The Original Sin: who is to blame?

[9-18-1]

", post: 6073307, member: 65725"]@9-18-1
You're misquoting again... this time you it's ecco... please go back and check your work. Post # 238...

lol

", post: 6073307, member: 65725"]oh dear... I am pretty sure you did say that 666 was bad.. something having to do with sin.

I don't denote things as "bad" - it is either a binding or a liberating. "Belief" to "knowing".

", post: 6073307, member: 65725"]But I'll double check.

You're awfully diligent.

You sure you are not a "follower"?

Didn't you say that you don't follow me?

You're still here!

You are relentlessly accusing/attacking me of/for what you are in fact doing, but I find it hilariously entertaining.

Do you "believe" Moshe was a real person?

 

[dybmh]

I asked you to define "belief" and "G-d". I asked nicely.

I did. And I answered nicely.

But you're still mad.

I'm not mad. You're projecting.

 

[9-18-1]

@9-18-1,

Yet another false claim.

You said, just few moments ago, "I never said 666 is bad"

Correct.

Yes... you did. See below:



You said 666 is the mark of the beast.

Where did I say the mark of the beast was 'bad'? Do you just naturally associate 'mark of the beast' with "bad" and "BELIEVE" others understand it that way?

See you're projecting your own bullsh*t again.

And then I brought evidence from a University Professor disputing your claim.

No you didn't.

And:

Truth over Authority = Knowing
Authority over Truth = Believing

I don't appeal to authority, like you.

Another example of lack of attention to detail.

It's a pattern.

Lol, yes, for you.

Flip-flopping, Poor research, false claims, peddled as truth.

Yes, for you again.

And please go fix the misquotes?

Fixed.

 

[dybmh]

@9-18-1,

LOL, this is priceless...

Who is this? And what's so ironic is that the misquote is about misquoting!

 

[dybmh]

Where did I say the mark of the beast was 'bad'?

OK... this is because you don't know Hebrew.

And that leaves only yetzer ha tob, because yetzer ha ra is 666 'the mark of the beast'.

Yetzer Hara? Guess what Hara means? The EVIL.

So, because you don't know what you are talking about, literally...

you made another false claim. Again.

Dude. I promise I am not mad. I am enjoying this.

You are hilarious!

 

[9-18-1]

Rough translation for non Hebrew speakers.

And G-d spoke, here is Light, and there was Light.

Shared Will
To Bestow
To Receive

Answer: It is from a belief system called: Mathematical Monotheism.

It is belief... 9-18-1 is using this belief as a virtue. While at the same time claiming that belief is not a virtue.

Classic Hypocrisy.

ORDINAL GENESIS 1:1/JOHN 1:1 TRIANGLE (Part 1) - Mathematical Monotheism

And credit for the diagram was not given... lack of attention to detail again, 9-18-1.

The person who developed that diagram appears to be: Leo Tavares

@9-18-1, Are you Leo Tavares? If not, why did you plagiarize this material? Just another honest mistake. Or, is it a lack of attention to detail?

Note: The diagram is copyrighted:

"Copyright 2019, All rights reserved, Leo Tavares"

LOL

I did. And I answered nicely.



I'm not mad. You're projecting.

No, you're trying to imitate what I'm doing with you - it's obvious to me, but will probably fool the others (it is okay).

In any event, I don't see your definitions of "belief" and "G-d" anywhere.

Easy logic:
If the Qur'an/Torah suffer manhandling, can either be the perfect word of god?
Yes/no.

Suppose god doesn't write books?

"Belief" is not a virtue.

 

[dybmh]

What's your point?

I wasn't directing it at you, my friend. Apologies if it seemed irrelevant.

 

[dianaiad]

If you can't follow the thread, that is not my problem.


Your opinion is worthless as it is based on ignorance.

Personal insults do not impress me as valid debate strategies.

Bye now.

 

[dybmh]

No, you're trying to imitate what I'm doing with you - it's obvious to me, but will probably fool the others (it is okay).

No,

I definitely am not trying to imitate you.

I most certainly did answer your questions honestly. And Nicely.

I thought we were going to have a friendly discussion.

I'll go find my answers and re-post them.

 

[9-18-1]

@9-18-1,

LOL, this is priceless...

Who is this? And what's so ironic is that the misquote is about misquoting!

View attachment 28418

Like it? The more you like it, the harder I go, baby!

OK... this is because you don't know Hebrew.

Correct - I don't study Hebrew from "authorities", I studied the letters myself. I stopped once I got the answers needed.

Yetzer Hara? Guess what Hara means? The EVIL.

Wrong - you told me before there is a different word for evil. Don't know what it is, or care. Ra simply means "impure", not "EVIL".

So, because you don't know what you are talking about, literally...

Mirror.

you made another false claim. Again.

Ah that would be you, again. Yetzer ha ra does not mean "the evil" - better is "the impure".

Dude. I promise I am not mad. I am enjoying this.

You are hilarious!

Thank you for following

 

[dybmh]

This was from 12:08 PM today. ( I think )

How is that? We both define terms: G-d and "belief".

I think that Hinduism does the best job at defining G-d in words. In my view G-d = Brahman.

For belief:

In my view a Fact is a claim whose evidence surpasses all reasonable doubt.

A belief is a claim which is not a Fact.

So, a belief is a claim whose evidence does not surpass all reasonable doubt.

All I need to do is introduce reasonable doubt, and then a claim becomes belief.

Does that make sense?

 

[dybmh]

Correct - I don't study Hebrew from "authorities", I studied the letters myself. I stopped once I got the answers needed.

So, even if the conclusions you reached are positive... belief is what got you there.

It's another example of belief as a virtue.

 

[dybmh]

@9-18-1,

I am being serious. Please quote me properly. OK?

 

[dybmh]

Ah that would be you, again. Yetzer ha ra does not mean "the evil" - better is "the impure".

You **believe** it means impure. Evidence please. Then I will bring mine.

 

[9-18-1]

]I think that Hinduism does the best job at defining G-d in words. In my view G-d = Brahman.

...which is, what? Don't just pawn it off to another concept. Describe what it is according to your own understanding - not another entire pantheon.

For belief:

In my view a Fact is a claim whose evidence surpasses all reasonable doubt.

Define 'fact'.
Define 'claim'.
Define 'evidence'.
Define 'reasonable doubt'.

Can a fact/truth be unknown?
Can a fact/truth be mistakenly reasonably doubted?

A belief is a claim which is not a Fact.

lol

So, a belief is a claim whose evidence does not surpass all reasonable doubt.

Like... the Torah came from god and there was a Hebrew Moses who was *not* Akhunatun?

Or the Torah is manhandled and a Hebrew Moses was actually a Hebrew Akhunatun?

All I need to do is introduce reasonable doubt, and then a claim becomes belief.

LOL

Does that make sense?

Well... yes in that I understand how you perceive. No in that it actually does not make sense.

So, even if the conclusions you reached are positive... belief is what got you there.

It's another example of belief as a virtue.

Belief is not a virtue. You will only ever "believe" I believe something, as opposed to knowing it, especially in that... state of definitions.

@9-18-1,

I am being serious. Please quote me properly. OK?

OK.

Here are my definitions.

G-d: truth as authority <no object> (requires conscience).
Belief: authority as truth <requires object> (no conscience).

Can an "unbeliever" be a "knower"?
Is "knowing" superior to "believing"?
If "knowing" is superior to "believing", is "belief" a virtue?

This is the two fish of Pisces: "I believe" and "I know". Separate goats from sheep.

 

[dybmh]

...which is, what? Don't just pawn it off to another concept. Describe what it is according to your own understanding - not another entire pantheon.

OK.

G-d is the ultimate unchanging source of everything. How is this relevant?

Like... the Torah can from god and there was a Hebrew Moses who was *not* Akhunatun?

Or the Torah is manhandled and a Hebrew Moses was actually a Hebrew Akhunatun?

I don't know which one is true. Again, relevance?

G-d: truth as authority <no object> (requires conscience).
Belief: authority as truth <requires object> (no conscience).

Not sure I agree, but, relevance?

Can an "unbeliever" be a "knower"?
Is "knowing" superior to "believing"?
If "knowing" is superior to "believing", is "belief" a virtue?

This is what I think ( assuming I understand what you are asking, of course )

Question: Can an "unbeliever" be a "knower"?
Answer: Not simultaneously. I think most people oscilate between the two. And rarely operate ( if ever ) in the extremes.

Question: Is "knowing" superior to "believing"
Answer: They are like comparing apples to oranges. Knowing is intellectual. Believing is beyond intellect. Both are useful in different ways and in different situations. It's really the same thing I said the first time you started a thread on belief.

Question: If "knowing" is superior to "believing", is "belief" a virtue?
Answer: When knowing is superior, belief is not a virtue. When believing is superior, then belief is a virtue.

This is the difference between my mindset and yours.

You are operating black vs. white. It's fundamentalism. Literal. Stereotyping. Generalizing. Over-simplified.

I reduce things into yes/no questions. Rather than good/evil judgments, I simply ask black-and-white questions that resolve what reality reflects.

 

[ecco]

I reduce things into yes/no questions. Rather than good/evil judgments, I simply ask black-and-white questions that resolve what reality reflects. I can give examples of questions I ask, then allow meditation to resolve:

What is the central "claim" of Islam?
What does Islam "believe" about the Qur'an?
Are there any other religions which "believe" the same about their own book?
"Poofs" offered by Islam?
"Explanations" offered by Islam?
"Sources" allowed/disallowed (censored) by Islam?
How did Muhammad die?
Who did Muhammad appoint his successor (if any)?
Why did Muhammad commit genocide on Jews?
Why did Hitler commit genocide on Jews?
How are these two figures "related"?
Why did Dr. Carl Jung compare the rise of Hitler to the rise of Muhammad?
What must every Muslim do in order to join Islam?
Can the testimony of a dead man possibly be true?
How closely does each religious 'state' follow the Ten Commandments?
What happens if a person "believes" something that is not true.
What happens if someone "testifies" to something that is false?
What happens if a person places a particular false "belief" as a principle guiding factor?
What happens if a person places a necessarily true "testimony" as a principle guiding factor?
Whose "testimony" between the former two is more likely to be "true"?
Is "belief" a virtue?
Should "beliefs" which are known to be false be protected by any state?
Who protects "belief"-based states?
Why are "belief"-based states "protected"?
What is an "idol"
What is "idol worship"?
Do any "belief"-based states use central figures (ie. "idols") as truly authoritative?
What is a paradox?
How does peace become war?
What does war become peace?
What is 'peace'?
Without war?
etc.

None of those meet your own criteria for questions with "yes/no" answers.

 

[ecco]

reflected by the questions it can spontaneously form from the conscious being that is 'I AM'.
I choose to attempt to solve Abrahamic "problem" which (after finding there is no potent Abrahamic god) lead me to a deeper problem: "BELIEF".

"BELIEF" is not a virtue. In fact, it might be satanic. Binds, binds, binds, "beliefs" that are not actually true. Entire empires build on idols requiring testimonies of them. More "belief" and more "belief".

You don't believe in belief, yet you talk about "satanic" which encompasses nothing more than belief.

 

[ecco]

What happens when someone identifies with/as a "belief" and places their entire being into it?

You should know since that is what you apparently have done.

 

[ecco]

Can you provide and prove that God flooded the whole earth, where's your proof

It's not my job to prove Christian things to Christians. When necessary, for the sake of conversation, I respond to what they believe or what is written in their holy scripture.

As there's no where in the Bible that states the whole earth as being flooded over

Maybe before you repeat what you heard, you do your own investigation.

It's not about what I "heard". It's about what is written in your holy scripture. If you choose to ignore it, don't try to shift the blame to me.

Genesis 17
17And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth. 18And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark wentupon the face of the waters. 19And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that [were] under the whole heaven, were covered.

​

First, you show you do not know the difference between omnipotent and omniscient and now you don't understand what is written in your holy scripture.

You do list your religion as Christian, don't you?