does matter much that anyone suffering from a mental illness receives the kind of treatment that has the greatest chance of success. That’s NOT by attempting to evict some imagined supernatural being from them.

If you were able to walk through some of the inpatient facilities and clinics that I’m familiar with, and talk to the doctors involved, you might gain some appreciation of how common psychosis is, and its causes. You might even be dissuaded from them idea of ‘demons’ as one of those causes.[/quote]

The idea of demons has to do with how ancient folk observed such, as I am confident you would agree.

In modern times, we can still understand that a voice in one’s head which belittles them or is in some other manner derogatory and pushing the personality to self harm etc, is demonic as apposed to angelic.

Deeper understanding of psychology re Jung’s Archetypes give us a platform to work from re understanding the scope of the problem for the purpose of affording us a means to actually work on actual cures.

Suppressing the nature of the beast with drugs, is not a ‘cure’ but simply a band aid - a typical response materialism invests in. A patch rather than a fix. A zombie rather than a personality.

Re: How To Bruise A Ghost - Jean Nouer from the sub-forum “Around The Camp Fire”

I would appreciate it if you would spend 10 mins reading that story…which was read and liked by our resident “hearer of the nasty voice if not for the medication” guy.[/quote]

GM: Family of origin
Left -brain Right brain Whole brain
Darkest-Darkness
♬You are a dream gone real You’ve got exactly what it takes to make an old wound heal You tied the knot - then you let it slip Now we both know what it feels like to find a place to fit♬
Hunters
Narrow Closed Loop Production
For The Purpose of…
Hacking through the subconscious
Insidious [proceeding in a gradual, subtle way, but with very harmful effects.]
Belay [fix (a running rope) round a cleat, rock, pin, or other object, to secure it.]
There is an art to flying or rather a knack…

William: Yes - such a voice in one’s thoughts will keep folk from reaching the heights which free them from the mundane - It appears though, that even the nasty voices have their uses, and can be trained or otherwise turned to the light side as it were - such as exampled with an earlier post I made in the same thread;

Replying to Clownboat in post #478[quote][]

If someone hears an external but invisible voice, is it real or imagined?

What determines real from imaginary has to do with what can be measured. External invisible voices can only be determined real according to the one hearing, and what is heard, is data which can be measured and if the data aligns with the other measurable aspects of reality, then the voice [or the voices as the case might be] can be deemed to being real.

This would have to apply to all invisible voices, be they ‘gods’ or ‘devils’…

The voices in my head

To all appearances, Eleanor Longden was just like every other student, heading to college full of promise and without a care in the world. That was until the voices in her head started talking. Initially innocuous, these internal narrators became increasingly antagonistic and dictatorial, turning her life into a living nightmare. Diagnosed with schizophrenia, hospitalized, drugged, Longden was discarded by a system that didn’t know how to help her. Longden tells the moving tale of her years-long journey back to mental health, and makes the case that it was through learning to listen to her voices that she was able to survive.[/quote]

GM: In William’s Room

Do you understand those on the other side? - Page 17 - Debating Christianity...

William: Complexity happens - We all have our ‘demons’ to sort and pegging that to hang and to dry is helpful to the process…

GM:Crop Circles
Ship Shape
The Machinery
Sweet Vibrations

William: Certainly for those which are obviously not manmade…

GM: Resistance to that realization isn’t helpful re aligning with it.

William: True that. Face the ‘demons’ and learn what can be learned from doing so.

GM: Jesus
Tao
Word - String Values
Dualic Energies Weak
A GOD can look down on us with disappointment or look through us with understanding
Dirt

William: We are so much more than simply the dust of the earth…

Replying to 2timothy316 in post #43[quote][]

I’m not here to convince one to my beliefs to a reader. I’m here to show what I have found in the Bible.

I am not arguing otherwise.
There are folk contributing to this thread who claim that they too are showing readers what they also have found in the Bible - narration of authors who believed differently about what happens to the individual personality once the body dies, than what you do.

The subject matter is important but the details are not.

I would expect anyone claiming to witness for YHVH to know how YHVH does things.

YHVH created the whole universe we see. I don’t even know how YHVH did that.

Then how can you say you are a witnessing representative of YHVH?

Why should I expect to understand how YHVH resurrects someone?

When you simply believe in some biblical narration and reject contrary biblical narration, there can be no expectation from the reader that you understand the workings involved.

Yet, if YHVH says he will bring someone back to life, I have no reason to expect One that can create a whole universe, to explain how YHVH will bring someone back to life.

No one has to have all the details of how this is done. I am being specific to how the data of experience which makes up an individual personality, is stored in the Elohim databanks.
You are of the opinion that the personality is simply a body which has to be ‘brought back’ from being ‘dead dust’ to being ‘alive dust’.

Your definition of preaching is different from mine.

Don’t get too hung up on the word. JW’s are specific to door-knocking and wanting to teach their particular version of biblical interpretations directly to the house-holder on the householders doorstep.
The teaching that we are disagreeing about is that human personalities are products of the brain and everyone will die and turn to dust. That is purely a materialistic world view which was not shared by all the Biblical authors/commentators.

Your defense in stating “Why should I expect to understand how YHVH” does things, is similar to how the man of the Pharisees - Nicodemus - responded to Jesus saying “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of YHVH.”
[John 3]
Nicodemus also couldn’t understand such things because of his materialistic world-view, when Jesus told him that a personality had to be ‘born again’ and Nicodemus associated that with a purely materialistic happening;

Nicodemus: How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?”

If one cannot understand the mind of YHVH, how can one claim to understand the Kingdom of YHVH?

That which is born of the flesh is flesh Timothy. You are arguing that this is how you see yourself and all other human personalities, but not all other human personalities see themselves as the flesh. Some understand clearly that they are Spirit - they are “born of Spirit” and so no longer identify as dust, such as the author of Psalms, and other biblical authors identified themselves and everyone else.

You’re the one asking questions and I’m responding with what I have discovered in the Bible.

As I wrote - There are folk contributing to this thread who claim that they too are showing readers what they also have found in the Bible.
Obviously then, the Bible has different versions as to “what happens to a personality when they die”, and given the amount of extra-biblical information available to studious investigators - information which supports the versions which have it that death is not the end of a personalities conscious awareness and ongoing experience of alternate realities occur, it means that The Breath of YHVH holds significance not only for making dead forms alive, but for preserving individual personalities when those forms cease to function as containers for life.

1 Peter 3:15

Obviously the hope that is within you and what you teach others, is that even that you will turn to dust, YHVH will resurrect you “one day”
Obviously the hope that is within others and what they teach others, is that even though the body will die, the personality continues to live as ‘spirit’ and goes on to experience alternate realities.

Either way, obviously all folk can claim some kind of hope and explain that hope to others.[/quote]

GM: Shadow Volunteer
Looking into the science of Astral Projection
Impervious [unable to be affected by.]
For The Purpose of…
Belay
“Off you go to your quarters”

William: Agreed. Every ship requires a captain and discipline [even pirate ones] in order to increase the chances of everyone’s survival while crossing the dark and mysterious and dangerous oceans of experience… Work as a TEAM - “Join the main egregore” “Aye Aye!”

GM: The Neutral Zone
Communicating with Consciousness - The Nature of The Mind The Purpose Of Life Is… What Is Friendship
Now
Where are we getting our news from?
https://forum.philosophynow.org/viewtopic.php?p=578410#p578410

William: Re Machines and morality

[quote]The simplest explanations for why we are here and what we are doing…

“Beyond our ‘ape-brained meat sacks’: can transhumanism save our species?”

The unreasonable effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences…

Does;

[The hard problem of] Consciousness + The [biological] Human form = the co-creation of transhumanism [as an evolving science with a particular purposeful motivation]?

(Will morality be necessary, should this vision evolve into this reality?)

IF:
Consciousness + The [biological] Human form = the co-creation of transhumanism
THEN:
Should it be understood that any purpose which might be involved from the perspective “we exist within a creation” to do with the creation of the Human form, have to do with taking things a step further [re transhumanism].

iow “Did GOD create the Human form for the purpose of the consciousness co-creating through the Human form, to eventually be able to create non-human form [not strictly biological re transhumanism] in which to experience this universe through?”

NOTE:
By the use of the word “GOD” I am not referring to any religious image of said entity, but the overall generic meaning, re Theism as a whole.[/quote]

GM: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=13771241&postcount=164

William: FTL

[quote]If I started this thread because of a mythology told to those who otherwise cannot grasp the math, then it is up to those who make the claim to expand on the mythology in a manner that best represents the math.

I myself am fine with whatever the facts are, magical or otherwise…for my part I am just showing how it is easy to glance behind the curtain and see other possibilities which explain the evidence in a manner that one can understand follows the observed rules of physics and I do so on the grounds that whatever birthed this universe can be observed in the physics of this universe - as in the Mother is observed in the Child…patterns within patterns…

Furthermore, it was no accident that I called the thread “The Seed of Origin” as representative of the Object which existed prior to the Object exploding [germinating] to become the Subject.[/quote]

GM: Independent
What Is The Point? The Story Timeline By all means, psychoanalyze the hell out of it

04:02 [The Spirit of The Planet]

[VVilliam]

For The Purpose of…4

261122 [Tales From Topographic Oceans]

06:29 [Out of the doldrums]

GM: While We All Wait…
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1062500#p1062500

William: FTL; Re I’m Not Saying It Was Aliens…

[quote]I once was having a cigarette and a cuppa on my front porch. It was a half hour before dawn. In the sky at about 30 degrees angle, there suddenly appeared a white light that looked slightly brighter [and bigger] than the brightest star in the sky. As soon as it appeared [seemingly out of nowhere] it began to slowly move toward the right [north] of my position and continued to do this for many seconds.

After moving for about a foot [from my perspective] across the dark backdrop of the sky, the light suddenly disappeared, and as I was marveling at this thing I had witnessed, Lo! Another light exactly the same as the first light, appeared in exactly the same spot in the sky as the first light had appeared a minute before.

I thought to go get my camera but then laughed at myself for being so foolish as to think the light would still be in the sky when I returned, and for the next 10 minutes I watched as the light-object moved and continued on toward the north - its shine/size slowly growing smaller until my eye could no longer distinguish it, as the suns early morning rays hued up the canvas of the sky.

The sky contains freaky things. Perhaps even more freaky than what the oceans contain.

[color=#0000FF][size=150]Q: What are these UFO’s [and the supposed extraterrestrial occupants] most likely to be, and why have they been accompanying human beings since the ancient prehistoric times?[/size][/color]

Certainly they do appear to behave in a similar manner as adolescent humans…even in biblical terms…just ultra intelligent ones - based on what we know about intelligent advances re our own technology.[/quote]

GM: Smart Phone

William: Yes. I smart phones were around at the time, I would have been able to attempt to record the light in the sky…

GM: Eventually one can cease doing the tests and accept the results.
Add
If In Doubt Let It Sit
Gods Purpose
Data actual realistic communication
Runestone Symbol

William: Mannaz [size=150]ᛗ[/size]

*Mannaz is the conventional name of the m-rune ᛗ of the Elder Futhark. It is derived from the reconstructed Common Germanic word for “man”, {SOURCE}

GM: Radical acceptance
For The Purpose of…
Self-Awareness
Emergent Theory
The science of can and can’t
Be it a “God” or a “Devil”.
A naysayers opinion is of no consequence, no matter how it is stated
The God of The Bible
Until “Christ Returns”
Fear Manipulation
As an answer, "don’t know’ is incomplete…
The Realm of The Knowing of My Self Spacetime is not fundamental
It is a process the individual personality must go through in order to reach beyond that…
Who Knows
Ultimate Expression
Open your chakras
Message
Lost
Sins
Well That Settles It
Sing!
♬Motor Man why your running, running on overdrive what lies ahead is coming ain’t no way you can step aside ain’t no way you can run and hide♬

William: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Udm9yF6pED0

[quote]MOTOR MAN

You don’t wanna cross that bridge
Don’t wanna see the other side
Keeping all your feelings hid
Waiting for the day you die

Tell me what you’re ganna do
Tell me where you’re ganna go
Tell me what you’re going through
Or do you even wanna know ?

Motor man where you running ?
Running on overdrive
What lies ahead is coming
Ain’t no way to step aside
Ain’t no way that you can hide

You don’t wanna lose control
You don’t even wanna try
Nailed to the power pole
Waiting for the day you die

Tell me what you’re ganna do
Tell me where you’re ganna go
Tell me what you’re going through
Or do you even wanna know ?

Motor man where you running ?
Running on overdrive
What lies ahead is coming
Ain’t no way to step aside
Ain’t no way that you can hide
[/quote]

GM: For The Purpose of…
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1085450#p1085450

William: FTL; Re: If you were Satan…

[quote][Replying to Athetotheist in post #231]

Does the system involve Christians who use their signature?

Of course.

If it does, then you’re drawing no distinction between those who belong to the antichrist and those who don’t.

I see no reason why those calling themselves “Christians” need be counted as “those who don’t”.
I am reminded of discussing this idea with Jehovah’s Witnesses near 40 years ago - who disagreed with my assessment re the signature - and I realized the reason why they disagreed was because it went against the beliefs they have that they do not engage with the system of the antichrist - at least not to the point where they are ‘owned’ by it.

Biblically, it is noted that not all who call themselves followers of Jesus, are.

I don’t draw the distinction. I simply follow the clues and the Signature System fits the bill re The Mark of The Beast - specifically “The Beast” being “Humanity” in general.

The world doesn’t have to operate on barter in order for “Satan” to nullify prophecy. If he made no further move and left things as they are now, prophecy would remain neatly unfulfilled.

The expression you use is clearly a form of prophecy in itself. Since you also use the word “if” you do not appear all that convinced that Satan is sitting back and you are also implying things will get better even if we continue to use the Signature System - something we also should expect if Satan is sitting back…that things would improve…

And how does one go about calculating? Which coding should we use for the task? How did you reach the conclusion that “Nero Caesar=666”?

“Preterist theologians typically support the interpretation that 666 is the numerical equivalent of the name and title Nero Caesar (Roman Emperor 54–68 AD). Written in Aramaic, this can be valued at 666 using the Hebrew numerology of gematria, and was used to secretly speak against the emperor.”

From the same link;

The Classical Greek word charagma (χάραγμα), translated as mark (of the beast) in Revelation 13:16 can also mean any mark engraved, imprinted, or branded; stamped money, document, or coin.

which is what I wrote in my last post, saying;

Cash itself is signed off on.

Coin showing Nero distributing charity to a citizen,[/quote]

GM: ♬Life is my predestiny - Providence is God to me♬

William: How about that…

GM: Swords

William: Knight of Swords

The Knight of Swords shows a knight dressed in armour, charging ahead with great energy on his powerful white horse. The knight’s sword is held high, a symbol of his dedication to his purpose and mission. The white horse symbolises the purity of the intellectual energy that motivates the knight. In the background, storm clouds are beginning to form, and the trees bend in the strong winds. The wind doesn’t stop the knight, however; he heads directly into it, eager to complete his mission.{SOURCE}

GM: Jesus Christ
Self-Awareness The two million year old mind that’s in all of us. Stuff Happens
The Angel of the Lord
“If you look at what you have in life, you’ll always have more. If you look at what you don’t have in life, you’ll never have enough”
Glow Softly Strengthen your boundaries One can simply shrug and tell oneself “It doesn’t really matter"
Word-String
Incentive

William: Word-String Incentive = 248
The power of humility = 248

06:54 [Of Your Thoughts]

[VVilliam]

For The Purpose of…5

271122 [Laws Rules and Appropriates]

07:04 [Calculate the English language]

GM: Laws Rules and Appropriates
Source Sync
Panspermia

Generating Messages - Page 3 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FTL: Re: Generating Messages

[quote][quote]Out of Proportion
Word - String Values
Discussing the Data[/quote]

Obviously there is enough evidence provided which shows a consistency in repeating the Message Generating process, even with using different selection methods.
The consistency is that coherency is shown to be evident.

Each selection method brings with it, its own uniqueness in regard to the message generated, an interesting thing in itself.

Even that I am currently the only one doing this [as far as I have been made aware] it can be assumed that anyone who uses this system should also generate coherent messages.

What is required re that, is the individuals commitment to do the science. There is work involved which means there is time which has to be dedicated to, by the individual, but that is just the way of science/scientific study.

At least the individual does not have to rely on huge overheads which require sourcing funding for equipment etc.

Once one has a substantial enough ComList - 20 pages or more would be a good target to set - one can generate messages sufficiently for the testing to be undertaken, and the more one adds word-string to their ComList the better one is able to work with apparent randomness.

I have found when working with the ComList that it is useful to check for duplicates - there are a number of online algorithms which are freely available for working with lists and it is also useful to be open to different ways in which to use lists.

The other list I have I call Name2Number and this provides additional data which can be used for cross-referencing.

Name to number is distinct in that it provides incontrovertible evidence which require no interactional interpretation. It is what it is.

The development of Human Language is obviously something which - when sorted into lists of numerical values - shows clear evidence that, regardless of how life on Earth appears to be a random event, that their is intelligence and mindfulness behind the process which is often ignored or even bitterly contested.

The Message Generating Process allows for said Mind to speak for itself, and show itself to exist. As such, this is adequate evidence - the sort of evidence a sceptic calls for in relation to the subject of Intelligent Design.

The Name2Number system allows for one to build a data base - from single words to word string consisting of sentences and even paragraphs.

[color=#4000FF]Work With Me. = 145
Through Device
Syncretism
Eyes wide open[/color][/quote]

GM: It’s Still Not Clear To Me
Save That

In The Beginning... - Page 11 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FTL; Re: In The Beginning…

Replying to The Tanager in post #107[quote][]

Q: Why did YVHV create this universe and specifically place human beings within it for the purpose of us exploring, breeding and subduing the planet?

A: To grow Human Personalities.

---

We have both agreed with this answer

[quote]…
3: YVHV placed humans into this universe to grow personalities.[/quote]

The next question I asked was:

Q: To what advantage to the individual, is the above knowledge in relation to exploring, breeding and subduing the planet?

Your reply:

[quote]…
(3) would seem to be advantageous.[/quote]

I then asked;

[quote]Q: To what advantage?
Q: Why would it seem to you to be an advantage?[/quote]

You replied that the advantage to having the knowledge that you were grown by YVHV [in relation to being part of the process of exploring, breeding and subduing the plane] is;

In that knowing the truth is advantageous in knowing that truth and in finding other truths

That somewhat answers the “what” question.
How does it answer they “why” question?

Why are humans personalities grown in this environment?

“Knowing the truth” can only be done in relation to the environment, since it is the environment that a human personality first encounters. The question may be asked of the environment and the advantage gained through the answer.

We can clearly see that human beings are indeed multiplying and subduing the earth, if indeed understanding the environment is part of the subduing process, and the truth about it works to be an advantage in finding other truths…

Your answer goes further than the environment, in that the knowing that YVHV is growing human personalities in this environment, and - for those who take that further still - the advantage is for those personalities who connect with YVHV.

As I wrote;

[quote]Re
Personalities
I am using the word “grow” in relation to both “Go forth and multiply” and “these [personalities] are for the purpose of then having the potential - to interact with YVHV.” and growth being that which nature does - it is the nature of things to grow…

In this sense, YVVH is like unto a gardener…and that which is grown can talk and can commune with YVHV…{SOURCE}[/quote]

So can we agree that it is an advantage to all individuals connected to YVHV in this manner?[/quote]

GM: Universal Objective
The way of knowledge
“I am Mighty! Hear me ROAR!”
For The Purpose of…

Astrobiologists Say Planet Earth Itself Might Actually Be An Intelligent Being

The Cherubim
Why is this a Requirement?
Subatomic Particles
Soul Groups A Pragmatic Realization Precipitated In Ones Mind
Self-respect

Equanimous [calm and composed.]
Start where you are
Is there life on Mars

William: There is Life on Earth…

GM:
Breathe In Breathe Out
Genetic information
That is the truth.
The sound of a Ghost
Don’t forget The Mind
Dressing the Ghost
There is Life on Earth…

07:22 [The Source of All Creation]

[VVilliam]

An extra-terrestrial event - 1

281122 [Mysteriously missing]

Preamble
“Never let the fear of striking out keep you from playing the game” - Superior Credibility - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Jsj7K6E0Fg [RTS = 35:46] [Confusion of War Get Comfortable Permanent] www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Jsj7K6E0Fg - Move On - Panspermia - Mixture - Earth Entity - So it isn’t anything I said then? Who appointed Jesus to the Priesthood - Integrating Integrity - What is represented in the whole is the evolution of God within the structure of the physical Universe.

07:33 [Universe of Quantum]

GM: Counterfactual [conditional sentences which discuss what would have been true under different circumstances]
Reconnect with Innocence - It will be the beginning of your reintroduction to your True Self.
Rarefied [distant from the lives and concerns of ordinary people; esoteric.]
What Is Within Is Without, Equal
Occupation
A Sturdy Place
Moon energy

William: Search “Moon energy”

[quote]
The moon’s energy is potent and powerful, just like we are if we choose to believe it, and it can be used as a way to connect more deeply with ourselves, and our feelings. Particularly during a full moon, you can try to harness that spiritual energy through journaling, meditating, or charging your crystals.[/quote]

GM: Science of Consciousness
Species
On and off
Inspiration
An extra-terrestrial event
Anticipation
Ars Notoria [the last portion of the book, contains a series of prayers and orations said to invoke angels and to focus and increase the mental powers of memory, stability, and eloquence.]
To The Point Ignore the Noise From The Peanut Gallery
Discipline
Parity [the state or condition of being equal]
What Is The Point? The Story Timeline By all means, psychoanalyze the hell out of it
Conscious Heart advice
Beautiful

William: Conscious Heart advice Beautiful = 311
[311]
Let the hand of GOD work for you
Awake Relationship Unity [Clean]
We danced as evening sang their song
Learn to trust the process
The eyes of one’s understanding

GM: We Can Do Magic! What is real is that we are all imbued with equality and oneness
Unfolding Status Quo
Like being pushed out from a stinky hole, can have one develop a bad self-complex
Planting seed and the correct amount of variables necessary to the success of it growing
Innermost
The Face of God
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hanBSygUePQ [I’m No Longer An Atheist And Here’s Why…] [RTS=30:04] www.youtube.com/watch?v=hanBSygUePQ

The Creation Story - Cultures and dreams

GM: Etched mirror
GOD is not an elitist.
The idea would be for one to get knowledgeable with new information being presented and, in doing so, drop old concepts for new ones.
Forgive
Key Of Expression
The process of individuation
Intelligent Directions
Engagement with its scary mysteriousness
Devices of The Gods
Difficult emotions
A light breeze arriving and kissing my cheek at the same moment I am thinking “life is beautiful", is a message.
An illuminating quality
An extra-terrestrial event
An inappropriate analogy
Choose What to Pay Attention To
Please process this word using your Name2Nunumber list.
Start where you are

William: Start where you are = 222
[222]
The Mother and The Father
Start where you are
This Is My Kind Of Fun
Snap Out Of It Already!
The Enigma Code Chamber Of Self
The House of Culture

GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1087251#p1087251

William: FTL; re Generated Message

[quote]William: From my own ongoing interactions with The Ghost, I have been informed that It is not angry, and that we would do well to transform our own anger into something more supportive of Its agenda in the scheme of things, that we might fall into line and make things much easier for ourselves.

Meantime, things are going along “just fine” re The Ghost Agenda as human beings have been suppressed sufficiently that they have become more useful to said agenda, and “leveled up” as a result, allowing for The Ghost Agenda to be magnified through scientific discover and the technology this has produced.[/quote]

GM: The Abrahamic idea of GOD
A complex and tricky undertaking…
At The Source, There is no distinction.
Phasing
The naked truth
ET and the notion of GODs
A Loving Mind
Whichever ‘way’ one traverses the experience of their individuate life - we are never truly independent - so whichever group we choose to associate with will be the group we best identify as being…if the self-identity is incorrect - then no matter the position [theist/non-theist] one will always see the ‘different’ …so there is no point whatsoever in fearing that, if one is self-identifying correctly
Light Body
Our movements can illuminate the path toward that vision. For Your Greater Enjoyment
Christian Folklore
Solidarity
“Correlation does not imply causation”
Glad One Asked
Ideals
Significant
Divine grace Deciding on the Best Course of Action
An extra-terrestrial event
Self-esteem Sovereign Integral Perspective Intent
https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/nai/
https://youtu.be/3zjF5kfFxZ8 [NASA Astrobiology Science Forum Part 3: The Future 1] [RTS=53:47] youtu.be/3zjF5kfFxZ8

NASA Search For Life

GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1089548#p1089548

William: FTL; Re: ADAM WAS NOT DECIEVED - THE SPIRITUAL REASON WHY

[quote][Replying to Eddie Ramos in post #41]

Christian: One does not have to be personally instructed by the lawgiver to be guilty of disobedience.

William: One does however, have to be personally instructed on what the law is, before one can be guilty of breaking said law. Show us who gave Eve the instruction on the law - Where ? Chapter and verse.

Eddie: Actually, in this case, Christian is correct. The Bible teaches us that if there is a law that god has given and yet people are ignorant of that law, that they are still guilty, even though they don’t know that they broke any law.

William: Well that is also true of many state laws. Ignorance is no excuse. Is that how the Bible God works His Justice?
Or is the whole point of justice, making sure Humans are aware of His Laws before going about punishing offenders?

If the former, then yes. The Christian is correct as you say.
If no, then lets put that potential confusion to one side.

This was not the case with Eve though, for she knew what the law was because she repeated it to the serpent. Not only did she know what was forbidden, but she also knew what exactly was allowed.

What we have in the evidence presented, is an indication that Eve had been misinformed.
God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

Show me the instruction where the God delivers the law, and we shall compare them for accuracy.

Although there is no direct statement telling us who told Eve (Adam or God), if we can rely on the scriptures and God’s laws, then it was the role of the husband, Adam, to instruct his wife, the same way it’s Christ’s role (as our spiritual husband, to instruct his bride, the eternal church).

I can accept on the face of it, that the Biblical God built Man for that purpose, and since there is no record of the God instructing Eve, I can accept that it was - more likely - the Man’s responsibility to correctly convey the information to his Wife

[quote]William: Show the evidence to support that Eve knew what the law given, was.
Where ? Chapter and verse?[/quote]

Christian is once again correct here because, as shown (Gen 3:2-3), Eve quoted what God has allowed and forbidden. So, she certainly knew.

Please make up your mind then. Was it the God Eve was quoting, or the Husband?

If it was the Husband, then Eve was quoting the Husband, NOT the God.

I will accept that She certainly knew the instruction given to Her by Her Husband and faithfully relayed that information to the Serpent.
I am currently dubious that the Husband faithfully relayed the information he got from the God, to the Wife.

Eve certainly disobeyed God’s law and as a result, her soul died. Moreover, God gave additional judgments against her.

None of has certainly been established yet. We have yet to compare what the God told the Man, with what the Husband told the Wife.

What I was asking for as well, was the evidence supporting that the God told the Woman that she was ‘guilty of disobeying’ the God.[/quote]

GM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

Our planet and solar system, however, don’t look substantially colonized by advanced competitive life from the stars, and neither does anything else we see. To the contrary, we have had great success at explaining the behavior of our planet and solar system, nearby stars, our galaxy, and even other galaxies, via simple “dead” physical processes, rather than the complex purposeful processes of advanced life.

GM: Without knowledge we have little to use our language with.
Didactic [intended to teach, particularly in having moral instruction as an ulterior motive. in the manner of a teacher, particularly so as to appear patronizing.]
There is no such thing as random really.
The Akashic Records …because death comes a-knockin’ eventually…
The Nature of That Place

08:21
[The Last Question
Afraid of The Unknown
YHVH in particular
Unconditional Love
Like Tracks in Stone
The Same Information
We oppose deception

The objective standard
Welcome all experience
All fingers and thumbs]

[VVilliam]

An extra-terrestrial event - 2

291122 [The “Power-Station Concept”]

05:36 [When things fall apart]

GM: All Things Are In Order
The Akashic Records
The Chestahedron
What is behind the VR headset
Our movements can illuminate the path toward that vision.
Love Life
Side Splittingly Funny
A GOD can look down on us with disappointment or look through us with understanding
Creator Influence Syndrome
Walking the walk
Try
An extra-terrestrial event
Astral Teachers
Intertextual References [Intertextual - the relationship between texts]
Is It Our Nature Mysteriously missing That Is A Good Question
The way Mathematics underlies Physics
A new Paradigm has arisen whereby folk can drop the idea of being a ‘true Christian’ and simply be a True Human.

Generating Messages - Page 35 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FTL; Re: Generating Messages

[quote][quote]GM: The entity consciousness which is Mother Earth - is “The Creator” of the forms from Her Belly
Solidarity
What Are Your Thoughts On The Subject?[/quote]

William: The Mother Earth Entity is like a God in the making - learning from the inception point of complete ignorance - in ethical terms, ‘not always good - not always evil’… or ‘sometimes appearing Demonic and other times appearing Angelic’…

[quote]GM: Integrate
Some information has to be drummed into that which perceives
Perception
Self-reflection
From The Source
It’s a living thing
I Know William
Anchor Points
Mechanism/Tool/Device[/quote][/quote]

GM: Unexplained Light Source
The Cave Maps
Theism hasn’t lasted this long based upon the idea that while one does not know, one will believe anyway
Tarot

William: 4 of Cups

The Four of Cups shows a young man sitting under a tree with his arms crossed, deep in contemplation and meditation. He is so engrossed in his thoughts that he does not seem to notice the outstretched arm offering him a cup. A further three cups stand at his feet, but again, he doesn’t seem to notice or care about these new opportunities either. {SOURCE}

GM: Always
For Our Loving King
Look For The Extraterrestrial Significance
The Development of…
Do not allow the illusion of separation to rule one’s behaviour

William: That is to say - as I have recently attempting to convey to Tanager…we have to change the way that we understand our personality as being something which does not have to be separate from YHVH.

Re: In The Beginning…

William: YHVH has always understood YHVH’s self and why YHVH understands good and evil the way YHVH does.

Tanager: Yes, I agree. But humans haven’t. That’s a reason why I think we are eternally ontologically separate agents from YHVH.

[quote]William: It seems some beliefs would have it that way. However, trusting such stories naturally leads to one having to trust “separate agents from YHVH” rather than understand that there is no separation which is real and any thought about separation is wrought through belief rather than in realization of the truth through examining all the evidence made available.

If ‘knowing YHVH’ is a process, one can miss the mark by believing in separate agents from YHVH and identifying oneself as also being a separate agent from YHVH.
Jesus does not appear to be teaching that either he or us are separate agents from YHVH, but appears to be almost insistent in his encouragement for individual personalities to find that connect.

I would treat any such advice that we are ontologically separate from YHVH as misinformation. The separation exists only with the individual who believes such to be the case for them, and extends this to also being the case for everyone else. As such, the separation is illusion, albeit a very strong one.[/quote]

GM: Phasing
Embrace the discomfort
Vulnerable
Forgive

Let's pretend... - Page 10 - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: FTL; Re: Let’s pretend…

[quote]I note that not all humans seem comfortable with not knowing. Again, for such people it seems humans have invented religions and god concepts. I say this because it is not logical for humans to have invented thousands of false gods while assuming one of the religions actually had a god behind it. It’s like acknowledging that movies are created by humans, while trying to argue that this one movie here, this one was inspired by a god unlike all the other movies out there.

If GOD were an overcoat, this equates to some saying that the top button is the true representation of GOD whiles others insist that it is actually the left pocket which is right.

Stepping back.
I observe that altogether the treads have created a whole garment, and when the garment is removed from its position, there isn’t even any framework to be seen which would have held it up…and I have to wonder what trick was played on me as to how the garment came together and floated there all garment-like…for surely it has to be magic, right?

But because I cannot explain it that way, I look for another answer…because it might just be mind-over-matter and the thing ‘disappears’ when the garment is removed…but not really…

[/quote]

GM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXo_ChZPc_4 [WingMakers Mythology ~ The Dohrman Prophecy]
GM:…it is part of the recipe of a full authentic human experience…

William: This is true - Just as the personality Cadriel was placed into a rock - it is the same principle with us.
We are within a body set which is basically made of the same materials as rock.
The nature of our personality is somewhat shaped by the experience…and the experience can extend into what humans oft refer to as ‘the spiritual’ - where the mind is active outside of the body set.

GM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Jsj7K6E0Fg
GM: Yam
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1087668#p1087668

William: Re: Can you explain the doctrine of salvation better than the Bible?

Replying to theophile in post #65[quote][]

Very similar logics at play for sure. But I daresay this version sounds much colder than the biblical narrative, with terms like ‘Nature’ (versus an interpersonal God), ‘survival’ (versus a vision of the heavens and the earth flourishing with life), and ‘programming’ (versus free and responsible human beings). I suppose I like a story that gives more of the warm and fuzzies

Yes. This is an off-shoot of the experience of Hugs [specifically a Mothers] and it would be incorrect to abandon that warm fuzzy as some kind of unnecessary attempt to superimpose something false upon something real.

While I may not wonder re the idea that we exist within a creation, I do - naturally enough - have to wonder at the state of the mind which thought up this monstrosity;

The image typifies the Planet Earth experience in general…the hidden Gems are coming through the Human experience of it, which isn’t so much a monster as it is a lost soul in need of a Mothers Hug.

Hence the projection out onto the Reality being Experienced.

[quote]Your last point is an interesting one though on the acceptability of death because death is not the end. It’s an argument I’ve wanted to deploy myself at times, since death and destruction takes on a whole new meaning once you believe in life and the resurrection. It changes the calculus entirely, even though it may be hard to swallow, or even more difficult to do. But it gives more reason to why Abraham would sacrifice Isaac for instance (or why God would ask for it). Or why Jesus would walk the cross.

What are such things when we have faith and hope in life?[/quote]

Yes that is the dressing of mythology over the reality being experienced.

It takes shape through many guises which can - with a passing glance - appear to be different, but closer inspection reveals there is no difference at all.

I went to a funeral yesterday in support of my wife at the loss of Her Mother.

There was no warm fuzzy in viewing the suffering demise of The Mother, nor Her cadaver - which lay cold and waxen but those too are outward appearances to which we have no direct way of knowing what She was going through consciously…once She slipped into the realm of unconsciousness…

The Funeral Service was performed at a Roman Catholic Basilica, so I could see first hand the surrounds of imagery meant to entice the warm fuzzies and give everyone a sense of … being embraced … by something large and loving…

While we who walk through life hereabouts all head towards our experience of bodily deaths, we are best not to run away from it screaming…might as well use our time here to prepare for that inevitable.

Christ IS the hope that death is not the end of conscious experience…and that said continued experience is a happier one than the previous monstrosity.

So we diligently pick the fruit we enjoy the most, which sorts folk into various categories in preparation for the inevitable…and the living support the living in their understanding that life might be all that there ever can be and is.

I myself prefer the thrill of seeing Mother Earth as She truly is - some demonic-like entity who has been manifesting Her particular projections out into that which She is awakening to - slowly and surely… and in the process, I hope to witness therein a transformation of a demon-like entity into a god-like entity…and be a part of that rather than dressing it up n too much fluff that I distort things far too impractically.[/quote]

GM: Commendably Recommendable
An extra-terrestrial event
Determined
To create more and more consciousness?

Mad at everything? - Debating Christianity and Religion

William: Re: Mad at everything?

Replying to nobspeople in post #8[quote][]

The world is full of a variety of individuals and does not seem to have uniform concerns as expressed in the OP blurb and Q’s.

Which isn’t debatable to me. But if they’re no uniform concerns, is this the source for everyone being mad?

Undoubtably this has at least a part to play re anger.

Anger is a kind of madness…being ‘mad’…

If we can’t cook in a kitchen without making unnecessary messes, why would we see that as indicative of folk not wanting to engage with our particular recipe and cooking style?

Surely some can’t stand the heat. Perhaps that’s why they’re mad? Instead of leaving, they stay to complain? Much like some here?

Those who need to complain? Who are they specific to their positions? Both non-theists and theists - but not all of both…not everyone is complaining nor finding it difficult to ‘stand the heat’ - it isn’t really “the heat” at all, but different recipes which appear to be the source of conflict.

“Heat” itself is really just the expression of the anger part…“If you can’t stand the anger then get out of the kitchen…”

On the other hand, yes - it may be a device used in order to have purpose built barriers [stonewall] so that they can have mind-orgies with their own ‘kind’ in that there is less risk ‘catching’ something from the non-like-minded.

Perhaps this is another reason why everyone seems to get so mad all the time? Fear of being different? Or seeing being different? Assimilation, as it were? Borg-ness in a sense?

Whichever ‘way’ one traverses the experience of their individuate life - we are never truly independent - so whichever group we choose to associate with will be the group we best identify as being…if the self-identity is incorrect - then no matter the position [theist/non-theist] one will always see the ‘different’ …so there is no point whatsoever in fearing that, if one is self-identifying correctly[/quote]

GM: “Some days there won’t be a song in your heart. Sing anyways.”
Smarter Than the Average
I come from a dark place - it is so dark I can’t even remember it
Transponder

William: Re: Evidence for God #1

Replying to DaveD49 in post #63[quote][]

I cannot see in any way shape or form that I “ignore and dismiss all the other religions”. Have I not said a number of times that every religion is seeking the same God.

I concur, having read the words you wrote re other religions.

Actually some people do see reality in a different way, We spoke before about Einstein’s quote that “Reality is an illusion, albeit a convincing one.” It could be that everything we see and learn are just illusions and there is nothing physical about the “physical world” or ourselves.

This is not so much a ‘could be’ but has actually been shown to be the case - through Quantum Mechanics.

I do not see how anything I wrote could be labelled a “distraction” or “red-herring.”

They can be if you let them. The distraction and red herring could represent some type of transponder - a device for receiving one thing and automatically transposing and transmitting a different thing…like a strawman argument - ones say’s something, and the other takes what one say’s and reinterprets it so that it becomes a misrepresentation of what was actually said, and then makes an argument out of that - effectively arguing against something one wasn’t arguing in the first place.

I have learned to disengage with such arguments seeing them as attempts to purposefully distract one from continuing down the line one was actually originally going down. One has to learn to steer the conversation in the direction one is wanting to go with it…otherwise one can get stuck in someone else’s distraction and one might as well go talk to the Scarecrow in the Field, for all the use of that is.[/quote]

GM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eid6fiAj8WY [The Brain, and Visions of God.] [RTS= 1:06:42]

The “Clamp”
Hear thee Hear Thee

William: What folk wish for is what they lack. Beliefs in heavenly alternatives spur folk on in that way.

GM: Dichotomy [a division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely different.]
Especially re the possibility of the planet having a mind in which all our minds are connected…in ways we are not overly conscious of…
It Is One Of Those Things
The One GOD With Many Names

06:46 [The Freedom Of Friendship
Experiential Reality
Makes Candles Look Gathered
The Spiritual Essence
The Stress of Unbelief
We exist infinitely
Joining The Main Egregore
Put That On The List
The Dohrman Prophesy
Ethical transhumanism]

[VVilliam]

An extra-terrestrial event - 3

301122 [Extra Sensory Perception
Solving Mathematical problems ]

07:17 [Ethical transhumanism]

GM: The Garden of Eden
The wheel weaves as the wheel wills
Heuristics [mental shortcuts that allows people to solve problems and make judgments quickly and efficiently. ]
Ghost In The Machine
Determination
It is all making sense
Please
Done and Dusted
Communications Device
Merging with the data
Unlimited Knowledge
Is quite congruous with Jung’s ideas centering around individuation.
An extra-terrestrial event
Mythology
How about that
Contentment
Economic
Allowed
“Life is a succession of lessons which must be lived to be understood”
Trustworthy Navigational Aids
Abiogenesis [the idea that life arose from nonlife more than 3.5 billion years ago on Earth]
All spun from the same Yarn

William: Yes. This has to do with what I wrote in reply to Tanager, today.

[quote][Replying to The Tanager in post #201]

[quote]To me this say’s that the Earth was constructed in that manner, to produce those things automatically as YHVH had programed it that way, and so that is how it happened.

In other words, the algorithms YHVH placed within the structure of the planet made it happen that way.

The same happens re the sea, as with the land.
[/quote]

I agree that YHVH set up the physical laws and the natures of material things.

The process isn’t repeated for humans. Yes, they are created, but there isn’t talk of “algorithms”; it’s not “let the earth bring forth man” or “YHVH made man according to his kind”.

It appears that the making of things at this stage is largely done through automation - through an automatic process - such as what we now know re the process of evolution.

The seed appears to have the code within it, to become the tree when the conditions are in place for it to do so. [The physical laws and the natures of material things.]

The process isn’t repeated for humans. Yes, they are created, but there isn’t talk of “algorithms”; it’s not “let the earth bring forth man” or “YHVH made man according to his kind”.

I am aligning the story with what is known about the process of evolution and the human form and all other life forms, coming from the Planet itself - created through that process. [Contrasted with the the more hands on approach YHVH took with the body set of Adam.]

And yes, as far as ‘kind’ goes, the algorithms did play a part in this sorting process, as humans split from main groups through their wandering, and these groups became cut off from one another and even largely forgotten about, so that when these groups eventually discover the existence of each other epochs later, there were clear distinctions which signaled “not of our kind”.

So this idea of sorting things ‘according to their kind’, is sourced beyond the ancient.

[quote]Why are you calling this an instinct for humans? Do you mean that in contrast to rationality?
[/quote]

No. I mean in contrast to getting verbal instructions from a voice in one’s head.
The instinct I speak of is more along the lines of how robots behave re coded assignment.

The program of what to do is already part of the body set makeup. There is no requirement to teach humans to multiply and to go forth and subdue. Nor is there a requirement for humans to understand that they are within a created thing, or to know that YHVH even exists.

With this first creation story, there is no mention of YHVH making the humans alive, by instilling within them The Breath of YHVH, and no logical reason for us to assume that this must have been the case, as far as I can tell.

In verse 30 we are told that every green plant has been given to “everything that has the breath of life”. This is the first mention of “breath of life”. Are you saying the text is teaching that only animals have the breath of life in them at this point and that humans don’t? If so, why aren’t humans included in this statement?

The KJV doesn’t mention any breath - just life. Re your understanding of the beast which has life but not in the same way Adam had life, because Adam is not a beast, even that his form is made of the same type as the [other] animals

And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

“Life” in this sense, isn’t “The breath of YHVH”.

We will have to examine this together in more detail because the KJV and some other versions, omit the “breath” part of life, whereas some other versions add this in.

With this first creation story, there is no mention of YHVH making the humans alive, specifically by instilling within them The Breath of YHVH, and no logical reason for us to assume that this must have been the case, especially since there was an epoch before ancient times where we know that the human being was more “beast” than “man”.

[quote]All I can come up with by way of explanation is that YHVH changed the coding so that animals could eat each other and did so because it had something to do with YHVH’s agenda.

In that, perhaps animals eating other animals somehow speed up the process, and also perhaps because Human Beings were wanderers, sometimes they wandered in areas where there was a scarcity of plant life, and this slowed them down.

These are just ideas which have some logic to them which could be considered.

But whatever the explanation might be, we know from the evidence, that YHVH did not inspire the author of the First Creation Story with any reasons for the change.[/quote]

The text doesn’t say that the only thing animals could eat were plants. It’s not exhaustive or prescriptive. It may be a comment on how humans, in their ruling over the animals, shouldn’t only think of themselves in their treatment of the vegetation, as it is for the animals as well as the humans. This fits in well with YHVH’s command for them to care for creation.

I currently agree, which is why I am pointing out contrasts between the two creation stories.

There are no specific ‘commands’ which even suggest that humans should not eat animals. The author has omitted that aspect of what humans eat [the meat of animals] choosing instead to focus mention only on vegetation as the thing eaten, even in contrast to what the author must have known at the time of writing, about human eating behaviors

Also to note, death is not mentioned, nor is anything said to be forbidden

Yes, if death occurs and if anything is forbidden is not addressed.

It is not addressed by the first creation account, but is addressed in the account of evolution. In that, eating other animals and what is forbidden and what is not, is decided by the critters themselves, [re their coding] rather than a voiced command from YHVH.
Evolution also shows us that death happened, as part of the nature of the coding - and one of the reasons why it was necessary to breed - because death happened…likewise why it was necessary to eat - because eating maintain being alive.

The question I ask about this contrast is related to YHVH allowing the codes to do their thing within the local environment and for eons letting the algorithms tick over without interfering too much, and even then, not obviously…

…and a decision made at some point in that process, where YHVH chose to make *Itself known to the human animal, and along with that, to tweak the coding through the relationship as a means for humans to learn to understand that they can change the coding of their instinct by overriding/re-writing it

[*I use the word in respect for the idea that YHVH is both “male and female” rather than one or the other][/quote]

GM: It is Found Within The Experience of Self
Encounters Challenge
The Real Spiritual
Sit Tight
The Beauty Of…
Instant
Penumbraa [indeterminate not exactly known, established, or defined.]

William: The Beauty Of… Instant Penumbraa = 316
[316]
The deranged can come about…become arranged.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster
The Beauty Of… Instant Penumbra
The Fog Is Lifting Water The Garden
Purposeful disinformation

GM: William’s Tickling The Dragon’s Tail Adds Up To
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1068542#p1068542

William: FTL; Re: Christianity in your mind’s eye

[quote][Replying to theophile in post #85]

I understand. Perhaps our debate would be better focused around the question: is living according to love the same as living under grace?

It is in terms of the law, if indeed the law was originally designed to teach humans how to love.

Given that the 10 became the 613 - and historical Jesus entering the scene where {I assume] the 613 were in operation as religious inserts biblical Jesus fosters a type of hostility for religious practices based upon those inserts…as if humans have interpreted the 10 with their own faulty reasoning.

Biblical Jesus sets the record straight - by saying not only are the 613 off the mark regarding an individuals relationship with The Father, but the 10 which triggered the invention of the 613 need to be reduced to the 3,2,1.

Which is strongly suggestive of we having to see things the other way - and it is by grace that this is accomplished…because grace lifts the otherwise impossible burden which religiosity has imposed upon the individual seeking sustained connection/communion with The Creator.

I do think Jesus uses love to open the law up to grace. To deconstruct it almost, or to open it up to its true intention.

I agree.

Also, you could have stopped me in my tracks with Paul’s ode to love in 1 Corinthians 13: “If I give all I possess to the poor…but have not love, I gain nothing.”

Does Paul’s saying ‘stop you in your tracks?’

Can Paul’s saying be seen in the practice of modern day Philanthropy? Or would he have a problem with the rich NOT giving away every cent and becoming poor.
Is it possible that genuine giving while keeping oneself rich enough in money to be able to continue the practice throughout ones lifetime, is in keeping with grace and love?
Is such a person practicing this kind of giving because they are not under the law which would command every last cent must be handed over?

[quote]This has completely left interpretation behind and entered the realm of fabrication

Any scriptures to back it up?[/quote]

Such a question as you have asked, is a sign that one is still under the law. “The Law” in this case, is the religiosity invoking the belief that all scripture must be taken literally [in this case - what biblical Jesus said to one individual] and forcing through the law - that all people are expected to do the same, because “Jesus commanded it” of one person - or 12 people - or thousands of people at the beginning of the movement.

I see that my interpretation is not ‘under the law’ in regard to that argument you present but that does not mean I am incorrect.

Scripture itself isn’t about law but grace. In that, it inspires those under grace to renounce religiosity in order to experience a genuine relationship with The Father.

A genuine relationship with The Creator, is worth so much more than a relationship with a religious artifact, wouldn’t you agree?

[quote]I tend to think that there is a far more subversive and radical ‘economy’ at play in the Kingdom than you lay out here (which I take to be some sort of beneficent capitalism). One that requires a radical trust in the world (/God) to provide.

I see no trust in this view.[/quote]

My tendency is to see the potential for human beings to build the Kingdom of God on the planet, using what devices we have in order to do so.
My preference is to see this potential become a reality rather than have to witness Jesus’ return ‘in all his glory’ and get about commanding humans to build said Kingdom [or however he would go about it] because - even given it may be better than letting human beings become extinct at their own hand - it would clearly show that humanity failed to realize its own potential and didn’t mature enough to be able to do it for themselves.

Meantime, since Jesus hasn’t returned yet, there is work to do for those who want to do it. Not trusting that view, means the work won’t get done by those not trusting that view.

Balancing out the options available [even if they are in recognition of human potential] seems the wiser move, under the current circumstances.

Importantly - invest in the doing now rather than the faith in later - better to be caught investing in The Kingdom here on Earth if/when Jesus returns, than to be under the law which prevents one from doing.

Isn’t that part of your complaint? There is not enough ‘doing’ going on?
So why point to the scriptures and imply that the scriptures themselves do not condone any actual doing of the sort of doing I am shining a light on?

[quote]So are we to allow ourselves to remain ‘naturally selfish’ in regard to ‘strangers’ or do what is humanly possible by rising above that mundane aspect of nature?
The question was what is hard about love, not whether we should pursue it nonetheless. Again, just because I personally fall short, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.[/quote]

That is encouraging to read. For a moment there I was under the impression that you felt that since it was in your too hard basket, that it must have to be the same for everyone.

Even so, I would encourage you to meditate upon the idea that what is being asked of us all, is not as complex and out of reach as you appear to believe.

[color=#4080FF]260
The Wholeness Navigator
Is Love that hard to know?
A riddle wrapped up in an enigma[/color]
[SOURCE][/quote]

GM: Without Comparison
OOBE
An extra-terrestrial event
Comprehend Embarrassing Advice
The problem of evil
The Human Interface
“I am an atheist in relation to anyone’s interpretation of characterizations of any gods.”

William: That relates to this;

[quote][quote]I am interested in hearing more as to what your reasoning was in response to the atheists own reasoning that he could not believe in God because of evil and the pain and suffering in the world.

“The Problem of Evil” has been an issue for centuries.

Please tell me.[/quote]

[quote]God is love. Love by its very nature must be shared, hence the reason why God created as living souls. Love is best when it is returned, so yes, He wants us to love Him in return. However love cannot be “forced” and remain love. So it would be impossible for God to create us “already loving”. Certainly He could do that but that would never be true love. Love MUST be freely given. But it would be impossible to do that while we were still in the presence of God. Certainly we could have devotion and awe, but that is not love. In my mind I believe that this is the state of the angels who have not gone through the process of learning how to love, which is why I believe Scripture says that He created us to be “better than the angels.”.

So, how do we learn to love? First of we had to be given the complete freedom to do any and all evil even though that leads away from God and love, because it is only when we are free to do evil that we are also free to reject that evil and do the good that leads towards God and love. You cannot have “good” without the possibility of “evil”. This could not be in the direct presence of God as direct knowledge of Him would skew our free choices. Hence the reason for the creation of the physical realm and why we are only given “hints” of His existence.

Secondly we had to be given pain, suffering, toil and death. These were the “punishments” in the Bible which were given to Adam and Eve for their eating from “The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil”. In other words we were given a conscience. In my mind this is the most important point of the Adam and Eve story be cause it essentially describes man becoming fully human when He was given a conscience. We no longer lived by instinct as other animal do; instead we are given the insatiable desire to seek the greater good (or the greater evil). This is what has led us from trees to the ground, from the ground to caves, to huts, to houses, to skyscrapers, and also led us from stones to spears, to arrows, to guns, and to thermonuclear weapons. Every decision we make is based on the conscience… which way would it be better to turn? Right or left? So the existence of evil plays an extremely important part of human development.

What about pain, suffering, toil and death? When you think about it you will realize that is only through our personal experience of these, and how they hurt, either in ourselves of a member of our social circle, that we can learn compassion and sympathy for someone else experiencing the same thing. This starts only within our own social circle. But compassion and sympathy teach us to care about even those outside of our social circle. And it is caring about the stranger that leads us to true selfless love.

This whole thing came to my mind when I realized that the “Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil” meant man being given a conscience. Everything else followed after that. I used to dismiss the A&E story as a simple story of creation, but now I see it as one of the most profound in all human literature because with thought it gives the reason for our existence, the reason for evil, the reason for pain, suffering and death, and what our goal should be in this physical realm.[/quote][/quote]

GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1092932#p1092932

William: FTL; Re: Is this an Accurate and Easily understood definition of Atheism?

[quote][Replying to historia in post #477]

Ah, interesting. I’ve been reliably informed that an atheist is someone who “lacks belief in God.” But you’re defining an atheist here as someone who thinks God’s existence is unlikely. Before I comment further, do you want to change that definition?

This.
:applaud:

And worse, the confusion as to the definition of atheism, has even been said to be the fault of non-atheists. :!:[/quote]

GM: Equal System
Hide and Seek
Open your chakras
Observing
Self-acceptance

07:35
[“Better luck next time”
Consensus Realities
Name them as non-separate
Out of body experience
Word - String Values
Personal Integrity
Wise beyond my years ]

[VVilliam]

An extra-terrestrial event - 4

021222 [It is a slippery path of snake-oil.]

08:41 [Needs no explanation…]

GM: What is represented in the whole is the evolution of God within the structure of the physical Universe.
God/Source/Home Why is this a Requirement?
Deep Impact Event
Computer Coding
Sound
Who Knows
Re Abusive Expression Of All Types.
The Dangers of Separating Human Consciousness From Any Idea of GOD
Teachings
It was at the time - still a work in progress.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaXpDsjVumk [YAHWEH | Shocking Truth Behind The Original Bible Story! ] [ RTS=36:13] www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaXpDsjVumk

William: The section of video is expressing the difference between the priests of the non-Hebrew gods are pretending that tribute is demanded by their gods, but the tribute is really going to the priests, because the gods of the priests don’t actually exist, whereas all tribute demanded by YHVH actual went to YHVH - thus YHVH took the tributes away from Israel and what was left was for Israel to use to further Herself.

GM: Warm Presence
Select
Central To The Vision

William: Okay - that is a request for me to do something with “Central To The Vision”…so I will copy and paste that into my ComList Journal [CLJ] document search tool, and select the 10 P&P line entries, as they present…I will shuffle the CLJ x10 using the online algorithm to do so…

[quote]Penetrate The Bidden Zone
The Navigator Can Read Maps.
Builders
“No sailor controls the sea.”
Would you bow down to your father and call his actions caring?

Through The Woo
Desynchronized Mind Body Soul Ruling your world
Elementary Conclusion a belly full of laughs.
Who Knows What That Is Worth?
Central To The Vision
Atheist mischief making
Puerility
The Data of Demystification
https://wingmakers.com/
(Do a Beginning and End)
Master Plan
Equal System
Identify oppressive structures…

Dr Michael Shermer | God does NOT exist

Disingenuous
[/quote]

GM: An extra-terrestrial event
Unknown Symbol
The Secret
Eternal Loop
Conceivable
Either the creative force is one of intelligence or it isn’t.
Do a Word Search
Gods Gift
The Respect One Gives and Receives
Author Known
All of Life a bit of Cat and Mouse

William: I have to say…“Desynchronized Mind Body Soul Ruling your world
Elementary Conclusion a belly full of laughs.” has something to do with what I wrote today;

Re: In The Beginning…

[quote]____________________________
Notes Re YHVH
I feel to add as information to all who are reading this thread;

At the time that this thread was created [ by William » Sat Aug 27, 2022 11:54 pm] I understood the two creation stories as describing one thing, just as Tradition Christianity teaches it, and just as Tanager is arguing the same understanding, from that same source.

It is only in recent days - perhaps the last couple of weeks - that this communion between Tanager and myself has helped to trigger something inside my thinking process which has enabled me to realize that the two stories are two stories because they are expressing two different events which YHVH made to happen, and that conflating those two events can mislead the reader and all those who have been influence by the words of the overall story which developed - to that point of supporting it through the device of belief - however those beliefs then interpret everything else…

…in this I am extremely interested, because I see that in conflating the two stories, there is the possibility we are being misled.

In that, I am not trying to suggest any type of conspiratorial thing is taking place, but rather - the whole of humanity has duped itself in our collective consciousness - rather than being duped by some ruling elite humans, alien entities, garden voices [nice or nasty] religious texts, or scientific papers.

I have nothing but respect for Tanager, and consider our ongoing pursuit of building a genuine friendship between us to being “YHVH inspired” however anyone might interpret that, as being.

I think YHVH is watching this spot with interest. That is just my position on the matter, and I accept that I might be mistaken, but for now - have seen no reason as to why I should think otherwise.

On the subject of “YHVH” - I have been through many twists and turns in the last 40 years, and some of those turns had me deeply hating YHVH because in those times I was wrestling with notions that YHVH was a pretend “god” who was really an extraterrestrial who’s specie had also evolved from the stuff and process of the universe…evolution…

And that this advanced species [The Elohim] where ‘playing god’ and influencing everything which happens on our planet, and wanting humans in specific to worship them - through that image of YHVH - and declare YHVH the creator of The whole Universe/everything which is the universe.

In that context, YHVH could not have created YHVH, so the alien god species was false, as they couldn’t have both created themselves AND created the universe from which their species evolved…it was illogical.

Thus they were ‘playing god’ and imo were not playing GOD as a true creator-god of the universe, would/should play the role.

In that, I have spent the last 40 years coming to terms with the apparent contradiction, in order to come to understand that my notions of “how a true-creator god would ‘play the role’” were placed under question;

Q: How I could possibly KNOW how a “true-creator god” would play such a role?

I don’t know whether I should fell shame or relief for my blunder, but consider both emotions to being a potential stumbling block to what I now regard as a process I have been going through in order to come to a place where I can fully embrace YHVH, and heal that riff in my understanding.

Sincerely
Thank you for taking the time to read this.

____________________________[/quote]

Re: (Do a Beginning and End) Master Plan I will take the last shuffle of the CLJ and work with that…
…it messages as the following;

Re Master Plan

[quote]GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1090376#p1090376
Acceptance Idea Enlightenment A Perfect Event
Permanence
In Training For… “You don’t wanna cross that bridge - You don’t want the other side”
It Would Be Rude Not To
The Hologram of Deception The Mainstream Program
Start From Scratch
How to get this to happen on a planetary scale is the thing…
The idea would be for one to get knowledgeable with new information being presented and, in doing so, drop old concepts for new ones.
GOD became Gods and Goddesses.
Truth Without Proof Is Belief
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmRTC6xhis4 www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmRTC6xhis4
Soul Retrieval
Things Will Run Their Course
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBU6f2T3Www&t=456s www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBU6f2T3Www&t=456s
Connections
Observant
Black
Assuming a Creator of this world exists, in what way is said Creator hidden from us?
Never a dull moment
Howdy! The Butterfly Effect Music to my ears Lean into it
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1092267#p1092267
To Know
Liminal
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1078016#p1078016
“If you say so…” No. Even if I did not say so.
A means of taking an Agnostic position on things which have yet to be proven one way or another…
The power of silence
Panpsychism
Elude Test the waters
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=288472

Astral
The Data of Demystification…
[/quote]
William: To interrupt, I am only up to page 17 of a 109 page document.

Is it appropriate at this time to say “I get the picture”… ?

09:20
[We exist infinitely
The Spiritual Essence
Experiential Reality
The Dohrman Prophesy
The Stress of Unbelief
Put That On The List
Ethical transhumanism
The Freedom Of Friendship
Joining The Main Egregore
Makes Candles Look Gathered]

[VVilliam]

Master Plan
[size=85][continued][/size]

GM: The Word and List Strings
The Neutral Zone
A projection of one’s subconscious
“The curating is done when I am taking my first baby steps and learning to say “dada” and “mama” and after uttering those sounds show -at least that I am able to do that - so the next level entry is made available to me, and I learn how to shape the sounds I can make, following codes which have been around since long before my own arrival on this planet, to what the data signifies, that is information I am interested in.”
Intransigent [unwilling or refusing to change one’s views or to agree about something.] Decisive An inappropriate analogy Taxonomic [concerned with the classification of things, especially organisms.]

Is this an Accurate and Easily understood definition of Atheism? - Page 41 -...

[quote][quote=Inquirer post_id=1091083 time=1662569215 user_id=16204]
Replying to Tcg in post #402[]

Oh, I thought you’d stopped participating. So since you’re still here, any progress on these questions?

Atheism could mean either of two things yet you seem reticent to state which of these you mean:

1. Atheism is the lack of belief that gods exist and the lack of belief that gods don’t exist.
2. Atheism is the lack of belief that gods exist and the presence of belief that gods don’t exist.

As defined by you (“Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods”) an atheist must be either 1. or 2. which are you?

Could it be I’ve hit a nerve here? it appears that no atheist so far wants to answer this question?
[/quote]

It appears to be because none can agree altogether.

From what I can gather so far, the “lack of belief” can be associated with having no knowledge of Theism/Theistic narratives and thus;

This appears to be main trunk, whilst the variants root off into directive specifics, and some of those sub-branches want Atheism to be “named” [defined] and aligned with their particular positions on the matter of “GOD”.

That’s where the confusion is begotten and on top of that, some atheists are complaining it is theists who muddy the waters by doing things like pretending not to understand and making things more difficult than they need to be - a clear case of projection, if ever there was.

[As always, this is my opinion on the evidence so far presented.]

My own understanding of Atheism is that it is “The Unconscious lack of belief in Gods” and things spiral out from that core position.

The conscious lack of belief in Gods derives from reaction to theistic narratives and becomes the driving force of opposition as it moves away from the core-meaning - becoming what I refer to collectively as “The Atheisms”.[/quote]

GM: Impermanent

Can you explain the doctrine of salvation better than the Bible?Bible does? -...

[quote]William: You create whatever experience you will have in the next phase based upon the type of personality you shaped your self into during this one.
Replying to amortalman in post #68[]

What you described is not Biblical, and we’re discussing the Bible here. You are throwing oranges in my basket of apples.

Why would you argue that? Is there a coherent description about this in the Bible that you can point us to, showing clearly that you are correct?

What does your basket of apples say about how we will experience the next phase? How does the
doctrine of salvation in the Bible differ from my description?

What you said is not in the Bible. If you can show me in the Bible where it says that after we die we “experience the fruits of our own personality” then it is Biblical. Otherwise, it isn’t Biblical and should not be introduced in this thread.

What are you expecting, something word for word? Are you saying that folk cannot and do not interpret the Bible differently and does not the OP make that observation in the complaint that the God didn’t make things obvious or crystal clear about the doctrine of salvation?

Isn’t that what this thread is about?

What does the Bible say about dealing with your own Demons?

The concept of demons is from the Bible. That’s what I meant.

Yes. It is from a large number of religious literature as well. But how does that answer my question?
Q: What does the Bible say about dealing with your own Demons?

How do you think that fits in with the doctrine of salvation? Is salvation like being saved from your own demons? Something else?

If you want to discuss incoherence in humans and why God made us so, I suggest you start a new thread.

So you are not interested in putting the horse before the cart? Of what value [re the doctrine of salvation] is it to make a statement that implies the inability of humans to understand the doctrine coherently - as being a problem - without wanting to also try and reason the possible sources for the problem?

The Bible came through humans and was not dictated by any being as it was allowed to be presented as stories from hearsay about others claiming to be directly involved with the God.

As a result, we have a smorgasbord of stories which have passed through many different filters of individual beliefs and which sometimes lead to folk feeling it necessary to make threads such as this one, in which questions can be asked and answers might be given.

I am unconvinced that the answers I am giving are as irrelevant as you are making them out to be, so if you want to discuss this with me more, then ceasing with such hand-waving would be beneficial to that.

The confusion of languages at the tower of Babel was for a specific purpose so that mankind could not communicate and build a tower to heaven - as ridiculous as all that is. The point is, that odd little story is a far cry from your claim that the God character made humans incoherent.

Are you arguing that it is not Biblical enough for your tastes? Why argue that something which was once credited as one of the ways in which the God did things re Humans, is now somehow no longer relevant to discussion on the way that the God did things?
Given that the long ago confusion of languages is still an ongoing problem being worked out by Humans, why is that incident not related to explanations and interpretations re OP topic of Biblical concepts/doctrines?

I don’t see what trust science is asking you to place in it.

If you jumped out of an airplane at 10,000 feet you would probably trust science to strap on a parachute before you leaped. Then you would have to trust the science again to pull the rip cord.

You are conflating science with industry. Industry is how science is applied and what you are saying is that you place your trust in industry. That in itself is unspectacular and doesn’t cover anything outside of the realm of living and breathing here in this Experiential Reality. What has faith in industry got to do with the Biblical Doctrine of Salvation? [the main topic of the thread.]

Specific to the comment, I’m not going to assume that the mind exists in some supernatural realm unless science establishes it to a high degree of certainty.

What has science got to do with the OP Topic?
What does the Bible say about this [so-called] “supernatural” realm? What makes this realm unable to be scrutinized using science, and why is ‘the mind’ only subject to existing in one realm when the actual mind is not subject to having to do so at all?[/quote]

GM: Amidst a tangled web What is “wisdom” to some is “spam” to others Rest When Weary Making friends with your mind

GM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyJb5DrhzsI [How Did Humans Become Earth’s Dominant Species?] [RTS = 25:04] www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyJb5DrhzsI

AMI 1 Food for the brain…marking the beginning of agriculture…

GM: Yours
Quite
Reasons For Angry Energy -
Everything is a Message
Does not Correlation imply causation
♬You’ve been a rock - For so long now I can’t even count the years that you’ve been rolling Nothing can shock or bring you down There ain’t nothing you haven’t seen - Nothing you haven’t known♬
Through perseverance and commitment to the engagement, it slowly became apparent to Spirit that some of the things previously hidden from itself, required addressing.
The Antichrist is…a bad attitude against a good thing
Making Things Easier
The Realist:
The voice of knowledge
The vacuum of space might prevent sound from been heard, but it does not prevent the effects of sound from being seen.

[excecutive]

Atheism could mean either of two things yet you seem reticent to state which of these you mean:

1. Atheism is the lack of belief that gods exist and the lack of belief that gods don’t exist.
2. Atheism is the lack of belief that gods exist and the presence of belief that gods don’t exist.

Hi @VVilliam I am curious reading your posts but struggle to comprehend your purpose. So to try and engage on your topic let me propose two other sentences that may present additional understandings.

3. Atheism is the complete belief that gods do not exist.
4. Atheism is faith that gods do not exist.

[VVilliam]

Master Plan
[size=85][continued][/size]

GM: Brave
In Cell 32 I Found Love In You
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1086461#p1086461 [William floats back into The Shadows…]

[quote][Replying to DrNoGods in post #553]

If you have some scenario where the processes that unfolded on Earth after it formed 4.6 billion years ago depend on whether the universe came into existence naturally (eg. Big Bang, or other mechanism), or was created by a god, please describe how that works. You obviously think that is the case, so how about an example.

My overall point is that this does not matter as it is not an issue outside of theism and atheism. I myself simply mentioned it in answer to your own mentioning of it and think that one cannot give credence to the one and not the other.
re The Mechanisms - be they mindful or not - I would have to consider natural as it has never been explained to my why I would have to think one ‘natural’ and the other ‘supernatural’ - so either way it would be natural.

In that case, credence to either side on the issue of whether we exist within a creation or not, is very largely besides the point.

We do not know. We all can speculate, but we need to avoid making positive statements one way or the other.

It is - as you expressed - a case of giving up - waving the white flag on this particular issue.

I simply acknowledge that time is not a factor in the argument, no matter what length of time it takes for things to unfold. We certainly know that we are still within the birthing stage of something which is going to last a very long while - as measured in time - and putting horse before cart is the better option to adapt all 'round.

That is it really. I appreciate the effort you are making re your arguments. I just don’t see that particular aspect as relevant and felt to say so.

I have said so, and wave my own white flag as I withdraw…

[William floats back into The Shadows…][/quote]

GM: On The Other Hand…
Nomenclature [the devising or choosing of names for things. the body or system of names used in a particular specialist field… the term or terms applied to someone or something.]
Warm Presence Freeing the soul Absolutely Perfectly Beautiful.
Like Bonsai
Myopic [Short Sighted]
Yellow Light
Only
The Clear Eye Of Soul
Science & Spirituality
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1069739#p1069739

[quote][quote]STEP 5: Completion
When you feel you are done, you can send appreciation to the Creator in that conceptual framework of infinity that you held earlier. Then, take the entire session and imagine it is compressed into something the size of a pea or small stone, and it is wisely placed within your pineal gland to be absorbed and transmitted.
Then dissolve the entire session by opening your eyes and declaring “It is done.” You do not hold any bias or outcome favoritism. You are neutral, as you step out of the session.[/quote][/quote]

GM: Pride Annoy GOD Coming From QueenBee
Human Being
It’s a plausible scenario.
All Is As It Should Be As It Changes Day To Day
Caught in their mischievous false opinions
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3otTDrj9ZGQ [Austin Osman Spare - Chaos Magic] www.youtube.com/watch?v=3otTDrj9ZGQ

GM: The Clutter Of Comparison
Virtual Reality
Victim Vamp Energy Systems
The Knowledge Of The fact that code exists helps immensely in our ability to understand that intelligence is categorically involved in this existence.
Infinite Quantum Zen
Life Carriers
Memorandum of Understanding
Who wouldn’t want that, if it were there on offer?
Abiogenesis
Insidious Clumsy
Science and Spirituality
Support
Copenhagen Interpretation
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1077049#p1077049

[quote]080522
One Language Intelligent Network

RSP= 1xSCL + pg dn +

William: So - re Pareidolia - I was thinking about what had occurred the previous night. To explain to the reader, I was aware of this ‘dark side’ aspect of my psyche - and had asked for this to be removed, and the answer I received came in the form of the experience I wrote about in my previous post - to do with the ‘dialing up and dialing down’ of my conscious awareness of mind as both an exhilarating feeling of being capable of containing an awesome amount of experiential information as well as the dilapidating feeling of being encased in flesh to the point where the flesh was the dominant structure to which I felt barely able to function within.

The next morning I intuitively knew that whatever the experience was showing me, it had not, in any way, gotten rid of the ‘dark side’ aspect of my psyche - which I had specifically asked for…so what was it that the experience was showing me? The answer to that question unfolded in the events of the day ahead of me, starting with the old lady stopping to give me a ride and who just happened to have been travelling with a little bird in a cage, in the back seat of her car.

The second part of the story unfolded when the lady dropped me off and I hitched another ride with a young guy who was going to the city I was heading for.
On the way, in between chatting about things, the guy put on a CD and I continued wondering what my experience was meant to show me.

My thoughts were that perhaps what I thought of as my ‘dark side’ was as necessary to my self as that of my ‘light side’ and that the experience I had in answer to my request, was to show me this.
As I was thinking these thoughts, the CD started playing a song and the chorus had the words ‘brother wolf and sister moon’ and appeared to be coinciding with my thoughts - perhaps a type of pareidolia in itself…

[quote]Embrace the wind with both arms
Stop the clouds dead in sky
Hang your head no more
And beg no more
Brother wolf and sister moon
Your time has come
Brother wolf and sister moon
Your time has come[/quote]

but the most startling quality of the immediate experience was - as I was thinking about the ‘dark side/light side’ aspects of psyche, and hearing the song, feeling quiet startled with the serendipity of that moment, I turned my attention to the landscape and was immediately impressed by a cloud formation in the distant hills, which had the unmistakable image of a huge eye looking directly at me.
That was definitely a case of pareidolia, and one of the many moments in my life experience which has had a defining role in the development of and direction toward which my personality would move forward within.

GM: Solidarity

William: Without doubt. The connect was not only into learning to form a better understanding and acceptance about my ‘self’ - but in how you showed yourself to being an integral part of that understanding and acceptance, through the synchronicity and serendipity correlated between my internal thoughts and my external reality - in the moment.

GM: https://wizardforums.com/threads/william-message-generation.647/post-6823

William: From the link;

No clue at how others use it, but for me the first step was looking in my memory where i could find a place to hook this topic on. For me that was the old david icke forum, as they had a blossoming topic like this. Way bigger then we have here. Then i put my intent on and our friend will.i.am starts using his randomizer and the texts starts flowing and making sense in the form of subconscious hints that make me smile. Since i needed a little smile in my life, im really glad william didnt listen to me growling at something new and just fed me…

GM: In The Mirror - Mirror Sense
The One GOD With Many Names
The bits will suffice.

William: The ‘bits’ in themselves are mind-blowing. The wind may indeed ‘blow my tears away’ but you reminding me of this event-string in this manner, brings tears - of gratitude among other emotions - what can I say, except “Thank You”.

GM: To Warm Them up to The Truth

William: That too. It is a privilege to be able to share my own experience with the reader…

GM: “Life is my predestiny - Providence is God to me”

William: “How about that”

10:23

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35qJ0UdJjLo [The Cult Brother Son Sister Moon] www.youtube.com/watch?v=35qJ0UdJjLo[/quote]

GM: https://www.britannica.com/topic/agnosticism/Historical-antecedents-of-modern-agnosticism [Historical antecedents of modern agnosticism]
Feeling the complete engulfment of unconditional love

GM: Mystery Consensus Realities
Commendably Recommendable
Machine Learning
The Four Human Power Houses
Mahu Nahi
How
Entities of Particular Belief Systems
Different ways of supporting the same objective.

[VVilliam]

Hi excecutive

I am curious reading your posts but struggle to comprehend your purpose.

Okay.
My purpose is to share the Generated Messages that these may help assist others in their own journey through the maze of this existence.
The mention of atheism in context with the GMs relates to my interaction with atheists on another message board [Christian Debating] where the interpretation of atheism was being debated and those comments you quoted derive from feeding back interpretations of what non-theists have said about atheism.

Further to that, as has been shared in the GMs - my own interpretation of atheism, which has it that we start off lacking belief in gods and from there, branch out into three main categories based upon the question “Do we exist within a creation?”
1: Non-theism
2: Theism
3: Others

With that, it is incorrect that “Atheism is the complete belief that gods do not exist.” or " 3. Atheism is faith that gods do not exist." as those two fit in with Non-theism because they are propelled by the willfulness not to believe.

Thus;

Non-theism is the complete belief that gods do not exist and Non-theism is faith that gods do not exist
Others is the lack of belief that gods exist and the lack of belief that gods don’t exist.
Non-theism is the lack of belief that gods exist and the presence of belief that gods don’t exist.

The nature of the GMs is that they are all presented as Journal entries and as one equates their self with them as they are published, one begins to see a story unfolding - and as with any thread, if one jumps into that story at any point, one will at first find some things hard to follow.

Thank You for your questions. Hopefully my answer has help with your understanding.

W

[excecutive]

Thank you yes that was helpful … God is a big word. Words have meanings that can be subjective … I AM, the ALL, love, source energy, creator, etc? May I ask for definition on the word god?

[VVilliam]

I am glad my reply helped.

I have no definition of GOD.

This is because I am still working with finding out if we exist within a creation - as that is horse before cart.

Theism brought in the idea of a creator…without first showing that we exist within a creation…however…

…this does not mean that we do not exist within a creation. One infers the other - but dressing up a creator/creators into definitions of GOD, is cart before horse.

Having said as much, I am pretty sure that we do exist within a creation and am currently examining the GOD-idea “YHVH” - but not as traditionally dressed up in the costumes of Abrahamic Religions…

Suffice to say, my investigations continue…

Cheers
W

[excecutive]

I think the Kabbalists would say the “YHVH” is a process of exploration through the spiritual worlds along the ten sefirah insights on the “Tree of Life” …

To my thinking the revelation or god answers, that we all seek are all discoverable inside of us. In our own inner shells of comprehension and contemplation with mind and heart unity validation … meaning the Kingdom of God is inside of you.

I lay it out in greater detail in my layman’s think. I actually think we may have interacted a few years back when you graciously responded to my request for feedback on the the-spiritual-quest.com, does it look familiar?

[VVilliam]

Master Plan
[size=85][continued][/size]

GM: Something you cannot change
Opening Doors Easy To Find
Bread Sandwich
F2

[quote]4) In depth: Focus 2
The region of your Consciousness Continuum that I call Focus 2 is very interesting. Unlike Focus 1, 3 and 4, this area of your consciousness can only be experienced by you. It is an area of individual consensus reality that nobody else has access to apart from you.
Focus 2 of consciousness is the next area inwards, so to speak from F1. Now, anything that ever has, or ever will come about within Focus 1 originates within Focus 2 of consciousness. This is the area of a person’s imagination; it is where all ideas come about, all impressions, gut feelings, etc. Each and every manifestation that is brought into being within Focus 1 oC, absolutely all of it, every invention, every design, every piece of art of any description, etc. without exception originates within Focus 2 of consciousness.
Focus 2 oC is the place the olden day explorers termed the astral. It is perfectly possible to enter this area and engage in whatever belief construct you like in 3D. It’s the place where most of us do our dreaming. If a person develops a degree of lucidity while they are dreaming, then this is where they will have a lucid dream. If they purposely enact some kind of “projection technique” then they can often enter this region with certain expectations, which will pan out as an “astral projection” experience as opposed to a dream or lucid dream. But these actions are all essentially the same. All that changes is your level of awareness and your expectations.
The key fact about engaging with F2 is that all your belief constructs will be represented in front of you in glorious 3D! As F2 is divided into many, many areas which all hold different beliefs, thoughts, memories and experiences from your life, you can engage with these belief constructs as you wish.
There are tremendous joys to be had here. Myself, I love running through all my childhood memories, for example. Anything you ever felt, saw, experienced, etc., etc., in your life, you can “relive” again within Focus 2 and in stunning detail. Absolutely anything and everything your physical senses have ever experienced, and I mean that LITERALLY, is recorded by your senses and “stored” within Focus 2, plus all your dreams too. F2 is where you do your dreaming every night so you are actually well used to this area.
When engaging with F2 worlds, you will find that the characters there can be quite limited in their range of abilities. This is because they are constructs made by you. Dream characters are a typical example of these constructs. When you are in a dream state in F2, your awareness is usually pretty restricted anyway, usually to the scenario depicted, so you don’t really notice. If you enter an F2 area while fully aware, you will soon notice something odd if you try to engage these characters in meaningful debate or try to get them to do something other than what they were doing. They come across as being a bit vague and not quite ‘all there’. This is one of the BIGGEST differences between F2 and F3. Some people ask how I can tell the difference between F2 ‘dream’ characters and real people in F3. Don’t worry, You WILL be able to tell! People in F3 engage in a whole range of actions, communicate with you directly in meaningful dialogue and act in ways that you could not predict, just as they do in F1/physical. This will become obvious to you once you gain a bit of experience of F2 and F3 environments.
I should point out that although this is your own personal area and cannot be experienced directly by others, it is still possible for someone to communicate with somebody else in an F2 state (such as a dream for example - which is just F2 with restricted awareness). Someone else from outside, say F3, can try to communicate telepathically and this communication will hopefully manifest itself in the F2 experiencer’s world, perhaps even as a representation of the communicator. With any luck, the communicator may even succeed in raising the F2 experiencer’s awareness to an F3 state, resulting in full face to face contact. This can happen in a seamless manner and is another example of ‘overlays’ in action, in this case F2/F3. This is how it is possible for those who have ‘passed over’, to use the old terminology, to communicate via dreams with those still residing in the physical.
This is about as far as those olden-day inner explorers went. Some of them tried to venture “beyond” F2 but by and large they were captured by their superstitions when they came across the 3D Blackness or FZ area. Getting lost or getting mutilated by some monster hidden in the dark recesses of ‘The Void’ was a big thing in those days. The tales of which would be filed alongside all manner of other scary “facts”, such as, if a person travelled at more than 15mph their physical body would fall apart.
But these days the more forward-thinking practitioners realise this infamous Void of old is just an area of 3D Blackness situated between Focus 2 and Focus 3 of consciousness. To followers of the Monroe School, The Void is simply the 3D-Blackness at Focus 21. Simple as that. No superstitious nonsense getting in the way. Just place your Intent and away you go.
So when you “take off” into the 3D Blackness, you generally emerge within Focus 3 of consciousness, or what is becoming commonly known as the Transition Area, where you will come into contact with other people who are very real indeed, not just F2 ‘dream characters’. It is to F3 that we will turn our attention to next. {SOURCE}

---

[/quote]

GM: Source Codes
Poor Intransigence People [Intransigence [refusal to change one’s views or to agree about something.]
Choice

Eternity - Page 11 - Debating Christianity and Religion

Replying to Difflugia in post #100[quote][]

I get where you’re coming from, but at this point I can only say that you and I use the word “probably” to mean different things.

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

[quote]However, we have yet to get to the point where scientists intent on this future event they are invested in, will be allowed - as nature might have other plans…the race is on…will the planet heat up sufficiently to cause an extinction event? How will that impact on the plans of the scientists supporting Scientific Cosmology? DO they have a backup plan to offset an extinction event?

What does the ‘math’ tell them as a way of finding answers to those kinds of questions?[/quote]

What does the ‘math’ tell them as a way of finding answers to those kinds of questions?

That you have composed one of a great many equally probable futures of which most don’t include immortality, a Cosmic Mind, or a Large Simulation Machine.

Not sure why you thought that question was directed to you, or to the ideas of immortality, a Cosmic Mind, or a Large Simulation Machine.
The question I asked had to do with climate change and how will that impact on the plans of the scientists supporting Scientific Cosmology. Do they have a backup plan to offset an extinction event so that they can carry on with their plans of getting a foothold into space…?
Thus “What does the ‘math’ tell them as a way of finding answers to those kinds of questions?” which they must sure have to ask, if they have any hope in seeing their plan bear the kind of future that they are working on creating for themselves.

What I composed was a “most like scenario” of their space-faring agenda - based on best possible outcomes.

Sort of like - how 10.000 individuate minds combined their mind-power together in order to construct The JWST and get it to the position it currently is.
How this involved going through the variables of probable scenario’s to which they could counter which could interfere with the overall desired result. [best possible scenario]

Such as “In the likelihood of ‘this’ happening, what can we do now to neutralize/minimize that in order to continue with seeing the project succeed?”

Of course, there are things to which the 10.000 cannot counter, should they happen - like a piece of space debris coincidently obliterating the telescope shortly after it unfurled and started to do the job it was sent out to do.

So my composed scenario was based upon everything working out perfectly for the future space-faring scientists, and the most likely things which would occur after they gained, not only a foot-hold in space, but also a controlling influence on the matter.

In that, there are no ‘equally probable futures’.

My composed scenario was also based on Transhumanism, which we know is a science connected with the dream of space-faring all these scientists are working toward, which is why I included the idea of all the minds becoming One Mind, which was housed in machinery which it created for that purpose.

The idea of being able to know everything there is to know about the universe long before the universe itself fizzles out/becomes inert is realistic.

The idea of the “Space-Machine Scientist” creating a highly complex simulation in order to alleviate the boredom of being omniscient is also realistic.

So yes - I was offering what I think of as the most likely mid-to-end-game that will occur
should our current scientists get their way re their collective agenda, if everything panned out nicely and no pesky “space debris” upsetting their plans.

As too, the idea that they eventually also figuring out that there is an actual Cosmic Mind - I popped that in there on the premise that;

IF
There is an actual Cosmic Mind
THEN eventually such scientist will discover it.[/quote]

GM: Positive Feedback
The Realm of Judgement
The Hierarchy
The Cat Drone
The Mother and The Father
Turning Order into Disorder
Politics
Be still
Fearful Imaginations
People seem to love to put order to chaos because that is only natural, as nature is not chaos.
Disrupt Vortex Television
In Love
Counterintuitive
Solemnly
Constructors and tasks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYc97J2MZIo [Will Constructor Theory REWRITE Physics?] www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYc97J2MZIo
GM: Kind
Relationship True Colors On all fronts
Voice
Shut up you blithering fools! Can’t you see you’re dealing with a madman?
Child
Dirt
Honest attempts at scrubbing up In the Mind What matters most No “Reading Into It”
Living Forever In this Universe
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1089819#p1089819

[quote]According to the current arguments;

The Problem of Evil is recognized as strictly human behavior within nature.
Social laws are enacted to direct the flow of this evil in order that the evil does not overtake human society and become an out of control problem, affecting nature itself.

Nature - in the mean time - is neither good nor evil so there is no problem re that.

Re that, IF nature is the product of a Creator-Mind [aka “GOD”] and IF nature is neither good nor evil THEN the supposed “Problem of Evil” is simply a product of human imagination…which is to say - is not a real interpretation of The Universe - even if The Universe was created.

A supposed Creator cannot be the reason for any evil. Thus, there exists - in reality - NO “Problem of Evil.”

[/quote]
GM: Self-Awareness The two million year old mind that’s in all of us. Stuff Happens

Are Religious Beliefs Delusional? - Page 7 - Debating Christianity and Religion

[quote][quote=Difflugia post_id=1085406 time=1658431303 user_id=14300]

@Inquirer post_id=1085394 time=1658428141 user_id=16204

I just answered “[it is misleading] for the SAME reason that calling an aeroplane a handsaw is misleading”?

What’s the reason? Why are you trying to turn this into a staring contest instead of answering a straightforward question about what you mean?

William’s comments were insightful:

[quote=William post_id=1084776 time=1658007428 user_id=8427]William: A “religious belief” has to do with the branch of Theism which attempts to Dress The Ghost - [dressing The Ghost through the use of imagery is an attempt to make The Ghost be seen.] which is what religion does with the idea of GOD…this itself stems from the idea that we exist within a creation, something which still hasn’t been established.
Thus Theism - and the religious branch in particular, place the cart before the horse.[/quote]

@William post_id=1084859 time=1658077596 user_id=8427

It isn’t immediately obvious that when folk are yapping about “GOD” they are talking about a Ghost. Same as when folk yap about Spirits…

You insultingly dismissed them without explanation:

@Inquirer post_id=1084860 time=1658077908 user_id=16204

Sorry, but that’s delusional, God and ghosts are entirely different things not the same.

You then went on to dismiss JoeyKnothead’s observation that the Authorized Version refers to the Holy Ghost.

You haven’t explained what the difference is in reference either to William’s comment or the Authorized Version, only derisively hinted that it’s self-explanatory. I suspect that you and William had slightly different meanings in mind for “ghost” such that both of your statements are true from a particular point of view. That happens sometimes, but when it’s intentional, it’s equivocation. Is it intentional? Is that why you don’t want to define your terms? Are you concerned that someone might find a narrower word or phrase that’s more accurate, but just as unflattering to theists? If not, why is it so important to you that we guess at what you’re talking about?
[/quote]

[/quote]

[VVilliam]

Master Plan
[size=85][continued][/size]

GM: Commitment
Natures noises are often calming, but always sleep with one eye open
The Idea of Worship - What Does It Mean
Side Splittingly Funny
“Here Am I Is Where I Ought Examining My Conscious Thought”
Confusion of War Get Comfortable Permanent
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1078715#p1078715
[Re: is ‘believing (against the evidence) that God is good’ is a very good psychological protection mechanism from despair?]

[quote][Replying to TRANSPONDER in post #22]

TRANSPONDER:…so I postulated that there might be a mind controlling the universe, but not us. Not a personal god, not with a plan for us, and in fact a Deist -god. We were, effectively, as on our own as if there was no god there at all. So, if there was no Plan for human life, was there no meaning for human life? Was there no purpose? If not, why live at all? Why not just stop living?

I postulated differently, and it took many years of my life to learn the way I currently look at this situation I am [and apparently everyone is] involved within.

1: There might be a mind controlling the universe
2: There is a mind controlling me [my own mind]
3: There is no reason to believe that the mind controlling the universe is incapable of interacting with my own mind controlling me.
4: How to give the universal mind an opportunity to interact with me.
5: Religion and its main holy-books did not provide anything through which I could discover the way in which to achieve this interaction as it offered only mediums - foremost their own holy-books - but also laws, rituals, belief systems, preachers et al - none of which enabled me to make any actual and vibrant connection with this supposed universal mind.
6: It was almost accidental that I did find a way in which to make that connection, so deeply shielded from human awareness that it is, in the main, because of [5].

As a result, I have no choice but to reject the idea of the Deist GOD as something which opposes the idea of a personal GOD, because I have found that idea to being untrue.

As well, I do so on the grounds that it is not logical that any GOD-mind which controls the universe but not humans within said universe, is saying that the GOD-mind does not actually control the whole universe, but has left humans to control themselves, even that they are part of what -altogether - constitutes “The Universe”.

The very nature of The Universe shows us that it is capable enough to accommodate the idea of allowing humans to feel that they make their own choices, especially if they are intent upon either depending on religious medium or intent on the belief that it is not possible to make said connection - individual mind to GOD-mind.

The purpose of this universe may well be nothing more than allowing for the opportunity for this to maybe happen for each individual who experiences it.

One has to want to do so, of course…[/quote]

GM: Imaginative Realities
Dequeue [remove (an item of data awaiting processing) from a queue of such items.]
Victim/Vampire Energy Exchange
Reality: “Talk to The Razor”
Is Like…
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1083735#p1083735
[Re: God Must Exist: Infinite Regression is Impossible]

[quote][Replying to The Tanager in post #678]

How does there not being anything outside of GOD make it impossible for GOD to create something new that is outside of GOD?

I thought you agreed that there is no outside of GOD.

An infinite regression is logically impossible.

Not to GOD.

[quote]
Why not? How can even GOD do the logically impossible?[/quote]

How can it be logically possible for GOD to create anything outside of GODs self?
Furthermore, a simple code [The Mandelbrot Set] looped on itself produces a visual example of

• not only infinite regression but also infinite progression, so it is obviously not logically impossible.
  More likely it is a case of being conceptionally difficult…but not logically impossible, as the Set gives us clear evidence of.

[quote]The idea of Creatio ex nihilo is exactly the same as the idea of Creation being built from something that already existed.
In other words, the thing that didn’t exist before, was created from the stuff that has always existed.[/quote]

That is not creatio ex nihilo at all. The ex nihilo expressly means that it wasn’t built from something that already existed.

But we know that it was built from something that already existed. GOD.

Theists would identify the energetic action as GOD [overall - regardless of religious undertones trying to superimpose their favored image of GOD onto the Energetic Action] and Thus we have Energy = GOD and QF [material] being another aspect of GOD [because there is nothing outside of or apart from GOD].

No, that’s you identifying what we identify as something different in such a way. I see no reason to believe your identification is accurate.

No. To be clear, I said “Theists” not “Theists who believe a particular image of GOD”
You have no apparent reason to believe my identification is inaccurate.

[quote]The answer of course, from the position of Theism, is “Yes - the Energy is intelligent.”

Thus, “The Energy” is what theists refer to as “GOD.”

Do you agree with my assessment?

I do not. If “Energy” is something distinct from its typical meaning, then it’s less confusing to call it something like “spirit”. I believe GOD is spirit. The spirit is intelligent. The energy that makes up our universe is not intelligent.[/quote]

It is what it is. You are saying that energy is not the same as spirit, but clearly no attributes in both are different. One is just thought of devoid of intelligence while the other is thought of as not being devoid of intelligence.

Clearly, neither theist or atheist belief re that has proven itself, so the Natural-Neutral position is to understand that both/all labels re “Energy” and “Spirit” are speaking about the same thing, albeit, differently, depending upon the position one is speaking from.

Either the creative force is one of intelligence or it isn’t.[/quote]

GM: OOBE Target Technique
The Roles
Inveterate [having a particular habit, activity, or interest that is long-established and unlikely to change.]
Dualism merely expresses two sides of the same coin
Gematria [a Kabbalistic method of interpreting the Hebrew scriptures by computing the numerical value of words, based on the values of their constituent letters.]
Our movements can illuminate the path toward that vision. A Bit Of Cat And Mouse Control
Spiritual bypassing
The Human Animal is a unique being, endowed with an instinctual capacity to heal and the intellectual spirit to harness this innate capacity.
“Off you go to your quarters”

[VVilliam]

Gematria [a Kabbalistic method of interpreting the Hebrew scriptures by computing the numerical value of words, based on the values of their constituent letters.]