cause-and-effect: "cause" require evidence too

[mikkel_the_dane]

You have no point. The scenario you offer has never happened, it’s not likely to happen, and frankly just implausible and ridiculous. If you find a gear in Antarctica that is many hundreds of millions of years well that’s gonna be a question for scientists. But as it is this hasn’t happened, it’s unlikely to happen, so it’s not really relevant to anything.

No, it doesn't work as an example. It could be aliens. We wouldn't know.

 

[F1fan]

So you believe a universe sprang into existance without any mechanism whatsoever, including time?
We have little idea of what time really is - it's perhaps the ultimate mystery of physics (forget dark matter, dark energy)
Yes, the big bang as Hoyle mockingly called it - is a fairly new concept, springing from the work of Hubble.

The effect of the Big Bang is the universe itself, no? Never heard that expression 'painting the bullseye around an arrow.'

Yes. It is any time a religious person claims that the universe is created by their God.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But how do you know what is real, unless you can somehow poke reality and confirm it to be real in reality?

I don't understand this word salad.

Reality is always in the now, whatever you think is reality, whatever you do is reality, regardless of opinion, regardless of your conceptual opinion. You don't believe in spirit, that is reality, you believe in spirit, that is reality.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What part are you having trouble with?

Again, ask any christian to describe to you "holy spirit" or "spiritual energy".

Likely you will get MANY different answers. Take any of them that feels "right" to you.

Now ask a physicist to describe what "dark energy" is. And put that description next to the description of "spiritual energy".

I guarantee you that they will be nothing alike and that in light of those definitions any attempt from you to try and claim that they are one and the same "because both are said to be omnipresent", will likely only trigger uncomfortable laughter.


And you know it.

So just drop this charade.

Human opinion, Christian and Atheist is just that, reality is on the other side of any and all opinions. But if a human mind is able to be still and free from thought, it ceases to have any opinion on anything, reality is present directly, not a thought about reality, not a conceptualization, but non-dual reality.itself.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Jesus didn't fulfill messianic prophecy. I realize that you believe otherwise, but a dispassionate look at the evidence was sufficient for me to see that Jesus isn't the Jew's messiah. It has been for the Jews, too. Suffering savior comments aren't specific enough, and overlook the other prophecies that Jesus doesn't fulfill.

Many Jews do accept Jesus as Messiah, and all the apostles were Jews!

If you really were a Christian, as you claim, then you would know that God offers mercy to sinners in advance of bringing judgement. This explains why some prophecy relates to the Suffering Servant, and some to the king Messiah at his return (which is still future, and unfulfilled).

Your present beliefs do not allow for a Messiah, but what you have argued above does nothing to explain how Jesus could be descended from David, be born in Bethlehem, come to prominence as a teacher and miracle worker, and finally die by crucifixion. Nor do you explain how a large company of witnesses could all have given testimony to Jesus' resurrection and ascension. That's before we talk about personal experience of the Holy Spirit following Pentecost.

I have provided you with a list of prophecies, all of which find fulfilment in Jesus in the NT. Are you suggesting that the NT writers manipulated the evidence to fit the prophecy?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What a random thing to say as a reply to that post.

Try actually responding to the points raised.

Try to understand that your mind thinks, it is in a state of duality, reality is forever on the other side of the thoughts. An enlightened mind is still and free from thought, this is a non-dual mind state, reality is present directly, there is not just a thought representing something real, but the real itself.

 

[F1fan]

No, it doesn't work as an example. It could be aliens. We wouldn't know.

Hey could be SpongeBob SquarePants for all we know. We can go down all the rabbit holes we want but it doesn’t get us any closer to clarity or understanding. We can do what ifs all day and that doesn’t get us any closer to understanding. This is why science uses facts and follows the facts to valid conclusions. Science doesn’t observe infections and thinks well it could be bacteria or maybe it’s aliens. Here take these antibiotics and if they don’t work well maybe it’s aliens.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I'm not convinced.

What I am convinced of is that you are using a typical religious debate tactic that accuses critical thinkers of "just not getting it". Yet the claimants, you in this case, can't offer any valid, factual argument, just more claims. The odd thing is how the religious claims are often arrogant, and this attitude or superiority reflects on the character of the claimant. And this shallow and immature status doesn't suggest to me that the person is tapped into some higher understanding.

Ok, using your dualistic mind, your thinking mind, you decide you are not convinced. You are not prepared to try and still your mind, to realize a mind free from thought, ie., a non-dual state of mind, to actually find out what spirituality is.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Isn't this what I predicted? I wrote, "Let me explain: I think most of what I read of this nature, whether it be from people calling themselves searchers or spiritual pilgrims is people trying to add magic to their lives with phrases that facilitate that. It gives them satisfaction to believe that there is arcane knowledge and a higher plane of existence accessible to a chosen few, and that they are or might be among them. So, I routinely ask them what they have discovered, and it's always poetry - words with no definite meaning that inspire rather than inform. There's never any there there. What need that others but not I seem to have is being fulfilled? Is life too mundane for some, not magical enough? If I have this all wrong, then perhaps you can show me the value of this kind of thinking to somebody who doesn't see it. More vague, flowery text won't do that. It needs to be concrete and specific. Are you now free from grief or anxiety? Has your reading comprehension increased? What would be lost to you if you reverted to your old dualistic state and lived life as a subject experiencing an object again?"

And look at your response - a dismissive, substance-free comment that ignored all of that content except to dismiss a very small part of it out of hand. Did I offend you with my opinions? Maybe you should have spent a moment explaining what it is you actually advocate and how it differs from the experiences I named if you could. Maybe you should have indicated the benefits of this thinking to you as requested if you could. Or maybe I'm correct - this is all fluff. You haven't given me a reason to think otherwise even after being explicitly asked to give me one if you had one.

Your answer, predictably, explains nothing. You don't even to attempt to describe what you mean or relate it to the examples I gave of altered ways of viewing reality except to just dismiss one and claim that the comment invalidates me and shows my incompetence at understanding you. Understand what? You've offered nothing but empty words with no specific meaning and nothing that you can point to.


He says as he enumerates another of his beliefs. As I said, you've got nothing there but a claim that you have some hidden insight or arcane knowledge, but it's all hat, no cattle. You can't describe or demonstrate any of it. But don't feel picked on. Nobody who makes the kinds of claims you made ever can. Ask people who tell you that they have discovered spiritual truth what they discovered, and it's the same crickets. I guess that playing that role satisfies some need in those playing it, but I really don't know what it is, as I have no such need - maybe because I've learned critical thinking and need no more mental power than that. That's power enough for me - to be able to generate an accurate mental map of reality with which to traverse it relatively successfully.

Tldr. You need to understand a mind in the non-dual state does not do conceptualization about reality, it is one with reality. There are no words, no concepts wrt non-dual state of mind. Otoh, there is never ending opinions, endless mental chattering being expressed by the mind in the dualistic state, the thinking mind state.

 

[F1fan]

Ok, using your dualistic mind, your thinking mind, you decide you are not convinced.

Yes, imagine that, using your rational faculties to make your conclusion.

And you have yet to explain what a dualistic mind is and what is wrong with it.

You are not prepared to try and still your mind, to realize a mind free from thought, ie., a non-dual state of mind, to actually find out what spirituality is.

Are you interviewing to be my guru? Well I don’t need one but thanks anyway.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, imagine that, using your rational faculties to make your conclusion.

And you have yet to explain what a dualistic mind is and what is wrong with it.


Are you interviewing to be my guru? Well I don’t need one but thanks anyway.

There is nothing wrong with the dualistic mind wrt being creative in mortal life, that's the whole purpose of it. However it will never in all eternity enable a person to apprehend absolute reality, only a mind in the non-dual state can realize the underlying unity of all that exists.

 

[F1fan]

There is nothing wrong with the dualistic mind wrt being creative in mortal life, However it will never in all eternity enable a person to apprehend absolute reality, only a mind in the non-dual state can realize the underlying unity of all that exists.

More woo woo, and no factual explanation. This is like Deepak Chopra speak. It sounds profound but it is just poetic nonsense that has no practical aplication in life. At best such folks can pretend they are enlightened, and that is called delusion.

And as I noted earlier you try to use this superior understanding of whatever to beat it over the heads of others. You seem to think its a club, but it's more of a feather. It's not exactly the character of an enlightened person.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Your present beliefs do not allow for a Messiah

My present belief is that the description of Jesus and the description of the Messiah in the Old Testament.

Many Jews do accept Jesus as Messiah

Should that matter? Most Jews do not. Does that matter to you?

what you have argued above does nothing to explain how Jesus could be descended from David, be born in Bethlehem, come to prominence as a teacher and miracle worker, and finally die by crucifixion

Why does that need explaining? What would need explaining is not the ways that the two accounts might overlap, but the ways they don't. Jesus was never the king of Israel nor a great military leader, is not known to be a descendent of David, wasn't named Immanuel, and did not achieve perfection on earth during his lifetime. Furthermore, the Jews reject the idea of God as man, that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, executed as a criminal, be a suffering servant, or return after death. The Jewish messiah is triumphant, not a whipping boy. Here are some of the specifics:

Jesus Did Not Fulfill the Messianic Prophecies What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? One of the central themes of biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4, 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34) Specifically, the Bible says he will:

• Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
• Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
• Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
• Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world ― on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9)

Regarding being a descendant of David, that means through the paternal ancestry. If he was born of a virgin, Jesus didn't have a human father.

Here's something you might find interesting: I was Bar Mitzvah'ed at thirteen and baptized in a lake at twenty.

Nor do you explain how a large company of witnesses could all have given testimony to Jesus' resurrection and ascension.

You can't conceive of a naturalistic explanation for you coming to believe that that happened - a resurrection that some people claimed to witness? I just saw a forensic science show about an innocent man convicted by the eyewitness testimony of six people, and was then exonerated for the crime by DNA evidence.

I have provided you with a list of prophecies, all of which find fulfilment in Jesus in the NT.

Yes, but they don't refute the argument that Jesus fails to meet multiple OT requirements for the Hebrew Messiah.

Are you suggesting that the NT writers manipulated the evidence to fit the prophecy?

I don't think I did, but I do believe that much of the New Testament mythology was created long after Jesus' death. I doubt he called himself a deity or a messiah. Nor was he bringing a new covenant. We need only look at the evolution of the gospels from Mark to Luke and Matthew. You've probably seen this before. Look at how much of the two latter gospels are not found in Mark:

Tldr.

That was too long for you to read? I wrote it in a few minutes. It just took me thirty seconds to read. Maybe you should have left your mind alone and not try to turn your hydrogen atom mind into a neutron. It's pretty unimpressive that you found a few hundred words too long to read. Wait until you see what books look like.

I'll leave you in @F1fan 's capable hands. He seems to see through your bluster and deepities as well.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

More woo woo, and no factual explanation. This is like Deepak Chopra speak. It sounds profound but it is just poetic nonsense that has no practical aplication in life. At best such folks can pretend they are enlightened, and that is called delusion.

And as I noted earlier you try to use this superior understanding of whatever to beat it over the heads of others. You seem to think its a club, but it's more of a feather. It's not exactly the character of an enlightened person.

You do not understand what is being said, you are using your mind in the dualistic mode, ie.. conceptual representation of reality. You can describe anything you choose, and the description will only ever be that, the real is forever beyond the conceptualization.
To apprehend the real, the mind must be in the here and now, the non-dual state, then there is no time existing to make distinctions, everything is present as one.

 

[Polymath257]

well you are assuming without evidence that something before the big bang existed

No, that is pretty explicitly NOT what I am assuming if I am saying that the universe has no cause.

It *would* be what I was saying if I said the universe DID have a cause.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

That was too long for you to read? I wrote it in a few minutes. It just took me thirty seconds to read. Maybe you should have left your mind alone and not try to turn your hydrogen atom mind into a neutron. It's pretty unimpressive that you found a few hundred words too long to read. Wait until you see what books look like.

I'll leave you in @F1fan 's capable hands. He seems to see through your bluster and deepities as well.

My point is that your conceptualizations are not real, they are mere words to represent the real. How real are you? Are you a conceptual representation pf reality or are you real, ie., existing beyond on the words? If you are the real beyond the conceptual description, no amount of wordcraft and vocabulary will ever in all eternity be able to convey that reality.

As I explained to F1fan, the dualistic conceptualizing mind is perfect for living a creative mortal life, but not for the religious.

 

[Polymath257]

ok how about the first person to ever saw a building made out of carved rocks? how did he knew that it was designed?

Stop and think about that a second.

The first person to see a building made out of carved rocks was the first person to build such a building. That person clearly knew the building was designed since it was designed by either him or whoever told him how to build the building.

my point is that at some point there was a fisrt person who infered design without prior knowledge

Only from similar cases that were known to be designed.

He knows as much as any educated human (say a scientists) about all the natural phenomena (wind water erosion etc.) that might influence the shape of the rock and it´s carvings.

But he is not aware of the existence of any humans,

In that case, a *hypothesis* that it was designed would be entertained, but not proven until humans were observed that made clocks. Whether that hypothesis would have any other evidence to support it is outside of this scenario. But at that point, it would be a hypothesis with rather poor evidence to support it.

 

[Polymath257]

Will you ever adress my point?

“metal gears” in Mars Antarctica or the Jurassic period would indicate design even if there is no prior evidence for designers ever living in those places/eras?

It would hardly be considered conclusive evidence. A LOT of alternative explanations would have to be eliminated before design would be supported.

 

[Bird123]

When creationists, whether it be YEC or Intelligent Design, used the designer & some designed product analogy, like watches, cars, computers, etc, the analogies tends to ignore the “human factor” as the designers and makers of these products in the real world. They are not some invisible and incorporeal spirits.

So outside of these unrealistic analogies, you could find out who these very human designers, such as their names, where they lived, who their parents are, who their spouses are if they are marry, what other things they do other than work as designers. They would have birth records, medical records, government records, driver licenses, etc, all evidence that they exist as people, humans.

You meet the people who make these things.

Using these analogies on God, Creator or Designer, make these analogies, as I said, “unrealistic”, ignoring the facts that no evidence support these invisible entities.

God definitely didn’t make these watches, cars, computers, etc, so there are no realistic basis using these analogies.

Analogies are great in the world of literature, like poetry, fictions, scriptural texts, songwriting, etc, because you are comparing one thing with some things completely different.

Analogies are bloody useless to sciences, because there are no real connections between what they are comparing in the analogies. Essentially, their reasonings behind the uses of analogy, would fall under the logical fallacy - False Equivalence.

Here is the definition of false equivalence:

​

Source: Logical Fallacies, that’s a link.

All analogies use False Equivalence.

But this is a debate forum on the subject of science, like Evolution or the Big Bang, versus religions with religious concepts, like creationism and Intelligent Design.

The problems are creationists who like and want creationism or ID to be taught together with sciences, like biology, or astrophysics & cosmology. They also wanted creationism and ID to have the same science’s validity as evolution and the Big Bang.

However, if they want to YEC & ID to be like science, they have to explain the reason for having God or the Designer, as well as physically test their concepts. So you would need evidence for cause as much as having evidence for the effect.

But, no, YEC & ID creationists are dishonest cheaters, because they wanted to bypass the testing parts that are required in Natural Sciences, that are essential in Scientific Method requirements, that is finding evidence for the “cause” as well as evidence for “effect”.

They know there are no evidence to support their claims of God, Creator or Designer, that’s why instead of using evidence or experiments, they used instead some stupid fallacious analogies to support their absurd claims.

And here the kicker, that creationists don’t understand: using an analogy is just MAKING UP ANOTHER BLOODY “CLAIM” that they can’t substantiate.

ANALOGY ISN’T EVIDENCE! ANALOGY IS JUST MAKING MORE CLAIM!

I have to agree that Poof creation is not reality. God created the universe to unfold in such a way that mankind is going to be able to figure it all out in time.

You must remember that religion teaches people to value Beliefs over all things. Since they have been taught to go no further, reciting Beliefs is all they have. Until they widen their views beyond their box of Beliefs, this is all you are going to get. Point the way in a different direction taking baby steps.

In this time-based causal universe God's actions can be seen. When you Understand God's actions, you will Understand God. If you insist God does not exist, it doesn't matter. Figure out how and why things are the way they are.

Widen your view and expand your thinking. More knowledge lives beyond the surface of things than you can imagine. God is High Intelligence working on multiple levels with multiple views. You need to stretch.

Science works on theories and beliefs that point the direction one might search to Discover the Real Truth. In kind, God will always be a belief or theory until you actually bump into God. After all. one might find evidence God exist, however physical proof of a Spiritual Being is not going to happen. Still, when one acquires enough Understanding of God, God's system and what is actually going on, one might just get a visit from God. This is the point where God will no longer be a Belief. This is the proof for those who really seek.

Go ahead. Follow science. Science is walking toward God. On the other hand, one does not have to wait for science in order to Discover the Real Truth for oneself.

It doesn't matter what others choose to do or believe. It's what you choose to do that counts. I merely point so that those who are ready might Discover for themselves.

Given enough time and lessons, everyone one is going to Discover what actually is, anyway. There is no need to get upset for any reason. Move the grain of sand and in time, the mountain will be moved.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!!

 

[F1fan]

You do not understand what is being said,

Correct, because what you are saying in incomprehensible. You don;t seem able to break it down into factual statements that anyone can comprehend, so, it's called woo woo.

you are using your mind in the dualistic mode, ie.. conceptual representation of reality.

Welcome to being a human being with language ability.

You can describe anything you choose, and the description will only ever be that, the real is forever beyond the conceptualization.

"the real is forever beyond the conceptualization"

This is such an excellent example of your woo woo nonsense.

Could it be you are trying to say something like the idea of an appleyour mind conjures is not any specific apple that is growing on a tree somewhere, it's just the general idea of what we understand are apples?

If so, how is this problematic? I understand the general idea of apple is not an actual apple.

If not, then you get even less credit.

To apprehend the real, the mind must be in the here and now, the non-dual state, then there is no time existing to make distinctions, everything is present as one.

More woo woo.

I'll tell you what, here is a challenge for you, put all your woo woo into a real life example. Show us with adequate detail how your woo woo works for the average person.