Buddha

[aSoldier]

You're wrong Sasun. Your answers have always been very important to me and very appreciated by me. But, I'm sure you know this, I'm not looking to find God. My discussions in this topic are just a way for me to understand other people's religiousity. Your spirituality is very well understood; in fact, I would like for my friends and my future husband even, to be as spiritual - and as a result, as humble - as you have shown to be. I'm not a hardcore atheist who rejects everything that has to do with God, because I believe, as a result, that person also rejects everything that has to do with humanity.

 

I'm more interested to understand other people who blindly accept anything because someone told them that it's written in the Book, or they read it in the Book without any thought whatsoever. You are above that. We've had numerous discussions regarding religion, God, and morality in this forum in the past years and you've shown that you don't blindly accept something without giving it a thought. But, unfortunately, most religious people are not like you. Most of them show to be hypocrits. They only remember God when they have to, and they never remember their fellow human beings. And the reason they remember God in the first place is because they want God to do something for them. And when the topic of religion comes up, these "religious" people quickly jump to judging atheists to be either immoral or ignorant. That's why atheists protest and want to get away from "religious" people.

 

I agree. There are a lot of "religious" people like that, I wish they didn't give us such a bad name.

[Sasun]

You missed the point. That is exactly what is not consistent with a God that created light and dark, heavens and earth, and all else in between. I don't have to read the Bible to debate the inconsistencies presented in this thread. I'm just going by what you and sSebB have said.

I don't get it. Are you sure that a God who had created all these things would in no way care about human beings? Why is that? Can you explain how that conclusion follows? This maybe your opinion but who said that it is true? Actually by making this assumption you are lowering God to the level of undivine human beings who are arrogant not to care about people that are supposedly lower than them. Perhaps you think that this is the right thing to do for someone who has the status of God, but I could not disagree more. No wonder why you have no interest in God (to put it in mild words).

 

I don't see how sSeb or I have said incosistent things.

[Sasun]

You're wrong Sasun. Your answers have always been very important to me and very appreciated by me. But, I'm sure you know this, I'm not looking to find God. My discussions in this topic are just a way for me to understand other people's religiousity. Your spirituality is very well understood; in fact, I would like for my friends and my future husband even, to be as spiritual - and as a result, as humble - as you have shown to be. I'm not a hardcore atheist who rejects everything that has to do with God, because I believe, as a result, that person also rejects everything that has to do with humanity.

 

I'm more interested to understand other people who blindly accept anything because someone told them that it's written in the Book, or they read it in the Book without any thought whatsoever. You are above that. We've had numerous discussions regarding religion, God, and morality in this forum in the past years and you've shown that you don't blindly accept something without giving it a thought. But, unfortunately, most religious people are not like you. Most of them show to be hypocrits. They only remember God when they have to, and they never remember their fellow human beings. And the reason they remember God in the first place is because they want God to do something for them. And when the topic of religion comes up, these "religious" people quickly jump to judging atheists to be either immoral or ignorant. That's why atheists protest and want to get away from "religious" people.

Anoushik jan, as far as I remember in the last one or two years you have never ever agreed with me on religion/spirituality (and if I am wrong in this and it can be proven then as a penalty I volunteer to split this thread, which is not an easy task to do). So I guess that is your way of appreciating BTW, you have become surprising lately, how did that happen?

 

Anyway, joke aside I appreciate your words. I think that you are a very sincere person and as such I value your disagreements because they are sincere (even though wrong ) and come from a desire to see humankind in a better shape.

Thank you indeed for your honest words

[Sip]

I don't see how sSeb or I have said incosistent things.

 

Don't get me started on sSeb again ... but Sasun, this back-and-forth is becoming very redundant between the two of us. I fail to see why you do not acknowledge there is absolutely no credible evidence of anything you are claiming, while I can provide a MOUNTAIN of evidence on everything I have claimed.

 

You say:

 

I believe more in a different version which I have come to learn: there are three types of worlds - Physical in which we live, Astral and Causal. Accordingly, we and all living beings have 3 bodies - physical, astral and causal. We all know what the physical world is. The astral world consists of subtle energy-like matter, not physical matter. The astral bodies are more or less like the physical body of each soul, and many souls choose to wear their young bodies. The causal world and causal bodies consist of elements of ideas, thoughs/consciousness. Thus our souls wear three garments - physical, astral and causal.

 

When we die (or leave the physical world) we are left with two bodies - astral and causal, and we go to the astral world. The astral world is much larger than the physical world. There are many astral planets where living souls go after they leave the earthly bodies. Now, these planets are not all the same, some are heavenly where everyone whishes to go, but some are really bad where there are constantly wars and suffering. There are different gradations of these planets. Some are extremely good, some are just fine but less than the former ones, some are good, average, then some others moderately bad, etc.. Souls normally are placed in planets that correspond to their acts and state of consciousness in their last life on the earth. A kind and virtuos person's soul will be on a good planet (or Heaven) and an aggressive criminal will be placed on a bad planet (or Hell). Spiritually aspiring souls go to the topmost astral planets, and extremely spiritual people go even further to the causal world which is infinitely more joyous, one has a nearly complete freedom. Souls spend different times in the heavens and hells or in the causal world, it all depends on their capacities and previous lives and progress in spirituality (if any). After that they come back to earth with new bodies compelled by their own cherished desires. Advanced souls spend hundreds of years in very good places before coming back, while ordinary souls spend a few years and come back.

 

The concept of purgatory is that some (or all, not sure) souls after dying have a second chance in the purgatory of correcting themselves. If they succeed then they will go to heaven, if not to hell.

 

Ok, #1, what possible reason do you have for believing ANY of this. I know, I know, us who don't understand simply aren't as sophisticated as you to understand. But with all due respect, that just sounds like meaningless mumbo jumbo. In order for you to believe something, there has to be a reason. What is the reason behind this? What have you personally experienced that led you to believe ANY of this?

 

The beauty of everything I believe is that I can start with basic principles and axioms, and through sound reasoning, arrive at each and every piece of knowledge. More important of all, I can explain it to ANYONE. Not just those who are super gifted with "non-sensical" (not related to basic senses) vision.

 

#2, based on this idea, the number of souls should either remain constant or diminish. But in fact, there has been a consistent increase in the earth's population from waaaaaaay before Adam and Eve supposedly got kicked out of Heaven (by the way, it is very hard to understand what you believe because you rarely take a clear position. It's always some twisted unclear colorful and vague description). So do you believe that God put man on earth? Obviously you don't believe the concepts of Heaven and Hell as advocated by the Armenian Church and most major Christian establishments.

 

This is just one example of inconsistencies in what you say. I doubt anyone can argue that what I have said is inconsistent. I ADMIT that I don't know it all. What I do know is there is no evidence of God other than imaginative (or as you call, direct information fed into the brain). But for you to claim that I don't know what you know because you somehow (through this magical means) arrive at this knowledge that is not to be questioned, tested, or verified, places you in an extremely weak position in terms of convincing me of anything.

Edited December 9, 2005 by Sip

[vava]

Getting back to the reading of the Bible - and the inconsitencies within...

 

I've read the old & new testaments. I read them as literature - not as scripture. And yes, some parts were a slow go.

 

I feel there are very important lessons to be derived from the bible - more so in the new testament; as the old is quite 'hard'. I mean the God of the old testament is an entirely different beast than the god presented to us later on. On one hand we have a vengeful, almost insipid figure who demands (and needs) worship - some one earlier used the word 'dictatorial' - which contrast sharply from the God that Sasun described a few posts back - a loving, benevolent "father". If the latter is true - why do we hear all of the fear-mongering, "fire and brimstone" ranting and raving of the 'devout'?

Edited December 9, 2005 by vava

[aSoldier]

What I do know is there is no evidence of God other than imaginative (or as you call, direct information fed into the brain). But for you to claim that I don't know what you know because you somehow (through this magical means) arrive at this knowledge that is not to be questioned, tested, or verified, places you in an extremely weak position in terms of convincing me of anything.

 

There is a mountain of evidence of God, if you choose to believe it. Evidence can be rejected or accepted, no?

 

If we want to convince you of anything, we have to work on your level. All we can do is love and respect you. Your "accepting" Christ is a decision you must make by yourself. No one will force you to do so.

[Eloren]

[...]

As to me reading the Bible, like I said I have not read it all, and not even the New Testament completely. I consider the Gospels the most important books, and have read them completely (which I am doing again as Christmas is approaching). Every once in a while I will take and read from both Old and New Testaments. But to tell the truth, I don't find a lot of inspiring things outside of the Gospels. And many things are not clear to me (which explains why I am not in a hurry to read all books end to end). I prefer to read one paragraph and really understand it, rather than read a whole book mechanically. Oh, I have read the Reveletion by St. John and am convinced that this also must not be taken literally, as well as many things in the Gospels said by Jesus. This is my personal understanding.

[...]

 

Pardon me Sasun, but with all respect, isn't this self-brainwashing?

If every day of my life from my childhood I read Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" slowly, slowly. Feeding my brain with every story in it, every words etc.. Of course after a few years, you could always try to proove to me that elves, hobbits, gnomes, magic don't exist, i won't believe you anyway. Because i have persuaded myself, brainwashed myself by reading over and over the same book.

[aSoldier]

Pardon me Sasun, but with all respect, isn't this self-brainwashing?

 

Shortly put, no.

[Eloren]

Shortly put, Yes it is.

 

 

(Now which one of us is right? so easy to answer without explaining )

[aSoldier]

Shortly put, Yes it is.

(Now which one of us is right? so easy to answer without explaining )

 

 

Does LOTR have morals, teachings, blessings and prayers? Is it historically proven to be correct? Does it have any relevance to the world we are living in now?

[Anoushik]

Anoushik jan, as far as I remember in the last one or two years you have never ever agreed with me on religion/spirituality (and if I am wrong in this and it can be proven then as a penalty I volunteer to split this thread, which is not an easy task to do).

Of course not! You think there is a God and I don't

[Anoushik]

BTW, you have become surprising lately, how did that happen?

Oh? How so?

 

... Maybe surprising in the fact that I appear once in a while nowadays and get stuck to Hyeforum Well, I do have finals to prepare for

[DominO123]

This thread is becoming boring, me think I'll open few other threads about multiverse during vaccations and convince Sip and anoushik to be a Fadixian.

[Eloren]

 

Does LOTR have morals, teachings, blessings and prayers? Is it historically proven to be correct? Does it have any relevance to the world we are living in now?

 

As a matter of fact, yes there are morals, prayers, blessings in the LOTR.. Elven prayers, Dwarf blessings etc... Songs, morals etc.. All is there!

Historically proven? Is God historically proven? Jesus? Noa's Arch? Adam and Eve? All these are historically proven?

See? It's not very far from the Bible actually.

[aSoldier]

As a matter of fact, yes there are morals, prayers, blessings in the LOTR.. Elven prayers, Dwarf blessings etc... Songs, morals etc.. All is there!

Historically proven? Is God historically proven? Jesus? Noa's Arch? Adam and Eve? All these are historically proven?

See? It's not very far from the Bible actually.

 

 

Yes, all historians support the existence of Jesus, Noah's Ark, etc.

 

Oh and I wonder why you left the last question out, lol.

 

BTW, LOTR is a fiction...

[Eloren]

Sorry, I haven't seen yet historians admitting the existance of things from the Bible, if you could point out some links for me, i'd be grateful

 

I left the last question because i didn't understand it really, sorry

 

Yes, LOTR is a fiction, just like the Old Testament is a fiction mostly. If the LOTR was published thousands of years ago, we could have been praying to Elven gods? People were very easy to manipulate at that time. Anything that could scare them was easy to spread (burn in Hell if you don't follow God)..

 

Look at now, half the world is convinced that Jesus was born on the 25th of December.. which is totally wrong isn't it? Just because some powerful men played with the minds of the feeble minded population.

[aSoldier]

Sorry, I haven't seen yet historians admitting the existance of things from the Bible, if you could point out some links for me, i'd be grateful

 

I left the last question because i didn't understand it really, sorry

 

Yes, LOTR is a fiction, just like the Old Testament is a fiction mostly. If the LOTR was published thousands of years ago, we could have been praying to Elven gods? People were very easy to manipulate at that time. Anything that could scare them was easy to spread (burn in Hell if you don't follow God)..

 

Look at now, half the world is convinced that Jesus was born on the 25th of December.. which is totally wrong isn't it? Just because some powerful men played with the minds of the feeble minded population.

 

The bible talks about subjects that affect us today (money, sex, faith, forgiveness, love, etc). Does LOTR do that? As far as I can see, it's only about a ring.

 

I've only seen historians admit the Biblical stories to be true on TV and video, I'm not sure if you can find it on the net. I know you don't read the Bible, so please don't propose empty accusations.

 

No, people know Jesus was not born on the 25th, but they set it on that date because it was around that time period he was born. It is an educated guess.

 

But hey, you can pray to the "Elven" gods all you want.

[vava]

 

Does LOTR have morals, teachings, blessings and prayers? Is it historically proven to be correct? Does it have any relevance to the world we are living in now?

 

Funny, but within the context you've stated above, LOTR & the Bible have a lot in common.

[Sasun]

Don't get me started on sSeb again ... but Sasun, this back-and-forth is becoming very redundant between the two of us. I fail to see why you do not acknowledge there is absolutely no credible evidence of anything you are claiming, while I can provide a MOUNTAIN of evidence on everything I have claimed.

 

You say:

Ok, #1, what possible reason do you have for believing ANY of this. I know, I know, us who don't understand simply aren't as sophisticated as you to understand. But with all due respect, that just sounds like meaningless mumbo jumbo. In order for you to believe something, there has to be a reason. What is the reason behind this? What have you personally experienced that led you to believe ANY of this?

 

The beauty of everything I believe is that I can start with basic principles and axioms, and through sound reasoning, arrive at each and every piece of knowledge. More important of all, I can explain it to ANYONE. Not just those who are super gifted with "non-sensical" (not related to basic senses) vision.

 

#2, based on this idea, the number of souls should either remain constant or diminish. But in fact, there has been a consistent increase in the earth's population from waaaaaaay before Adam and Eve supposedly got kicked out of Heaven (by the way, it is very hard to understand what you believe because you rarely take a clear position. It's always some twisted unclear colorful and vague description). So do you believe that God put man on earth? Obviously you don't believe the concepts of Heaven and Hell as advocated by the Armenian Church and most major Christian establishments.

 

This is just one example of inconsistencies in what you say. I doubt anyone can argue that what I have said is inconsistent. I ADMIT that I don't know it all. What I do know is there is no evidence of God other than imaginative (or as you call, direct information fed into the brain). But for you to claim that I don't know what you know because you somehow (through this magical means) arrive at this knowledge that is not to be questioned, tested, or verified, places you in an extremely weak position in terms of convincing me of anything.

 

Sip, let's make it clear: you are saying what I have said is inconsistent. That would mean, for example, if I say ths sky is blue and also say that the sky is not blue. But from your post I can tell the following:

 

1) The so called inconsistencies are what you assume follows from what I say, and what you assume should have been. But it doesn't work that way, you should not assume that the conclusions you make are true and objective, or that I also make the same conclusions. In other words, if you want to show inconsistencies in what I say you should say this statement of yours contradicts to another statement that you made.

 

2) You are asking what evidence I have of the worlds and all that you don't believe: I don't have any evidence, and I never said I have evidence. I have presented it as a theory that I believe in. This is not an incosistency. The type of evidence that is relevant to metaphysical concepts cannot be physical which is what you are looking for. The only evidence I can give you is what I have made a mention of before: go beyond your senses and mind. There is evidence, but you should be able to see that evidence, and going beyond the material dimension of your being is necessary. I can't help you otherwise, and nobody can do. Now, I have said this before, but you didn't understand. This not magic, this is normal and everyone can do that.

 

3) Your argument on the number of souls is not correct, because your argument is based on your conslusion from my post. My post is not at all a comprehensive description of all that there is, it is only a brief fragment on the life beyond physical, of which I myself know very little, yet I could post a lot more (not that I am going to do so). As to the number of souls, I don't know if it increases or decreases or stays the same. From my post above it does not follow if the number of souls should be constant. However, souls evolve from mineral to plant to animal to human form, and souls can stay for any duration of time beyond the physical. So there is no way to tell what the number of human souls on earth should be.

 

4) As to my personal experience of these worlds, planets, etc... there is none, I didn't claim to have any, but I believe that those things can be experienced, because by meditation I have experienced things that I could not experience otherwise. But forget my experience, it doesn't matter if I had such experiences, what matters is that others have had such experiences. From your point of view, does it matter it is me or somebody else? When you want to learn physics you don't go and ask questions to your next door neighbor who has taken one course in physics. You instead go to an expert in the field, such as a physics professor. Therefore, my experience is not important, what is important is the experiences of mystics who are the experts in this field, and who also tell you how you can accomplish what they have accomplished. You are free to believe or not the mystics, however you are not in a position to reject their experiences.

 

5) Human knowledge is based on observation and logic. The axcioms that you mention are simply observations. The same way, the observations of mystics are axcioms of spirituality. But since you have not observed them yourself you don't believe. On the other hand, one can have faith in such things becuase faith is an intuitive knowledge of those things. And by faith I do not mean mental knowledge.

 

6) The ability to go beyond the senses and mind is not a gift, it is a matter of training and practice. I have never said that some people have the privilege to do it and other do not. What I have always said is everyone can do it with enough effort, including you. Some people are born with this, but it is not that they are gifted, they simply have practiced spirituality in one form or another in their previous lives.

 

7) THE PROOF OF THE PUDDING IS IN THE EATING. I can't say any simpler. If I said something unclear I can clarify, but I think we both agree that there is no need to go in circles.

[Sasun]

Sorry, I haven't seen yet historians admitting the existance of things from the Bible, if you could point out some links for me, i'd be grateful

 

I left the last question because i didn't understand it really, sorry

 

Yes, LOTR is a fiction, just like the Old Testament is a fiction mostly. If the LOTR was published thousands of years ago, we could have been praying to Elven gods? People were very easy to manipulate at that time. Anything that could scare them was easy to spread (burn in Hell if you don't follow God)..

 

Look at now, half the world is convinced that Jesus was born on the 25th of December.. which is totally wrong isn't it? Just because some powerful men played with the minds of the feeble minded population.

One example that comes to my mind is the story where the three kings come to see Jesus when he is born. This story is also recorded in India. There were three Indian kings that had the yogic vision of God being incarnated, and traveled to see him. They took three types of gifts, which are exactly the types of gifts common to give to newborns in India.

[Sasun]

Pardon me Sasun, but with all respect, isn't this self-brainwashing?

If every day of my life from my childhood I read Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" slowly, slowly. Feeding my brain with every story in it, every words etc.. Of course after a few years, you could always try to proove to me that elves, hobbits, gnomes, magic don't exist, i won't believe you anyway. Because i have persuaded myself, brainwashed myself by reading over and over the same book.

First of all, I don't read the Bible everyday. Second of all, every time I read the Bible I learn something new that I didn't understand before. Third of all, I read a lot of other things from other religions. Often that helps you understand your own religion better, because all scriptures have a common truth.

So the answer is, no you don't get brainwashed when learning the truth. The only washing that takes place is the washing of false ideas when you compare it to the truth.

Edited December 9, 2005 by Sasun

[Sasun]

The beauty of everything I believe is that I can start with basic principles and axioms, and through sound reasoning, arrive at each and every piece of knowledge. More important of all, I can explain it to ANYONE.

No, you cannot explain to everyone. You cannot explain to blind and deaf people anything at all, or people who cannot reason. The first because they are not familiar with your acxioms as they have not observed. The second becuase they do not have sufficient logic. In fact, I am not so sure that you will be able to present a sound reasoning for everything. No offence, but we all think that we are reasonable yet we disagree. You cannot find 2 people who agree on everything that involves reasoning.

Edited December 9, 2005 by Sasun

[Sip]

2) You are asking what evidence I have of the worlds and all that you don't believe: I don't have any evidence, and I never said I have evidence. I have presented it as a theory that I believe in. This is not an incosistency.

 

 

WOW! He finally said it. Aaaaaaaaallaho Akbar. Praise Jesus. Thank you Buddah.

 

Going back to what you and I both have said earlier, your version of reality and my version of reality are very different. I will never believe anything that I have no evidence of. You do. In my opinion, now this is just my opinion, no one should just believe things blindly like that. By blind, I mean without evidence. The term has been mentioned before but was brushed off under the rug with talk of how people like me are similar to deaf-mute people. The reason is, there are countless explanations and models that will describe anything without evidence. The chances of you having picked the right one, without proper evidence, is ZERO.

 

I will let Quebecker work out the math

[Sasun]

WOW! He finally said it. Aaaaaaaaallaho Akbar. Praise Jesus. Thank you Buddah.

This sounds like I have said the contrary before.

Going back to what you and I both have said earlier, your version of reality and my version of reality are very different. I will never believe anything that I have no evidence of.

 

Is that so? Don't you have faith in science? I am sure you have not done every experiment that led to scientific discoveries that we take granted in science books. I am sure you take 99.99% of the scientific truths by faith, and the rest perhaps you have had a chance of doing experiments in a lab. I know you will say but there is tons of evidence! Yeah, there is, but not yours You personally have had absolutely no first hand knowledge of these evidences. You personally have experienced nearly ZERO of the scientific truths. You take science and scientists by faith, and so do I. As to me, I also take spiritual science and spiritual scientists by faith. So my faith is not any more blind than yours

Edited December 9, 2005 by Sasun

[Sip]

This sounds like I have said the contrary before.

 

No but I think people like sSebB misunderstand you. He maintains a position that there is a LOT of evidence of God etc. But you acknowledged you just believe without evidence. I just wanted that to be crystal clear ... he thinks he agrees with you but in fact he does not.