• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

God

Beaudreaux

Well-Known Member
(Commenting on whether his claim that "There is no Universal Right and True to be found" also refers to itself.)No. That was not a statement within itself - only part of a sentence helping explain the paragraph. Below....)
I don't want to misrepresent you, so allow me to be direct. Do you believe that the statement "There is no Universal Right and True to be found" is universally true or not? Either you do or you don't (one of those mutually exclusive situations again).
 

Beaudreaux

Well-Known Member
Not true.

For instance the first Noble Truth. The truth of suffering. Universally true for all sentient beings.

Another:

All phenomena lack inherent existence. True of all phenomena.

(thought I'd wade into this just for the fun of it)
I agree with you, Allah. Judgement and I have completely different views of the world. Judgement is a Moral Relativist. He does not believe that there is an objective right and wrong. He also does not believe that there is anything that is absolutely true with regard to religious belief.

I don't understand how people can hold this position. First of all, it is self-stultifying. The statement "There is no absolute truth" is put forward as.....(wait for it)......an absolute truth! If it is not an absolute truth, then it is just his opinion and has no meaning for the rest of us. In Judgement's world, nothing anyone says about religion is true, including what he says himself.
 

mohammed_beiruti

Active Member
Mohammed, Again you are not really saying anything huh?

There is confusion in both.. So I guess there must be other gods besides Allah, right?

there is no confusion, the system of the universe is consistent, that highly indicates the existance of the one God.

besides, read the following sign

Qura'an Ch.23 Believers

[91] No son did Allah beget, nor is there any god along with Him: (if there were many gods), behold, each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have Lorded it over others! Glory to Allah! (He is free) from the (sort of) things they attribute to Him!
 

mohammed_beiruti

Active Member
So.. what is to become of the Unbelievers of Allah?

they mean there is no creator!
then who created us?

Qura'an Ch.36 Ya sin

[77] Doth not man see that it is We Who created him from sperm? Yet behold! he (stands forth) as an open adversary!

those who claim such a thing they just follow thier passions or feeling that they are not perfectly sure of.

Qura'an ch.25 Furqan

[43] Seest thou such a one as taketh for his god his own passion (or impulse)? Couldst thou be a disposer of affairs for him?


[44] Or thinkest thou that most of them listen or understand? They are only like cattle; nay, they are worse astray in Path.
 

mohammed_beiruti

Active Member
Allah is Muhammad's fantasy. You're free to make it yours as well if you wish however you're not free to force your fantasy on me or others who choose to reject the fantasy. Allah no more created my world than did a fetid dingo kidney.

Qura'an Ch.46
[8] Or do they say, "He has forged it"? Say: "Had I forged it, then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah. He knows best of that whereof ye talk (so glibly)! enough is He for a witness between me and you! and He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."


[9] Say: "I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the Messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration: I am but a Warner open and clear."


[10] Say: "See ye? If (this teaching) be from Allah, and ye reject it, and a witness from among the Children of Israel testifies to its similarity (with earlier scripture), and has believed while ye are arrogant, (how unjust ye are!) truly, Allah guides not a people unjust."
 

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
they mean there is no creator!
then who created us?

Oh fun fun fun! Someone finally asked. : hamster :

Christians call it the soul. Buddhists call it the mental continuum or mind. Anyway it is said that this essence of us - our spark of existence so to speak - is neither created nor destroyed. Technically that's not quite correct for our minds are continuously created only by a former moment of mind - but it was never created by some outside force. We (our souls) have always been and will always be.

Now about the physical world the flesh. That's a different kettle of fish but even here no 'God' necessary unless one chooses to label the one thing that makes it possible* for all things to arise but this one thing would not be thought of as God by those who subscribe to the God idea.

* possible a bit iffy term in this instance but best I could do for now.
 

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
Qura'an Ch.46
[8] Or do they say, "He has forged it"? Say: "Had I forged it, then can ye obtain no single (blessing) for me from Allah. He knows best of that whereof ye talk (so glibly)! enough is He for a witness between me and you! and He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."


[9] Say: "I am no bringer of new-fangled doctrine among the Messengers, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you. I follow but that which is revealed to me by inspiration: I am but a Warner open and clear."


[10] Say: "See ye? If (this teaching) be from Allah, and ye reject it, and a witness from among the Children of Israel testifies to its similarity (with earlier scripture), and has believed while ye are arrogant, (how unjust ye are!) truly, Allah guides not a people unjust."

Now you know as well as I do that throwing scripture at us to prove that scripture came from God and not a fantasy of a so called prophet is laughable. It's like trying to prove the innocence of a thief by reading his explanation of the theft.
 

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
there is no confusion, the system of the universe is consistent, that highly indicates the existance of the one God.

It is just as likely that because the universe appears to unfold in a particular fashion that there is no controling hand. It makes more sense to say that it is simply the way of the unfolding - nothing more. Your comment proves nothing.
 

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
It seems primitive (and rather child-like) to me to view the falling of a tree as being the work of some god. That all the enexplained happenings in our lives are controlled by a supreme diety. If we don't know why things happen it's not necessary to make up a story about it. You can of course but it's just a fantasy. Maybe it's wishful thinking or perhaps a method of controlling others but it's not true just because people want it to be true. Things happen because things happen. This is a far more profound explanation and one that actually makes more sense than a giant grandfather wagging his giant finger to make things dance about. Kind of like the Tooth Fairy story but we grew out of that. We can grow out of this giant Grandfather idea as well.
 

Freelancer7

Active Member
I believe.... God is bigger than most religions realize & there is only one true God. God is every Atom & Molecule & Quark, God is your PC and the desk it sits on, God is Me & You, God is all of our thoughts, God is every Heaven & Hell... every religion, God is the Trees & Rocks & Oceans, God is the Earth & Solar System, God is the Galaxy & Universe - every Universe and every dream, God is - All That Is. Debate anyone?

Nice, I suppose that means that all is, 'OF GOD' unless the Word fundamentalism:
Fundamentalism??!! Perhaps, Possibly the Lord Almighty misjudged when it came to Fundamentalism under nationalism come Tribleism?! Let alone severe pain and suffering, let alone bloodshed and warfare due to religious establishment’s global domination, but we all know about that. sorry for old news
 

Bishadi

Active Member
Oh fun fun fun! Someone finally asked. : hamster :
that little guy is cute
Christians call it the soul. Buddhists call it the mental continuum or mind.
but in both the idea that 'mind' of a soul retains its memories as isolated is foolish to say the least. See any alzheimers patient and tell us what happened to their soul.

Or better yet, what did you eat for lunch 7 days before your 3 birthday? (did your soul forget?)

memories are bound to the body (fixed structures upon glial)

Anyway it is said that this essence of us - our spark of existence so to speak - is neither created nor destroyed. Technically that's not quite correct for our minds are continuously created only by a former moment of mind - but it was never created by some outside force. We (our souls) have always been and will always be.
practically funny.... as it would mean 6 billion (individual) souls existed 20 thousand years ago and in 100 yrs the numbers will not change.

The 'collective' conscious is perhaps what you are pointing at. In which any person can tap into that at any moment. (experiencing the total as ONE)

Now about the physical world the flesh. That's a different kettle of fish but even here no 'God' necessary unless one chooses to label the one thing that makes it possible*
the 'process' .........

for all things to arise but this one thing would not be thought of as God by those who subscribe to the God idea.

* possible a bit iffy term in this instance but best I could do for now.

i agree........... as most still see god as separate versus seeing existence as the whole as god. The collective conscious can be observed as the entangled energy (light) between all mass (within the whole universe/existence)
 
Last edited:

Bishadi

Active Member
[/color][/size][/font][/color][/font][/size][/font]
Do you believe that the statement "There is no Universal Right and True to be found" is universally true or not? Either you do or you don't (one of those mutually exclusive situations again).

There is a universal 'right'......

Truth on the other-hand can be tainted by opinions. Truth is measured by whether it 'exists' or not. The lie exists but do the words represent truth; that is what 'we the people' must always weigh.

Which can be done within the understanding of 'right' or as i use the terms 'good and bad'.

Life is 'purposed to continue'......... a universal law found in nature (see instinct)

Mankind on the other hand has a unique gift; consciousness. The ability to know 'good and bad' or purely to either 'support life to continue' or be a 'loss to the common'.

We are mass that can choose rather then follow the 'universal law' (instinct)

we left the garden by choice

such that within, we were instinctive (always on the good)

but then choice was born

we could then take, lie cheat, steal etc etc etc.... for our own purpose (selfish) rather than simply 'to continue'

them points of every choice have a measuring that can be observed that is true to all existence rather than simply opinions

Life: purposed to continue

Choices;

Good: supports life to continue

Bad: loss to the common

at every interaction weigh these for a each choice and see, 'do they apply?'

supporting life is such to give of yourself for life to progress (continue). Whether it be knowledge, plant seed in good soil (we can observe what is good/bad) or giving of you self (sperm/egg) to continue your lineage (your whole families life)...

you live in what you do and have the ability to choose...........

kind of cool
 
Last edited:

Freelancer7

Active Member
that little guy is cute

but in both the idea that 'mind' of a soul retains its memories as isolated is foolish to say the least. See any alzheimers patient and tell us what happened to their soul.

The mind is a separtae voice that is within the brain. The voice of the soul runs through the body. If you concentrate you can speak inyour mind then if you listen to your heart you can speak through your body, a different voice altogether, it's the two voices understanding each other is true harmonisation of Body, Mind and Soul?!
 

Bishadi

Active Member
The mind is a separtae voice that is within the brain. The voice of the soul runs through the body. If you concentrate you can speak inyour mind then if you listen to your heart you can speak through your body, a different voice altogether, it's the two voices understanding each other is true harmonisation of Body, Mind and Soul?!

an eastern flare to that approach but to some that could be considered scary (psychology)

try observing the scientific approach; then think about the soul

the religious references often suggest the soul is some spirit within your body and 'good guys and bad guys' can take over 'your soul'............... but that's all poppy cop.

as none decide for another, nor are there 2 isolated forms controlling your body

it is just you and your conscious observing choices. Your heart is often what shares the value (whether the choice is good or bad).... and why often within a conflict may ensue. The self often 'wants'.... where the conscious often knows better. (your conscious is far better in tune with existence whereas the mind often subdues the conscious)

The mind is of memories and one bash in the head and all of them could be gone.

as well you could learn something and completely over look your conscious or 'feelings' on the matter.

At the very beginning of this thread much of the 'mind' is addressed but if you have particular items we can go over them if you like.

think of your body as a collection of mass, alive that enables a consciousness to experience itself. That consciousness is the entangled energy of your life. It is not of mind, nor of soul, of spirits, or ghosts... The consciousness is energy (light) upon the mass (like the aura)......... which can be described as a soul, spirit, ghost...etc But not a separate thing.
 

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
that little guy is cute

Isn't he ever!


but in both the idea that 'mind' of a soul retains its memories as isolated is foolish to say the least. See any alzheimers patient and tell us what happened to their soul.

Or better yet, what did you eat for lunch 7 days before your 3 birthday? (did your soul forget?)

memories are bound to the body (fixed structures upon glial)

The soul or mental continuum (and keep in mind here that the two aren't quite the same thing) isn't the brain. It's the brain which holds memories.



practically funny.... as it would mean 6 billion (individual) souls existed 20 thousand years ago and in 100 yrs the numbers will not change.

The 'collective' conscious is perhaps what you are pointing at. In which any person can tap into that at any moment. (experiencing the total as ONE)

No that's not what I'm talking about. We all have an individual mind (or soul). My understanding is that no mind is lost nor are any new ones created. There are an infinite number of worlds where these minds can arise so numbers aren't a problem.
 

Bishadi

Active Member
The soul or mental continuum (and keep in mind here that the two aren't quite the same thing) isn't the brain. It's the brain which holds memories.

What soul or mental continuum? Share what that is to an alzheimers patient.

Share what that is when you are sleeping. Then share what that is when dead.

As well in each show something tangible as applied to natural existence versus the 'opinions' of faith. (show me the science of a soul or mental continuum)

No that's not what I'm talking about. We all have an individual mind (or soul).
mind is memories and consciousness; the combination (human). Where as consciousness can exist without memories (alzheimers) as well memories can exist without consciousness (rainman or most any animal in nature).

My understanding is that no mind is lost nor are any new ones created.
Ok..... so your opinion has learned these are existing 'things' rather than the state of a 'thing'.

There are an infinite number of worlds where these minds can arise so numbers aren't a problem.
Only one world i experience, when i wake up.

The collective is like observing the gravity of all matter; it is associated, always.

Such that the force of mass, in a collective is greater than a single.

The collective conscious exists within the entangled state of all mass.

It is when we are alive we experience in this plane (dimension) we call life. But when you stop waking up, your mind is not going any place. You still exist right where you sit and all that you have imposed to existence while your body (mass) had choice, is the 'ever-lasting' life most want to understand.

your mind is not going any place. The memories are bound to the body and the mass is not keeping the consciousness of the individual alive. (no more waking up, no more choice; but you still live in everything you did)

none can take that away
 

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
What soul or mental continuum?

The one postulated by Buddhists.

Share what that is to an alzheimers patient.

Again mind (or mental continuum) and brain are not the same. The mind doesn't even reside in the head. It's said it resides in the heart chakra.

Share what that is when you are sleeping. Then share what that is when dead.

Dreams. As to dead I'll have to let you know. ;)

As well in each show something tangible as applied to natural existence versus the 'opinions' of faith. (show me the science of a soul or mental continuum)

Show me the scientific existence of God.

mind is memories and consciousness; the combination (human). Where as consciousness can exist without memories (alzheimers) as well memories can exist without consciousness (rainman or most any animal in nature).

Let's not get bogged down in semantics. Memories reside in the brain.

Ok..... so your opinion has learned these are existing 'things' rather than the state of a 'thing'.

Yes they exist though not inherently. The state of being would be the results experienced byy Karma.

Only one world i experience, when i wake up.

Good, otherwise we might have to check you into a hospital.
 

Bishadi

Active Member
The one postulated by Buddhists.
ah, then share the tantric doctrine that uses the term 'mental continuum'

otherwise, what you speak is but an attempt to combine the idea of the old philosophies

when speaking buddhism remember there is more material available supporting more contradictions than the three ladies of the abrahamic sects combined

the teachers shared ideas but like each pieces were missed

Again mind (or mental continuum) and brain are not the same. The mind doesn't even reside in the head. It's said it resides in the heart chakra.
You are stealing a word 'mind' and trying to re-define it.

mind is all about the head

you are trying to take words that don't apply and it seems you have a hard head on the subject
Dreams. As to dead I'll have to let you know. ;)
in both cases, your mind didn't go any place

Show me the scientific existence of God.
Mass, energy, time: the boss..............existence itself.... not some person, place or thing.

Let's not get bogged down in semantics. Memories reside in the brain.
and a brain with a conscious makes for a mind

Yes they exist though not inherently.
do you mean 'not separately?'

The state of being would be the results experienced byy Karma.
i state i be when i wake up.......... 'when' else can you 'be'.....not even you know what on deaths side. when you were dropped on your head, you were taught from there forth, memories didn't come with the package.

Good, otherwise we might have to check you into a hospital.

what was that for? being honest and expecting to keep words of the english language with the definitions that apply............. :run:
 
Last edited:

Alla Prima

Well-Known Member
You are stealing a word 'mind' and trying to re-define it.

It is a term used often in Tibetan Buddhism as is Mental Continuum.



in both cases, your mind didn't go any place

So what?

Mass, energy, time: the boss..............existence itself.... not some person, place or thing.

Doesn't prove the existence of God.


and a brain with a conscious makes for a mind

That's one meaning of mind.

do you mean 'not separately?'

No, inherently as in the lack of essence. Existing dependently.
 
Top