Face and hands change. All the objects of consciousness do. Consciousness doesn’t.
He doesn’t understand that.
Thanks Hamas.
I know hamas is the current trend right now.
Fuck. I walk down my own neighborhood seeing “free Palestine”. Put up by Jews.
Noam Chomsky is correct by saying sanctions should be put upon the Jews from the UN.
I’ll add to Noam Chomsky.
The Jews are the most xenophobic population in earth. And I’ll tell you a little secret about the cosmos and karma …. That’s why Hitler rose , as a mirror for the Jews.
I personally don’t care. I have bigger problems on my mind than Jews who believe they are the chosen people …. They’re going to kill the species.
I have cosmic on my mind.
I’ll say this again. The Jews should have been sent to Greenland
Jews pretty much control the world while victimizing themselves for everyone else’s sympathy, just another method of control.
Come take it little whore.
Wtf Pezer.
I’m nice to people so they’ll be nice back.
That makes me a whore.
I wasn’t talking to you.
What are you still doing here anyway Jason, I thought you were going to kill yourself so you could finally leave all of us and this Earth behind?
Unfortunately we don’t die. It’s Interesting to see people who think we die act out in the world.
The association of Noam Chomsky and socialism in general with genocidism is, of course, very on point.
Hahaha the least you could do is test it.
And, through the little whore Artimas and Hamas Felix, with faffy, meaningless New Age faggotry.
Pezer.
You’re out of line. I’m a multi resurrected being.
I’ve been resurrected in a human body more than Jesus.
I used 5 different techniques to use my whole soul to destroy existence, then I used 3 techniques to destroy my soul forever.
None of it works.
Cry about it, fruit.
Says the crybaby.
Unfortunately…
Even if I die in this parallel universe. I’ll just move to another one.
Been there done that.
Try to earnestly destroy existence first before you try to destroy my soul forever.
When I read the Bible, I thought Jesus was a genius. He said blasphemers had their souls destroyed in hell. So I tried to figure out how to blaspheme. Turns out you can’t do it. The Bible lied to me.
Now I’m much older.
I solved existence to the point that I even know what happens after we die.
Murdering me would be a very bad idea.
I solved existence. My life is invaluable.
If you want to prove a point to my moms tears, come and kill me right now. It will mot work out well for you.
I was given a mind again from your prayers.
Now that I have a mind again.
Meaning perception.
I have unfinished business with existence.
You know…. I could get you banned for a death threat. I don’t report people. Btw that’s two death threats from you…. Not just one.
Go figure. I learned how to add.
…still can’t spell (morays) mores, though…
Three:
What are you gonna do about this WILD horse, cowboy?
@felix_dakat I was waiting to hear from Bob, but since Bob didn’t reply, I will reply to Bob and make sure it is in alignment with the thread’s topic of consciousness.
“Our main differences lie in the supernatural, which I regard as unnecessary because the natural world presents processes of consciousness. God does not need to alter anything because the potential is all there, waiting to be realised. If Jesus was “God incarnate,” we all are.” - Bob
The natural (specifically: physical) world permits consciousness. That does not mean it is all that is necessary for consciousness to obtain. Then there is the issue of miracles, including the resurrection. Jesus perfectly fulfilled the Law and the Prophets (self=other) in his life, death, & resurrection. Only in Jesus dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily. See Colossians 2:9, John 1. You have to redefine the natural — expand its horizons — in order for God to “fit” in it.
“Occasionally, some people awake to the reality behind the illusion and describe what they recognise in various ways, depending on their cultural background. Often, it is in opposition to a teaching that they see as misleading and malevolent, just as Lao Tzu opposed the interpretation of Confucianism, Buddha rejected, amongst other things, the interpretation of Hinduism, the OT prophets protested the interpretation of the Law, and Jesus followed in their footsteps. Paul thought that the good news needed a wider audience, and so on.”
You have not said anything with which I disagree here.
“Then there is the Bible, an anthology of writings brilliantly brought together to offer an insignificant people significance.”
Actually, it was not for the purpose of offering them significance (Deut 7:7, 9:5). It was for the purpose of revealing God‘s nature to all the world. You see the “all peoples” promise in the Abrahamic promises (Genesis 12:1-3), fulfilled through Jesus as reflected in verses like John 3:16. This was not an invention of Paul. Israel is constantly reminded to remember they were once slaves and not to lord it over other nations or sojourners (as they once were)—by the master who became the servant of all (and had nowhere to lay his head). References upon request if needed.
“It is an epic story written in prose but otherwise comparable to all other epics. I can glean inspiration from multiple sources, including the Bible. I find the Gospels fascinating, each for themselves, and reject the idea of synopticism unless it is used to distinguish the various agendas of unknown authors.”
The Gospels’ authors are known and had a commitment to reporting the truth. The synoptics contain a lot of the same parables and such with some variations. It’s not just a story. It’s a true story. It’s also a great historical record. If you throw out the history it contains, by the same standard you would lose most/all of the history available to us in ancient historical documents.
“After years of studying the Bible in various groups, I realised that theology is just text interpretation, which we also do with other literature. You may see it the way one theologian interprets a text or as another does. I have often seen advantages in both interpretations but have failed to understand the contention. What is important for me is that human beings have their needs, and abusive interpretations cannot be true.”
Both? What if there are many? What constitutes an abusive interpretation?
“That seems to be our most apparent differences.”
This is confusing to me, because if you’re presenting the way you see things as a contrast to the way I see things, and yet I agree with some of your points, then it seems you actually do not understand the way I see things.
To bring it back to consciousness, you said, “the supernatural … I regard as unnecessary because the natural world presents processes of consciousness”
Do you think the natural world exists in a mutually productive way with consciousness (one could not exist without the other and vice versa), or do you think consciousness is the source of the natural world, or do you think the natural world is the source of consciousness? If you think consciousness is natural, do you think it begins/ends when biological processes begin/end? If you think it begins/ends with biological processes, do you think God’s consciousness begins and ends with the natural world? Would that make consciousness supernatural if you don’t think that?
Where our discussion started: My Theory of Consciousness - #92 by Ichthus77
In my reading, the natural or physical world doesn’t permit consciousness but is the form given by the underlying creative consciousness. When you get down to the micro-level, the physical is just form and not primordial “stuff.” Our awareness is filtered by our brain but does not originate there. It is primal consciousness when it is limited to the physical body, and occasional anomalies show that brain function inhibits rather than permits it.
While the Christian interpretation aligns with this perspective, Jewish Rabbis argue that Paul’s exegesis was not orthodox. They claim that he reinterpreted OT scriptures to suit his own agenda. Paul’s influence is evident throughout the Gospels (except, perhaps, Mark), which is unsurprising considering they were written and sorted after Paul’s time. It is important to acknowledge the church’s active role in standardising its teachings and suppressing or critiquing alternative interpretations, a practice also observed in the scribes who compiled the OT anthology.
Jesus was a man who, through whatever influence, became aware of his unity with the divine and all of creation and who interpreted Jewish scriptures in that sense. It was already happening when the prophets were being incarcerated and killed, but he seems to have felt called to spread it as “Good News” and be the first suffering servant. This is why he was revered as an exemplary man and said to be called into God’s presence like prophets before him.
The Gospel writers are not known, and they all have an agenda. If they were “reporting the truth” in the modern sense of the word, there wouldn’t be so many variations in the Gospels. The Gospels are interpretations of what happened. If at all historical in our modern sense, Mark is probably closer. His was less “Good News” than written in the style of a tragedy.
Anything that encourages division and maltreatment of human beings.
You may agree with me on some points, but clearly not on important points.
From what we can surmise, I assume that consciousness creates form, and form creates the material universe. However, consciousness also sustains the material universe and is within it but also transcends it.
When biological processes end, the material body decays, but consciousness does not. It is no longer limited to a physical body.
The natural world is in and of consciousness, and so it is either all supernatural or none of it is. There is no difference, but like H2O, which is steam, water, and ice, primal consciousness takes on the forms we witness.