Is the universe infinite or finite?

[ratiocinator]

Yes, dualism can never result in true understanding because the objective universe is the tip of an iceberg. like being only 5% of the universe.

You haven't said why you claimed science deals with things from a "dualistic pov" and you have given no justification for the 5% claim.

That is why you can not understand what is being said to you about the universal now, the universal now is the 100%. In correct religious practice, the other inner 95% begins to be realized in a subjective manner.

So science deals with the objective 5% of reality, and religion is meant to complement the 5% with another 95% to make 100% of reality.

Why should take these (apparently baseless) claims at all seriously?

...the error of the scientific atheism...

What's "scientific atheism" and what is its error?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You haven't said why you claimed science deals with things from a "dualistic pov" and you have given no justification for the 5% claim.

Why should take these (apparently baseless) claims at all seriously?

When the mind sees the universe and it apparent parts as separate from itself, that is dualism. Is that not how you see it? .On the question of the the 5% mass of the universe that science deals with, I am surprised you are unaware... baseless..
"Humans, along with everything on Earth and everything we have ever discovered in space, constitute less than 5 percent of the universe. This type of matter, also known as “ordinary matter,” is minuscule when compared to dark matter, which, when combined with dark energy, forms the remaining 95 percent of the universe. Interestingly, the dark matter that composes the majority of the universe remains a mystery to astrophysicists and cosmologists alike."
In the Dark: 95 Percent of the Universe Remains Unexplained | The Bottom Line UCSB

What's "scientific atheism" and what is its error?

Atheists with a closed mindset who do science. The error is their ignorance of the 95%.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Atheists with a closed mindset who do science. The error is their ignorance of the 95%.

Are you suggesting science would be more accurate (less ignorant) by including the unknown 95%?
That seems...well...unlikely.

 

[ratiocinator]

When the mind sees the universe and it apparent parts as separate from itself, that is dualism. Is that not how you see it? .On the question of the the 5% mass of the universe that science deals with, I am surprised you are unaware... baseless..
"Humans, along with everything on Earth and everything we have ever discovered in space, constitute less than 5 percent of the universe. This type of matter, also known as “ordinary matter,” is minuscule when compared to dark matter, which, when combined with dark energy, forms the remaining 95 percent of the universe. Interestingly, the dark matter that composes the majority of the universe remains a mystery to astrophysicists and cosmologists alike."

So when you said "In correct religious practice, the other inner 95% begins to be realized in a subjective manner.", you were making a claim that your 'correct religious practice' can lead to an understanding of dark matter and dark energy? Do publish and invite me to your Nobel ceremony.

Atheists with a closed mindset who do science.

Wanting reasoning and/or evidence before accepting something is not a 'closed mindset', it is basic logic, that applies to science just as much as anything else.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Are you suggesting science would be more accurate (less ignorant) by including the unknown 95%?
That seems...well...unlikely.

Yes, by being cognizant that they are only dealing with 5%, and that the 95% obviously has a part to play in the workings of the universe, they should be a little more circumspect about what is settled science. In fact since religion has always maintained spirit is omnipresent, it raises the question, could there universal consciousness involved.

 

[ratiocinator]

Yes, by being cognizant that they are only dealing with 5%, and that the 95% obviously has a part to play in the workings of the universe...

It's the part they are playing in the workings of the universe that is the only reason we know they are there. Nobody is ignoring this, but work is ongoing and none of it changes the best theories we have to date. A gap in science doesn't make anybody's unfounded assertions any more believable.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yes, by being cognizant that they are only dealing with 5%, and that the 95% obviously has a part to play in the workings of the universe, they should be a little more circumspect about what is settled science. In fact since religion has always maintained spirit is omnipresent, it raises the question, could there universal consciousness involved.

It can raise the question philosophically. But no-one should be attempting to answer that scientifically. Not theists, nor atheists.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So when you said "In correct religious practice, the other inner 95% begins to be realized in a subjective manner.", you were making a claim that your 'correct religious practice' can lead to an understanding of dark matter and dark energy? Do publish and invite me to your Nobel ceremony.

If you understood an earlier post on this subject, transcending the ego self mind that deals with the 5% to be at one with the 100% involves transitioning self identity from matter to spirit, in the process, the dualistic mind that deals with the stuff atheists are tied up in, is no more.

Wanting reasoning and/or evidence before accepting something is not a 'closed mindset', it is basic logic, that applies to science just as much as anything else.

Yes it is a closed mind. You need to knock at the door before it will be opened for you with religion, no knock, no answer.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It can raise the question philosophically. But no-one should be attempting to answer that scientifically. Not theists, nor atheists.

Perhaps this is not the moment, but in time, science may become warm once more to the possibility that there may be more to religious traditions than merely the myths.

 

[ratiocinator]

If you understood an earlier post on this subject, transcending the ego self mind that deals with the 5% to be at one with the 100% involves transitioning self identity from matter to spirit, in the process, the dualistic mind that deals with the stuff atheists are tied up in, is no more.

Assertion. And if it actually gave you any insight, why can't you tell us anything useful about dark matter and dark energy and get your Nobel?

Yes it is a closed mind.

It's basic sanity. Either you need reasons to accept propositions, you accept all (unfalsifiable) propositions (leading to accepting contradictions), or you abandon any notion of approaching things logically and just believe what you like.

You need to knock at the door before it will be opened for you with religion, no knock, no answer.

Pretty much meaningless. Even if there was some truth in this, one would expect all people who 'knock' (search for truth in religion?) to reach the same conclusions. They obviously don't.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Perhaps this is not the moment, but in time, science may become warm once more to the possibility that there may be more to religious traditions than merely the myths.

Well, yes and no. There is no one religion and no one sets of coherent religious traditions. As an atheist, I can learn techniques in religion without being religious.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It's the part they are playing in the workings of the universe that is the only reason we know they are there. Nobody is ignoring this, but work is ongoing and none of it changes the best theories we have to date. A gap in science doesn't make anybody's unfounded assertions any more believable.

But to an atheist, all things religious appear unfounded because of the closed mind. They are not unfounded to a properly religious soul, and such a soul can still make an excellent scientist. In fact I would say they would make a better one because they don't have the closed mind of some atheists.

 

[ratiocinator]

But to an atheist, all things religious appear unfounded because of the closed mind.

Give us some actual reason to take it seriously, then. It's impossible to be closed minded unless there is something to be closed minded to.

They are not unfounded to a properly religious soul...

So what are they founded on and what does "properly religious" mean?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Assertion. And if it actually gave you any insight, why can't you tell us anything useful about dark matter and dark energy and get your Nobel?

It's basic sanity. Either you need reasons to accept propositions, you accept all (unfalsifiable) propositions (leading to accepting contradictions), or you abandon any notion of approaching things logically and just believe what you like.

Pretty much meaningless. Even if there was some truth in this, one would expect all people who 'knock' (search for truth in religion?) to reach the same conclusions. They obviously don't.

You are repeating yourself. Nobel prizes are for people of the world, not properly religious folk.

You may continue with dealing with the 5%, the 100% does not interest you apparently.

Ah, the subject of religion is even more complex than science, it is after all the 100% not just 5%.
And as such, this is not the place or time, suffice to say that if and when you knock, you will notice subtle changes in your life, coincidences that defy the odds, and so on. Otoh, who knows, there could be lightening bolts and angels.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Give us some actual reason to take it seriously, then. It's impossible to be closed minded unless there is something to be closed minded to.

So what are they founded on and what does "properly religious" mean?

How about knowing exactly what and who you are in the context of 100% of the universe.

They are founded on reality. Properly religious is a form of religious practice that is not merely belief, but a continuous incremental transition from flesh to spirit being.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Well, yes and no. There is no one religion and no one sets of coherent religious traditions. As an atheist, I can learn techniques in religion without being religious.

Sure you can, not all atheists are as closed minded as some appear to be. But the soul is actually always involved in its incarnate life, it will determine the future. Actually you are your soul, the body is a temporary garment essential for the experience of incarnation.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Sure you can, not all atheists are as closed minded as some appear to be. But the soul is actually always involved in its incarnate life, it will determine the future. Actually you are your soul, the body is a temporary garment essential for the experience of incarnation.

Yeah, I accept that you believe so. And I accept if you can't accept that I believe differently. So you can believe all you like about how I ought to believe. I just believe differently because it works for me and I accept that my beliefs doesn't work for you.

 

[ratiocinator]

You may continue with dealing with the 5%, the 100% does not interest you apparently.

I'm very interested in it but you've given me no reason at all to think that religion can tell us anything about it.

How about knowing exactly what and who you are in the context of 100% of the universe.

That's not a reason to take it seriously, that's a so far totally unsupported claim about what it can supposedly do.

They are founded on reality.

Meaningless. How are they founded on reality? What part of reality can tell me that any of them are true. Why do they disagree with each other if they're founded on reality?

Properly religious is a form of religious practice that is not merely belief, but a continuous incremental transition from flesh to spirit being.

What does this actually mean?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yeah, I accept that you believe so. And I accept if you can't accept that I believe differently. So you can believe all you like about how I ought to believe. I just believe differently because it works for me and I accept that my beliefs doesn't work for you.

If you have read my earlier comments, according to my religious understanding, beliefs imprison the mind, both science and religion. True religion is not about belief, it is about discovery, so is true science, but unfortunately the believers like power and seem to dominate the respective human institutions associated with both traditions.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

If you have read my earlier comments, according to my religious understanding, beliefs imprison the mind, both science and religion. True religion is not about belief, it is about discovery, so is true science, but unfortunately the believers like power and seem to dominate the respective human institutions associated with both traditions.

Oh, aren't you special? Well, I accept I am normal and use beliefs. As for power, it is not that simple.