« Modern mystics, why should anyone believe your "vision"? | Main | Rejoice! Your essence is brain-meat, nothing more »

February 28, 2015

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Nice Brian but there is also a fourth group which belongs to people like tAo who can attack lie make insults make fun of just anybody ..it would be nice to collect all of his posts and paste them here so we would get a picture of what this group of 4 would be like

As with your the comments, your not noticing any difference between objectifying the specific contents of your own consciousness, and drawing conclusions from the very existence if general states of consciousness. No one has public evidence for consciousness. There needs to be a 4 after your 3, for those following apophatic theology/via negativa/direct path.

vlad, our whole culture manifests an increasing intensity and divisiveness when it comes to communication. I don't think the situation is any different in commenting on this blog.

When I read online comments submitted to controversial stories in our local newspaper, the language is just as heated as it gets here sometimes. Ditto, of course, with political discourse these days, in Congress or many other places.

I also think that religious/spiritual believers aren't used to being challenged. Usually people don't respond to ridiculous religious statements with, "Why do you believe that?" or "Where is the proof for that?," even though this is entirely reasonable.

So being questioned or challenged can feel like being attacked. However, in scientific circles (and other places, like classrooms), open debate and discussion -- often intense -- is commonplace.

It's healthy for believers to have to defend their beliefs. If they can't be defended, maybe they shouldn't be held in the first place.

Brian: "I also think that religious/spiritual believers aren't used to being challenged. Usually people don't respond to ridiculous religious statements with, "Why do you believe that?" or "Where is the proof for that?," even though this is entirely reasonable."

Why do atheists assume and automatically label anyone speaking about unusual experiences as 'religious' or 'spiritual'?

Someone with an 'open mind' can have paranormal experiences and not 'believe' in anything. Life is strange, weird and unknowable.

If you must hold a belief, hold it for questioning.

I agree with you Brian in everything you said but reading back tAo comments of manipulation insults attacks makes me want to vomit. Those are not just questions to believers those are serious attacks.

I agree with you x I would hold questioning to the end of my life. Towards my current state.

Someone with an 'open mind' can have paranormal experiences and not 'believe' in anything.

Yes, but that theoretical someone has yet to comment. So far, every one of you have become believers as a result of your "paranormal experiences".

"If you must hold a belief, hold it for questioning."

I don't hold a belief and I do question everything.

You, x, hold a belief. From your comments it is easy to see that you have a firmly held belief that everyone who is not an atheist is either religious or spiritual. An agnostic is more unknowing.

Observer: "An agnostic is more unknowing."

tucson: "I think so. An atheist believes there is no God when in fact, they can't know that. They just know they personally have seen no convincing evidence of such a thing."

x: "So far, every one of you have become believers as a result of your "paranormal experiences"."

tucson: "And you, x, have become an atheist as a result of your lack of convincing paranormal experiences.

I think being agnostic is a more intellectually honest position."

Observer: "You, x, hold a belief. From your comments it is easy to see that you have a firmly held belief that everyone who is not an atheist is either religious or spiritual."..

tucson: "..which x considers delusion when in fact the veracity of others' paranormal experiences cannot be known.

Speaking of God. How could there be such a thing, at least as an object to be known as such? To me, it seems that whatever God is must be the foundational subject of all objects.

We think of ourselves as subjects witnessing objects when in fact our conceptualized subjectivity is just that, another object in mind.

We think of our selves, our subjectivity, constantly, making objects of that which we deem subjectivity when, in reality, we are the absence of what we think ourselves to be which is the presence of what we are.

We are our total objective absence which is the subjective presence of...I'll let the reader come up for a name for it. It could be called God, the Eternal One, Great Spirit, Tao, Reality, Void or Ziggy.

tucson, I disagree. An atheist is almost exactly the same as an agnostic. Both recognize that there is no evidence for the existence of God, so God is viewed as an unproven hypothesis.

If solid evidence for God becomes apparent, both atheists and agnostics would change their view, and believe in God. However, it seems clear that nothing would change religious believers' belief in God, which shows their dogmatism compared to the open-mindedness of atheists and agnostics.

An atheist is just more convinced that the lack of evidence for God's existence is persuasive, compared to an agnostic.

I vehemently disagree that an atheist believes there is no God. Rather, an atheist sees no evidence for God, so concludes that there is no reason to believe that God exists.

This is exactly the same as someone who could be called an agoblinist, if society had a term for a person who doesn't believe in the existence of goblins. Finding no reason to believe in goblins, virtually everybody is an agoblinist.

But it would be ridiculous to say that everybody is a fervent believer in the non-existence of goblins. Most people never think about the non-existence of all the things that don't exist.

It is only because God is believed in by so many people that the word "atheist" is given to someone who doesn't see any evidence for God's existence.

Brian: "I vehemently disagree that an atheist believes there is no God. Rather, an atheist sees no evidence for God, so concludes that there is no reason to believe that God exists."

tucson: It seems like the same thing to me. That is, seeing no reason to believe God exists and not believing in God. It's sort of a semantic fine line. But I see your point.
Still, I see agnostic as a better term. A person sees no reason to believe in goblins but does not deny, even if the possibility is remote in their minds, that somehow, somewhere, a goblin exists.

Personally, I believe in goblins. They are also known as politicians.

Bill Hicks & George Carlin: The Big Electron

Two legendary comedians offer their perspectives on life, through song (2:29)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo

Hey any rich cats out there with extra 50000€ to give to me moongoes but with no limit of giving them back..but if in the future i earn them I will. I calculated that this would give me really great life.tnx.moon..it is not a joke

Tuscon vs Brian

Even a >60_IQ mind knows that
1*0=1 casu quo
0*1= Brian

is a false statement

777

Solopism is the only answer
and complaints then should be directed by Brian to Brian

And you, x, have become an atheist as a result of your lack of convincing paranormal experiences. tucson

Someone with an 'open mind' can have paranormal experiences and not 'believe' in anything. observer

When you assume, tucson, that someone is not a believer because they haven't had a "convincing paranormal experience", you make the case that believers are delusional.

...we are the absence of what we think ourselves to be which is the presence of what we are. We are our total objective absence which is the subjective presence of...I'll let the reader come up for a name for it. It could be called God, the Eternal One, Great Spirit, Tao, Reality...

This is your belief, tucson, the certainty brought about by your convincing paranormal experience. It is not fact. It cannot be shown or demonstrated. It can only be believed. Recite this gibberish enough times and it becomes Truth, but it's just holy shit.

In actuality it's exactly opposite than what we call paranormal.
Only experience will explain it to the one who is experiencing,
that how normal is that state of happiness which everyone in the world is trying to find in various possible ways.
And what we are going through in this physical realm,
is actually paranormal.

And yes, that certainly can not be demonstrated here,
because of the huge and unimaginable difference in frequency of the vibration.

And only one thing which can bring that experience to anyone is Love.
Make your heart full of Love and only Love and it will come by it's own.
You can not store tons of cotton in a huge room if there is slightest spark is present. Similarly you can not make your heart full of love if there is slightest of hatred present.

Love Everyone, to be loved by the One.


regards,
One Initiated

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gcc6m-B7XjE

x: "This is your belief, tucson, the certainty brought about by your convincing paranormal experience. It is not fact. It cannot be shown or demonstrated. It can only be believed. Recite this gibberish enough times and it becomes Truth, but it's just holy shit."

Tucson: "It may not even be MY belief in every case, x.

This is for anyone who reads my comments..
I am just philosophizing or theorizing based on personal experience/observation/thoughts, but I do not expect anyone to take it as truth on face value. They shouldn't and they usually don't.

At best, I might stimulate someone's intuition to see their own truth or to think outside their personal conceptual box. That's it. Nothing holy. No religion. No thing at all.

I may come off as having certainty, as if I am preaching from a self-proclaimed pulpit, but that is just the way my writing comes off when I think about matters philosophical. It is too much trouble to keep prefacing each and every sentence with, "It seems to me" "In my opinion" "It could be possible that" "In my experience" "I can't say this with certainty but" "I could be wrong, however" "I realize this is purely subjective" etc."

x: "When you assume, tucson, that someone is not a believer because they haven't had a "convincing paranormal experience", you make the case that believers are delusional."

tucson: "If Joe Blow has been convinced by a vision or something that God exists, he is not likely to say, as a result, that he is an atheist. Or would he? Maybe God told him to keep quiet about it.. "My son, don't let the Cat out of the bag. Keep it to yourself and proclaim that you are an atheist. Obey, if you know what is good for you."

tucson, I like your style. You don't take yourself seriously, which is great. I also resonate with what you said about not always saying "it seems to me," and such.

When someone expresses an opinion, it makes sense to take it as just that, an opinion, even if the person doesn't say "I feel," "I believe," or whatever.

Like you, I enjoy philosophizing about what might be. Sticking to what absolutely provably is, that's too limiting and boring. It does no harm to mentally soar into blue sky, so long as realize that there's really nothing there other than what we put there.

One Initiated: "Love Everyone, to be loved by the One."

tucson: " This is just my opinion. I could be wrong, but it seems to me, knowing full well that I possess mental frailties and that I could be in a state of utter delusion on the subject. Also, I mean no offence to One initiated and give this person the respect I would give to anyone who has not behaved unfairly or offensively. There, have I made sufficient qualifying statements?

'Love' is not a choice. You either have it or you don't. You can try to be nice, to love someone/something or God. You can act nice or loving but the actual state of sincerely 'loving' of 'being in love' is something that just comes of its own accord. You can't force it.

Some people love mushrooms. I have tried to love them. I have tried just to like them. I have even pretended to like them. But it just doesn't happen. Maybe by the grace of God.

I think George Carlin is right."

But, I Love you tucson :)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Got a smile on your face ?
That's what all HE wanted :)


So much Love to Everyone.

Something interesting to read re athiest evangelists
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/03/what-scares-the-new-atheists?CMP=fb_gu

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Welcome


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.