The only savior man has is himself

For intuitive and critical discussions, from spirituality to theological doctrines. Fair warning: because the subject matter is personal, moderation is strict.

Moderator: Dan~

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:08 pm

Greatest I am wrote:Oh my.

I cannot type I am shaking so badly out of fear. :oops:

I have a number of topics on the go. Go craze buddy if you think you have what it takes.

This one might be good if you think you have a winning hand.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=193075

The religious either ran from it or they just did not know how to refute what I put.

Regards
DL


Distraction tactics. Attempt to drag me off topic, off track and try to beat me with experienced stupidity.

In case you're wondering, I am not your Savior, I am not your King; I am not your Lord; and this will not be over quickly.
Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Peter Kropotkin » Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:15 pm

eaglerising wrote:Man’s inability or unwillingness to accept complete and total responsibility for himself causes him to believe in a savior outside himself. Being completely and totally responsible for himself is unacceptable to him because he wouldn’t be able to blame something or someone for his thoughts and actions. It is easier and more comforting to believe in a savior outside himself, regardless of what it is called.

Likewise, he doesn’t realize the only one who can change or resolve the problems he created, is himself. Furthermore, his uniqueness prevents anyone from saving him, because he is the only one who has the solution to the problems he created. Denial of his responsibility perpetuates the illusion of an external savor.



K: the question of a "savior" turns on the question of being saved....

what does man need to be saved from or saved for?

I reject the concept of human beings needing be to be saved....
because it implies that we needed to be saved....

I see nothing in human existence that requires us to be saved for or
from......

I reject the concept that humans need to be "redeemed"
because once again, I don't see what or why we need to be "redeemed".....

it is a false question and a false statement.. to be saved or to be redeemed or
to have a savoir implies that we need it and we don't.....it is enough
to understand that we are just human beings and that is enough....

Kropotkin
"Those who sacrifice liberty for security
wind up with neither."
"Ben Franklin"

The RNC has announced that's its changing the Republican emblem from
an elephant to an condom because it more clearly reflects the party's political
stance: a condom stands for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation,
protects a bunch of pricks, and gives one a sense of security while screwing others.

Kropotkin
Peter Kropotkin
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5971
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:47 am
Location: blue state

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Wed Jul 26, 2017 8:26 pm

I agree. As I've said countless times, they heap their sins on Jesus Christ in scapegoat fashion and expect to be saved from the consequences of their own actions, compounded by the 'sins' forced upon them in so many veins of force-perception, some of it rational and actual good psychology, the rest a bunch of bullshit. They refuse to face the father for what they do to the son in making him a whipping boy pack mule, what modern language would call 'bitch' in all terms of slang-use.

Exactly what is it they want to be saved from? Which of their fears in their nest of insecurities can they be saved from and if they are to be saved from them, then wouldn't it be by proper psychology through a reasoning engine that would be, if the fucker exists, God prescribed? Rather than some flashy son of man coming in waving his hands and snapping his fingers and flashbanging a Heaven on them all that they don't deserve and would ruin almost instantaneously.

They paint the proper picture, 'God is the beginning and the End, the Alpha and the Omega; we are made in his image; he is an authoritarian and disciplinarian, but he is fair; Beautiful and awesome in his majesty and terrifying in his wrath. They turned their God into their Devil and refuse to face the facts that Lucifer Morningstar is more of a fit heir to the throne than any Michael the Archangel or Jesus Christ. By his very name, Morningstar and the fact that God saves his toughest battles for his strongest warriors and he himself wades out onto the battlefield; what can they expect other than him facing their problems as just another individual, as an equal and solving them on the appropriate levels, since they apply to his levels as well. Equality.

And then, save them from what will find them anyway in just a moments distraction and so they hate their God for another reason, for being the perfect devil in giving them lessons in pain to counter the actual twisted ones with actual sound medicine by delivering to them their lessons in pain as inoculation and preventive medicine.

And that God would be born and raised as one of them, not knowing his weight until he grew into it, not some mind they can not fathom. Not some perfect being that is unsuited to judge the imperfect, but a motherfucker who is likely to swear, likely to indulge in drugs, likely to find himself homeless, likely to be anything other than the poster-bitch they want to make him into. And so much of eternity is beyond God and the devil, beyond that dichotomy, so they think themselves safe to tear apart his shit, only to find him in every aspect of life again, ever the warrior, ever the peacemaker, ever the vengeful one in waging a perfect war of righteousness and in peace for a peace that will never be able to be claimed or reached. They fear him, they want nothing to do with him, they think themselves better and have found themselves losing.
Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Wed Jul 26, 2017 10:00 pm

Some Guy in History wrote:
Greatest I am wrote:Oh my.

I cannot type I am shaking so badly out of fear. :oops:

I have a number of topics on the go. Go craze buddy if you think you have what it takes.

This one might be good if you think you have a winning hand.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=193075

The religious either ran from it or they just did not know how to refute what I put.

Regards
DL


Distraction tactics. Attempt to drag me off topic, off track and try to beat me with experienced stupidity.

In case you're wondering, I am not your Savior, I am not your King; I am not your Lord; and this will not be over quickly.


It will be at this rate. You challenge, I accept, and you call it a distraction.

Go away fool.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:41 am

Some guy, just to be clear....I think you are a child. You've got the emotional maturity of a 15 year old who just got dumped by his first girlfriend. You don't have a right to behave like an asshole...no matter what your mommy did to you. And again, to be clear, I mean for this post to be condescending, as well as pretty much every other thing I've ever said to you. You not a respectable poster, and you have the personality of a slice of toast.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 24645
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Mr Reasonable » Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:42 am

You're also a poor writer. Edit that shit for God's sake. Redundancy is a real thing.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 24645
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:55 pm

Keep talking your shit, both of you. I've gone through and formed and proven the theories on mental and spiritual time travel, mapped out the psychology of trolls and provided a hunters guide that preceded and paved the way for my later work in dealing with the unending legion. I have formalized and proven the theories of the existence of God, the Devil, all supernatural and paranormal. I have conquered politics by bringing it to its knees in dealing with gutterscum just like you. I've brought philosophy to its knees in practicality, eradicating the vaguenesses that allowed people like you to have too much power with your negativity and downward-pulling bullshit. I have performed a perfect righteous self-resurrection, seen the light of Heaven before it was blasted by the light of Hell, was glad to see the presence of things that would have each of you reacting in panicked terror.

And I'm not done, yet, this isn't me just stroking my mental cock; my ego. This is me serving you cold, shutting you down.

I have conquered and reformatted the English language to convey and express sentiments heretofore blocked out by the childish negativity and downward-pulling bullshit that I have already mentioned once and now twice in the same post for a different reason. I have lifted high reason with rationality to conquer even the devils drugs in the devils den as I perform the work of the Lord; my own damn self. I have had you asshats breathing down my fucking back, my fucking neck and just now and for a moment you get back to your feet and think you can come at me again and now further play games for gamings sake. I don't play games. I definitely don't play the ones not worth playing and while you shitheaded little cunts call it a game and fuck with me even now while I write and type this, in fact, I have sensed the same so many times over the years its not even funny anymore, to use a tired and cliche statement for the occasion. I sense your laughter, I sense your mockery while I type this, knowing you'll read it later and you are so caught up in me and my gravity, its not even funny. You are so filled with love of me that you turn it into a perversity and I'm tired of being raped by your attentions.

This isn't me being intimate. This isn't me being nice or sentimental. These swearwords aren't being said with sweet attachments to show how fond I am of you. I am telling the truth.

I want people like you to die. To die in the worst and most horrible ways possible; just to shut your punk-bitch asses up. Just to shut you up.
Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Thu Jul 27, 2017 8:30 pm

This is what they wrote of me before I ever even lived:

Matthew 21:38New International Version (NIV)

38 “But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill him and take his inheritance.’
New International Version (NIV)

Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.





Keep pretending you're not in my house. Keep up your attitudes and disrespect and scornful mockery and try to punk me and put me beneath and below you. Keep hurting yourselves as others did once upon a time screaming stupidities such as 'YOLO'. Keep breaking yourselves against me. Keep hitting your heads upon the unbreakable rock, the impenetrable barrier.

Image

Image



Do me a favor and wear this for me, for just a little while. Be careful, though; it hurts a little at first:

Image
Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Meno_ » Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:54 pm

Would hope man being his only savior beats being crucified, in full view, knowing or hoping against all hope not to give the impression that he really believed that his only begotten father abandoned him.

Why if fathers acted like this, how much more, friends ?
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:06 am

Some Guy in History wrote:This is what they wrote of me before I ever even lived:
]




Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Fri Jul 28, 2017 12:12 am

Meno_ wrote:Would hope man being his only savior beats being crucified, in full view, knowing or hoping against all hope not to give the impression that he really believed that his only begotten father abandoned him.

Why if fathers acted like this, how much more, friends ?


It happens that I am working on a new O.P. that I hope you can evaluate for me.

I try for a catchy title but sometimes miss the mark. Please tell me your thoughts on it.

===================

God the father, or God the deadbeat dad?

The use of the term Father in speaking of God is quite ancient and was around way before Jesus started using the term, even though he used son of man a lot more than son of God.

A son calling someone father in the proud way Jesus did is respecting a worthy father, but if we look at Yahweh, I do not see how anyone could be proud of such a father.

Yahweh is definitely portrayed as being quite vile thanks to his use of genocide, infanticide and punishing the innocent instead of the guilty quite often. Yahweh is also shown to covet Joseph’s wife, cuckold Joseph, produce a son and then take off for parts unknown leaving his responsibility for his son to others thus showing himself to be a deadbeat dad.

Scripture say that we are all sons of God. To be relevant to his children, a father has to be around to interact with them. It seems that God does not want to be relevant to us as he remains absentee and places us, his children, at the mercy of people who have written scripture more to enrich themselves than to give us the messages from God that they claim to know. Even though scriptures say that God id unknowable and unfathomable and his desires cannot be known.

My analysis of the bible and God does not show God to be a good father.

Do you, as a child of God, see God as a good father or as more of a deadbeat dad?

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Meno_ » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:09 am

Hello.

Honestly , I see, or rather, understand him to be both. He not yet a devil, Yahweh, that is, he has not yet become totally evil. By the time of Christianity, the Satan has become devil, and divided-into an either/or moral personification. I am drawn more toward a more objective view of fatherhood and the son, a more fitting description is drawn by gnostic view of Christianity, which is more akin to older auto-centric interpretations.

I think this accounts for a more ambivalent view of the relationship between the father and the son.
I think ambivalence is more fitting
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Meno_ » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:11 am

This is a very hastily assembled narrative, will get back on this to You tomorrow.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:28 pm

Greatest I am,

Does your username refer to God?

Let's stick with what can be known and stay away from what cannot be known.


Pray tell, where would we be knowledge wise and evolution wise if the scientists of the world had followed that mandate?

Why were we given the capacity to be curious, to wonder, to imagine, to think, to feel, to examine and to discover, ad continuum, if we were put on this Earth to stay away from that which cannot be known?

If we do indeed stay away from that which cannot be known, how do we discover that which can be known?

Oh you of little faith?! :P
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14852
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:29 pm

Meno_ wrote:
Hello.

Honestly , I see, or rather, understand him to be both.


Hello.

I see a bit of fence sitting my friend.

Are you saying that a deadbeat dad is a good dad?

He not yet a devil, Yahweh, that is, he has not yet become totally evil.


He is shown to use genocide and target the innocent instead of the guilty even to the point of torturing King David's baby for six days before finally killing it, all because he was angry with the King.

What on earth would Yahweh have to do before you would class him as totally evil?

What good do you see in Yahweh?

By the time of Christianity, the Satan has become devil, and divided-into an either/or moral personification. I am drawn more toward a more objective view of fatherhood and the son, a more fitting description is drawn by gnostic view of Christianity, which is more akin to older auto-centric interpretations.

I think this accounts for a more ambivalent view of the relationship between the father and the son.
I think ambivalence is more fitting


Gnostic Christian thinking is always superior to Christian thinking. Or at least that has been my experience.

As to ambivalence; my thinking patterns would reject that term as I am trying to take on more of the Christ mind based on the following.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

As an esoteric ecumenist, I could likely accept ambivalence if I followed some other method of enlightenment but cannot do so as a Gnostic Christian. My perpetual seeking after God, via Jung and Freud's Father Complex, in a sense, forces me away from ambivalence.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Fri Jul 28, 2017 2:41 pm

Arcturus Descending wrote:
Greatest I am,

Does your username refer to God?


To many theists, the "I am" part does, yes.

Christianity, even though the bible gives God that name, do not use the thinking that the name is supposed to have them take. They would rather be idol worshipers and have given God other names. Few think of God as I am and give up what I think of as their birth rite.

Let's stick with what can be known and stay away from what cannot be known.


Pray tell, where would we be knowledge wise and evolution wise if the scientists of the world had followed that mandate?


I think they have and that we would be just about at the same place.

What do you see scientists seeking that cannot be known?

Why were we given the capacity to be curious, to wonder, to imagine, to think, to feel, to examine and to discover, ad continuum, if we were put on this Earth to stay away from that which cannot be known?


Given? Given by whom or what?

We can ponder what cannot be known for sure but note how many war mongering religions we have been cursed with thanks to their believing liars who say they know what cannot be known?

Have you noted that most fantasy or supernaturally based religions begin with saying that God is unknowable and unfathomable and works in mysterious ways, and then continue with the reams of things they say they know and fathom of the unknowable and unfathomable.

Those religions, like Christianity and Islam, are obviously lying.

If we do indeed stay away from that which cannot be known, how do we discover that which can be known?

Oh you of little faith?! :P


You do not find the visible or provable by never having anything to begin with.

As to faith.

Faith closes the mind. It is pure idol worship.

Faith is a way to quit using, "God given" power of Reason and Logic, and cause the faithful to embrace doctrines that moral people reject.

The God of the OT says, “Come now, and let us reason together,” [Isaiah 1:18]

How can literalists reason on God when they must ignore reason and logic and discard them when turning into literalist?

Those who are literalists can only reply somewhat in the fashion that Martin Luther did.
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”

This attitude effectively kills all worthy communication that non-theists can have with theist. Faith closes their mind as it is pure idol worship.

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths. We cannot show our faith based friends that they are wrong through their faith colored glasses. Their faith also plugs their ears.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Arcturus Descending » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:52 pm

Christianity, even though the bible gives God that name, do not use the thinking that the name is supposed to have them take.

To many theists, the "I am" part does, yes


What to you is that thinking of *I Am* - I think that the rest of it is I Am Who I Am Becoming.


Pray tell, where would we be knowledge wise and evolution wise if the scientists of the world had followed that mandate?

I think they have and that we would be just about at the same place.


This is what you said:
Let's stick with what can be known and stay away from what cannot be known.


What do you see scientists seeking that cannot be known?


But this is just the point. Scientists and philosophers do not have that mindset. They will go about seeking until it is known or it has been confirmed that as of yet it cannot be known.
I think I must at least be partially right here. :-k Just my intuition.


Why were we given the capacity to be curious, to wonder, to imagine, to think, to feel, to examine and to discover, ad continuum, if we were put on this Earth to stay away from that which cannot be known?

Given? Given by whom or what?

Given by human evolution, consciousness, our own individual life journeys, the chemicals within our brains ~~ Everything in the Universe which gives us pause to be curious, to wonder, etc.


We can ponder what cannot be known for sure but note how many war mongering religions we have been cursed with thanks to their believing liars who say they know what cannot be known?

True. Beliefs can be both positive and negative and we love to believe that we know it all without question.


Have you noted that most fantasy or supernaturally based religions begin with saying that God is unknowable and unfathomable and works in mysterious ways, and then continue with the reams of things they say they know and fathom of the unknowable and unfathomable.

As for the first part, that has already become a contradiction in terms. If God is unknowable, how can we begin to know that a God works in mysterious ways.
As to the second part, I think we humans are just really contradictory in nature. Very often, we have no idea of what we are saying and we do not take the time to see if what we say is in harmony.

Those religions, like Christianity and Islam, are obviously lying.


It may not be truth or Truth but is it necessarily lying if it is done in good faith?

If we do indeed stay away from that which cannot be known, how do we discover that which can be known?


You do not find the visible or provable by never having anything to begin with.


What? So in a way, you are more like those above that you spoke of. That is your belief. What is it based on?


As to faith.

Faith closes the mind. It is pure idol worship.


I wasn't speaking of faith in the existence of God, for instance.
I was more speaking of the faith which a scientist would need to continue on with his or her work, *hoping* that something would come of it, would be made known.
I'm an agnostic.


The God of the OT says, “Come now, and let us reason together,” [Isaiah 1:18]

Well, it's a good thing that someone is trying to bring us all together to *reason*. :evilfun:

How can literalists reason on God when they must ignore reason and logic and discard them when turning into literalist?


Although i do know what the word means... :evilfun:

It can equate to the dictionary definition of literalism: "adherence to the exact letter or the literal sense", where literal means "in accordance with, involving, or being the primary or strict meaning of the word or words; not figurative or metaphorical".

Unless I am not following you here, I don't necessarily think that reason and logic are opposed to a discussion about God and the use of literal language. Belief IS though.


Those who are literalists can only reply somewhat in the fashion that Martin Luther did.
“Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.”
“Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.”


Yes, Faith used here is no more than embracing Belief.


This attitude effectively kills all worthy communication that non-theists can have with theist. Faith closes their mind as it is pure idol worship.


Well, that might not necessarily be true. It just depends on how open both are toward one another and how they are willing to withhold judgment and just listen to one another's views. Otherwise, you're right I think.

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths.

I may be wrong here but in getting into the true meaning and message of myths, wouldn't want also need to practice being literal ~~ to show what the real meaning COULD BE? Hmmm. :-k


We cannot show our faith based friends that they are wrong through their faith colored glasses. Their faith also plugs their ears.
[/quote]

Let's not forget that perception is everything. Are you really going to show them how WRONG they are? Where does the conversation go then? :-k
SAPERE AUDE!


If I thought that everything I did was determined by my circumstancse and my psychological condition, I would feel trapped.


What we take ourselves to be doing when we think about what is the case or how we should act is something that cannot be reconciled with a reductive naturalism, for reasons distinct from those that entail the irreducibility of consciousness. It is not merely the subjectivity of thought but its capacity to transcend subjectivity and to discover what is objectively the case that presents a problem....Thought and reasoning are correct or incorrect in virtue of something independent of the thinker's beliefs, and even independent of the community of thinkers to which he belongs.

Thomas Nagel


I learn as I write!
User avatar
Arcturus Descending
Consciousness Seeker
 
Posts: 14852
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Ecstasy on Earth.

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Fri Jul 28, 2017 7:56 pm

Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Sat Jul 29, 2017 2:04 am

Arcturus Descending wrote:[

What to you is that thinking of *I Am* - I think that the rest of it is I Am Who I Am Becoming.


When a Gnostic Christian accepts the concept shown in these quotes, he will name his God I am and mean himself, basically the way Jesus did in scriptures. This is not that I think a real Jesus as described in scriptures ever existed. Jesus is just an archetypal good man to us.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Pray tell, where would we be knowledge wise and evolution wise if the scientists of the world had followed that mandate?

I think they have and that we would be just about at the same place.


This is what you said:
Let's stick with what can be known and stay away from what cannot be known.


That is why I said I think. Not I know.

What do you see scientists seeking that cannot be known?


We are in a religion forum so what comes to mind is talking serpents and donkeys and a seven headed creature.

But this is just the point. Scientists and philosophers do not have that mindset. They will go about seeking until it is known or it has been confirmed that as of yet it cannot be known.
I think I must at least be partially right here. :-k Just my intuition.


Perhaps for some things but not what I put above. I hope.

Those religions, like Christianity and Islam, are obviously lying.


It may not be truth or Truth but is it necessarily lying if it is done in good faith?


I have a hard time believing that educated people will believe in talking serpents and donkeys.

Faith without facts is for fools and people want truth, not faith based lies. Again, that is a hope.

If we do indeed stay away from that which cannot be known, how do we discover that which can be known?


By seeking it out.

You do not find the visible or provable by never having anything to begin with.


What? So in a way, you are more like those above that you spoke of. That is your belief. What is it based on?


Eh, No.

What I meant by that sentence is that, for instance, if you are looking for a cold remedy, visible, real and functional, you have to begin with something visible and real, like a virus to bring to heel. If you do not have that to begin with then you can get to a remedy.

I was more speaking of the faith which a scientist would need to continue on with his or her work, *hoping* that something would come of it, would be made known.


I think a scientist would use the word hope, not faith.

It can equate to the dictionary definition of literalism: "adherence to the exact letter or the literal sense", where literal means "in accordance with, involving, or being the primary or strict meaning of the word or words; not figurative or metaphorical".

Unless I am not following you here, I don't necessarily think that reason and logic are opposed to a discussion about God and the use of literal language. Belief IS though.


I don't think I can agree but let us test that.

Please give me a logical and reasoned opening to a discussion on God so that I can see what you meant.

Yes, Faith used here is no more than embracing Belief.


Indeed. It is like saying, I do not want to know the truth and will settle for an unproven or un-provable belief.

This attitude effectively kills all worthy communication that non-theists can have with theist. Faith closes their mind as it is pure idol worship.


Well, that might not necessarily be true. It just depends on how open both are toward one another and how they are willing to withhold judgment and just listen to one another's views. Otherwise, you're right I think.


I think so as your caveat of being open is not there when we are dealing with people who go into intellectual and moral dissonance thanks to their faith.

Literalism is an evil practice that hides the true messages of myths.

I may be wrong here but in getting into the true meaning and message of myths, wouldn't want also need to practice being literal ~~ to show what the real meaning COULD BE? Hmmm. :-k


Some parts of myths can indeed be read literally and the message can come through, but not that many from what I have seen.

I use those three quotes above quite a bit in almost a literal way but if I were to read them completely literally, I doubt that the real message would come through. Give it a try if you like and see what you think.

We cannot show our faith based friends that they are wrong through their faith colored glasses. Their faith also plugs their ears.


Let's not forget that perception is everything. Are you really going to show them how WRONG they are? Where does the conversation go then? :-k
[/quote]

That depends on the listener and what he perceives.

If he perceives with this quote in mind, then all should be well. Most Christians do not know their bible that well though and their backs are usually up by the time I get to use it.

Proverbs 3:12 For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth.

It also depends if they can do this or not.

1 Thessalonians 5:21 Test all things; hold fast what is good.

That is a hard go when I am dealing with a theist that says he loves his genocidal son murdering God.

Once ones moral are that far down the scale, it is hard to bring him back.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Sat Jul 29, 2017 6:24 pm

Don't get it twisted, God does love his Genocide.

She's not your everyday beautiful
she's a fire burning in Hell's Inferno
Demon-born to God-found
she's got balls so big they drag along the ground

Genocide is her nickname
and killing is her favorite game
killing the ignorant slobs
pandering to a system she once hated
and so found herself fated
to go from failed project to Iron Maiden

Through Catholocism; wicca
touch her and she'll prick ya
her demon-son riding shotgun
in her body through a time-twisted life of hated fun
and in the heat of Hell's Kitchen
she threw down hard even as the King came dominatin

Thought she, herself, I must be evil
only to find a twist on that title
It felt right, as they, side by side
ran the gauntlet, the eternal fight
never knew she the enemy that he
she thought he ought to be
for never knowing him, found him a fellow warrior
shedding illusions that had been far beyond her

Shivers ran down her side; Genocide
as she slowly woke up to realize...

He loved her, or so it seemed
though twisted channels helped hide
the truth of it behind the Hunger Game scene
But he grabbed her up and didn't let go
said, 'you're coming with me,
for that very first look I remember you giving'

Was it a romance or a twisted game of depravity?
said he softly: 'it's why I hate even their complexity
for shredding to pieces hearts' fond simplicity
I could sum it all up with reason, but not without
too many words given, time spent
in a fucked-off creation
to which we are all partly to blame.
I admit,' continued he, 'I am quite cold and heartless
But I keep going with the love
until it wraps me up again and wakes me back up

Your paranoia plays one hell of a round
but it's just another pussy to pound
and part of my heartlessness is in case you're playing Me
ain't nothing in this eternity for free'

Genocide is her nickname
and she's God's favorite playmate

from children to grown adults
to eternity beyond eternities, through scars and insults
still taking on the eternal legion
still driving all life into oblivion
and back through the emptiness
through the depths of the great abyss
laughing and sharing the glory
of ultimate revenge, vengeance, making history
Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Meno_ » Mon Jul 31, 2017 1:19 am

A dead beat dad is the same as a good dad only in the manner which the spirit of parentige is considered. If the spirit in which parentige is concidered in good faith, then regardless of the out come, the dad was good. That he may have failed, due to external, unknown reasons, he may be considered a bad in that regard, only, if, his straying away was not an intentional act.

A good dad in all respects , or a bad one, has no absolute bearing on each other, only relatively speaking.

The only judge that can be said to have an absolute opinion is the baby, whose judgement on parenthood is based on the primary aspects of judgement: dad is good, if he is here, bad when he isn't. This type of baby thinking is mostly associated with good/bad mother, but I suppose, in absence of mother, father could also take on this aspect of baby cognition.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Mr Reasonable » Mon Jul 31, 2017 2:03 am

Some guy, get back on your meds you weirdo.
You see...a pimp's love is very different from that of a square.
Dating a stripper is like eating a noisy bag of chips in church. Everyone looks at you in disgust, but deep down they want some too.

What exactly is logic? -Magnus Anderson

Support the innocence project on AmazonSmile instead of Turd's African savior biker dude.
http://www.innocenceproject.org/
User avatar
Mr Reasonable
resident contrarian
 
Posts: 24645
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 8:54 am
Location: pimping a hole straight through the stratosphere itself

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Mon Jul 31, 2017 3:43 pm

Meno_ wrote:A dead beat dad is the same as a good dad


Sorry buddy.

I could not make sense out of what you put.

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Some Guy in History » Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:28 pm

I feel sorry that for all of this, you two and so many others have been what you called me in terms of weak, pussy, lame. Through it all, you've been the ones with impulse control problems that you refuse to work on and remedy. Your insecurities and inadequacies are far less than what I waded through and yet there you all still remain in yours. A pity that you all never really had to try at anything.
Image

A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. A man does not die of love or his liver or even of old age; he dies of being a man. Death is a distant rumor to the young. Life is eternal, and love is immortal, and death is only a horizon; and a horizon is nothing save the limit of our sight.
User avatar
Some Guy in History
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2415
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2014 1:26 am

Re: The only savior man has is himself

Postby Greatest I am » Mon Jul 31, 2017 7:31 pm

^^

Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

Regards
DL
User avatar
Greatest I am
Philosopher
 
Posts: 1482
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:07 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Religion and Spirituality



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot]