What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-10-2016, 11:40 PM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(08-10-2016 06:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(08-10-2016 04:50 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Oh, I am very sorry; I didn't know this forum is your home. And I didn't notice that some posts here could, in certain cases, be considered as shit on your house's carpets that you cannot avoid.

Sorry, and you also gave me the impression that you are the ruling god of this forum. So, shouldn't I end up into your hell? Big Grin

You are telling people who are critical of you not to participate.
I doubt you see the irony.

Now, fuck off.

Participating with whom? Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic. So when I talk to someone (as in other forums) I see myself talking to a sort of faithful repeater who reminds me what is already written in certain references about the subject (said scientific, religious or political). I said 'a faithful repeater' because he does his best to avoid adding and/or removing anything from what he learnt. This attitude is not bad, but I like participating with people who don't need following any side/group in the world when looking for a complete truth (mainly about the nature of their being and how the world runs on the ground... in their reality).

What concerns you, I see a person who used opposing anything said by a stranger, I guess, you likely do it just for fun, and this is also not bad. After all, this happens even among best friends Big Grin

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2016, 11:57 PM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(09-10-2016 11:40 PM)KerimF Wrote:  
(08-10-2016 06:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are telling people who are critical of you not to participate.
I doubt you see the irony.

Now, fuck off.

Participating with whom? Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic. So when I talk to someone (as in other forums) I see myself talking to a sort of faithful repeater who reminds me what is already written in certain references about the subject (said scientific, religious or political). I said 'a faithful repeater' because he does his best to avoid adding and/or removing anything from what he learnt. This attitude is not bad, but I like participating with people who don't need following any side/group in the world when looking for a complete truth (mainly about the nature of their being and how the world runs on the ground... in their reality).

What concerns you, I see a person who used opposing anything said by a stranger, I guess, you likely do it just for fun, and this is also not bad. After all, this happens even among best friends Big Grin

I was correct - you don't see the irony. Facepalm

You talk shit; you assume you know how others think, how they evaluate evidence, how they reach conclusions.

You are delusional. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
10-10-2016, 12:19 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(08-10-2016 06:26 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  
(08-10-2016 04:36 AM)KerimF Wrote:  Well, could you tell me how a person can believe that electromagnetic waves do exist, in case he has not a single mean to detect them?
In this case, he, naturally, should deny their existence as long he, personally, cannot detect them (in any part of their vast spectrum) and, most of all, he cannot take advantage of using them.

In fact, what we may call a spirit or a soul is a personal matter. So if it happens that someone has no soul in him, he can never know what a soul (the human living soul) means to someone who has it and, therefore, perceives it, besides his human living flesh.

Now, the question is: "How could a man perceive the existence of his personal living soul?"
In this case, the 'unit under test' is 'his being'...
But since I respect the nature of which you are made, and going further in this experiment will likely heart your feelings... let's stop here and say together: A "spirit or soul" doesn't exist.

After all, there is no use to convince someone about something that he insists he can't perceive as he does with his human living body.

See this guy?

[Image: T1000headinhalf.jpg]

That's a T-1000 in Terminator 2, the T-1000 had the benefit of distributing it's computing capacity throughout it's body, so a headshot wouldn't kill it.

If our soul or consciousness were not part of our body and it actually resided in some floaty place outside of our body instead of the brain, we should actually see some people with head damage like that walking around with full mental capacity.

That would be evidence that a soul resides outside of the body.

If the brain is a mere receiver for soul transmission, then we would have found this receiver device somewhere in our bodies and we would know that that would be the organ that controls the soul transmission capabilities of the brain.

We have thought for millennia that our mental and emotional capacity resided in the heart, our language still reflects this false notion, science showed that it was the brain.

The idea of the soul is a relic of ancient thinking with no basis in reality, it is every bit as real as the ancient notion of us feeling emotions with our heart.

Thank you for explaining how you imagine the soul in case it exists. And I agree with your analysis based on your view.

Now, let me give you another analogy (since I personally perceive my soul Tongue and, therefore, I don't need anyone to prove me it exists or not in my realm).
As we know, a TV set has actually two different systems; audio and video. And if one system fails, this failure doesn't imply for sure that the other one should fail too. Also these two systems are supposed to complement each other in most situations. In the past (before knowing how to transmit visual information), people were very happy for having just radio sets that have one system only. Also, those who were born blind, they can still use a TV set but as if it were a radio while its video system seems not existing for them, practically speaking.

So if someone discovers that his reactions should follow always well-defined rules (they are related to one's instincts, practically speaking), he can be sure he doesn't have a soul. A soul (when it exists in one's realm) has its own natural rules. So while a body needs bread (food) to survive, a soul needs something else to survive. The good news is that the death of a soul (the soul I am talking about here) doesn't imply the death of its body (as it is the case of a broken TV in which the video system only fails).

Anyway, I am writing this while I am almost sure that no one is ready to change his mind about what he already believes Big Grin This is a natural reaction because our human mind is also immune against any change as our body has its immunity system.

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 12:27 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(09-10-2016 11:40 PM)KerimF Wrote:  
(08-10-2016 06:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  You are telling people who are critical of you not to participate.
I doubt you see the irony.

Now, fuck off.

Participating with whom? Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic. So when I talk to someone (as in other forums) I see myself talking to a sort of faithful repeater who reminds me what is already written in certain references about the subject (said scientific, religious or political). I said 'a faithful repeater' because he does his best to avoid adding and/or removing anything from what he learnt. This attitude is not bad, but I like participating with people who don't need following any side/group in the world when looking for a complete truth (mainly about the nature of their being and how the world runs on the ground... in their reality).

What concerns you, I see a person who used opposing anything said by a stranger, I guess, you likely do it just for fun, and this is also not bad. After all, this happens even among best friends Big Grin

If you go to different forums, and the reactions are all the same that people think you are delusional, then maybe, just maybe you are delusional?

Reminds me of a joke we have here:
Voice on the radio: "Traffic news report: Be warned, we have a ghost driver on the highway. Please slow down and be careful!"
Guy in a car: "One ghost driver? I see dozens!"

So why do you keep posting here or on other forums this shit about other people accepting things without evidence? You have no evidence that people are "using trusted ideas, inherited by trusted persons", thats bullshit. Its your defense mechanism, so you can keep "unwanted" ideas out of your mind.
All you are doing here is rationalizing your own delusion, that everybody else is manipulated. You are shifting the burden of proof, Instead of providing evidence for your own claims you are asserting that
1) everybody else isnt basing his view on evidence (ignoring the facts to the conrtary)
2) proclaiming that your "pesonal logic" and "personal experiecne" is the only valid evidence
I repeat: you are shrugging off any evidence others have, and declare your own lack of evidence as evidence. You can do that, but then again, you are going to live in a complete fantasy.
Quote:Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic

Fuck your "personal experience", thats a religious argument, do you know that? I dont have to go myself to Pluto to accept with a reasonable certainty that it is
1) there
and
2) covered in nitrogen ice
Are you so deeply entrenched in your personal delusion/religion, that you have forgotten what makes up an delusion? I guess so.

Again: If the whole world is telling you, you are delusional, then either the whole world is ruled by evil reptilian aliens, or....you.are.delusional. Did you ever question your own position? EVER?

If you are either delusional or everybody else is being manipulated, why go out and bang your head against the proverbbial wall? Do you have a saviour complex?

Now, please, PLEASE dont write down an answer here. I am not interested in your delusional drivel the least, but THINK about what i said. THINK for a second and for a change.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 12:30 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(09-10-2016 11:57 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(09-10-2016 11:40 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Participating with whom? Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic. So when I talk to someone (as in other forums) I see myself talking to a sort of faithful repeater who reminds me what is already written in certain references about the subject (said scientific, religious or political). I said 'a faithful repeater' because he does his best to avoid adding and/or removing anything from what he learnt. This attitude is not bad, but I like participating with people who don't need following any side/group in the world when looking for a complete truth (mainly about the nature of their being and how the world runs on the ground... in their reality).

What concerns you, I see a person who used opposing anything said by a stranger, I guess, you likely do it just for fun, and this is also not bad. After all, this happens even among best friends Big Grin

I was correct - you don't see the irony. Facepalm

You talk shit; you assume you know how others think, how they evaluate evidence, how they reach conclusions.

You are delusional. Drinking Beverage

As long you, for example, have fun in insulting me continuously, you can be sure that I can't have even a slight idea about how you think when you decide to be serious. But if I am wrong, and you were serious in all your replies, you remind me some people who told me they are so smart to the point they know how to take from others without giving them anything useful in return. Of course, I look to these people as an idiot... for not being very smart as they are Wink

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 12:35 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(10-10-2016 12:27 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
(09-10-2016 11:40 PM)KerimF Wrote:  Participating with whom? Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic. So when I talk to someone (as in other forums) I see myself talking to a sort of faithful repeater who reminds me what is already written in certain references about the subject (said scientific, religious or political). I said 'a faithful repeater' because he does his best to avoid adding and/or removing anything from what he learnt. This attitude is not bad, but I like participating with people who don't need following any side/group in the world when looking for a complete truth (mainly about the nature of their being and how the world runs on the ground... in their reality).

What concerns you, I see a person who used opposing anything said by a stranger, I guess, you likely do it just for fun, and this is also not bad. After all, this happens even among best friends Big Grin

If you go to different forums, and the reactions are all the same that people think you are delusional, then maybe, just maybe you are delusional?

Reminds me of a joke we have here:
Voice on the radio: "Traffic news report: Be warned, we have a ghost driver on the highway. Please slow down and be careful!"
Guy in a car: "One ghost driver? I see dozens!"

So why do you keep posting here or on other forums this shit about other people accepting things without evidence? You have no evidence that people are "using trusted ideas, inherited by trusted persons", thats bullshit. Its your defense mechanism, so you can keep "unwanted" ideas out of your mind.
All you are doing here is rationalizing your own delusion, that everybody else is manipulated. You are shifting the burden of proof, Instead of providing evidence for your own claims you are asserting that
1) everybody else isnt basing his view on evidence (ignoring the facts to the conrtary)
2) proclaiming that your "pesonal logic" and "personal experiecne" is the only valid evidence
I repeat: you are shrugging off any evidence others have, and declare your own lack of evidence as evidence. You can do that, but then again, you are going to live in a complete fantasy.
Quote:Most members here (supposed being sane and mature) used trusting ideas, expressed and/or inherited by some trusted persons, more than their personal observations and logic

Fuck your "personal experience", thats a religious argument, do you know that? I dont have to go myself to Pluto to accept with a reasonable certainty that it is
1) there
and
2) covered in nitrogen ice
Are you so deeply entrenched in your personal delusion/religion, that you have forgotten what makes up an delusion? I guess so.

Again: If the whole world is telling you, you are delusional, then either the whole world is ruled by evil reptilian aliens, or....you.are.delusional. Did you ever question your own position? EVER?

If you are either delusional or everybody else is being manipulated, why go out and bang your head against the proverbbial wall? Do you have a saviour complex?

Now, please, PLEASE dont write down an answer here. I am not interested in your delusional drivel the least, but THINK about what i said. THINK for a second and for a change.

You wrote all this and you are not interested!
I wonder what you would do in case you are Big Grin

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 12:44 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
God refers to made up bullshit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 01:02 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
By the way, if someone, like our friend Deesse23 here, is very interested in knowing the outer space as, for example, knowing that there is a planet Pluto which is covered by nitrogen ice, he would surely not have enough time to discover personally what the real happenings, on his planet earth, are.

Facts that don't need evidences:
Sheep for milk live in peace because it is the will of their rich owners.
Dogs obeying rich masters deserve much better food and shelters than free dogs do.
Whoever has ears will hear.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2016, 05:32 AM
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(10-10-2016 12:19 AM)KerimF Wrote:  
(08-10-2016 06:26 AM)TheInquisition Wrote:  See this guy?

[Image: T1000headinhalf.jpg]

That's a T-1000 in Terminator 2, the T-1000 had the benefit of distributing it's computing capacity throughout it's body, so a headshot wouldn't kill it.

If our soul or consciousness were not part of our body and it actually resided in some floaty place outside of our body instead of the brain, we should actually see some people with head damage like that walking around with full mental capacity.

That would be evidence that a soul resides outside of the body.

If the brain is a mere receiver for soul transmission, then we would have found this receiver device somewhere in our bodies and we would know that that would be the organ that controls the soul transmission capabilities of the brain.

We have thought for millennia that our mental and emotional capacity resided in the heart, our language still reflects this false notion, science showed that it was the brain.

The idea of the soul is a relic of ancient thinking with no basis in reality, it is every bit as real as the ancient notion of us feeling emotions with our heart.

Thank you for explaining how you imagine the soul in case it exists. And I agree with your analysis based on your view.

Now, let me give you another analogy (since I personally perceive my soul Tongue and, therefore, I don't need anyone to prove me it exists or not in my realm).
As we know, a TV set has actually two different systems; audio and video. And if one system fails, this failure doesn't imply for sure that the other one should fail too. Also these two systems are supposed to complement each other in most situations. In the past (before knowing how to transmit visual information), people were very happy for having just radio sets that have one system only. Also, those who were born blind, they can still use a TV set but as if it were a radio while its video system seems not existing for them, practically speaking.

So if someone discovers that his reactions should follow always well-defined rules (they are related to one's instincts, practically speaking), he can be sure he doesn't have a soul. A soul (when it exists in one's realm) has its own natural rules. So while a body needs bread (food) to survive, a soul needs something else to survive. The good news is that the death of a soul (the soul I am talking about here) doesn't imply the death of its body (as it is the case of a broken TV in which the video system only fails).

Anyway, I am writing this while I am almost sure that no one is ready to change his mind about what he already believes Big Grin This is a natural reaction because our human mind is also immune against any change as our body has its immunity system.

All of your assertions about the soul are baseless and without evidence.

You tell me that you have a dragon in your garage, I go to your garage to find proof of said dragon and I see nothing. You then tell me it's an invisible dragon, so I put baby powder on the floor to find evidence for footprints of this invisible dragon, none are found. You then tell me that it's an invisible floating dragon and it doesn't leave footprints.

Round and round we go, but you will always have rationalizations or false analogies that are baseless for your garage dragon. Every time I give you a falsifiable way of verifying your claims, I'll get more rationalizations with zero evidence.

[Image: unpossible_fullpic_artwork.jpg]

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
10-10-2016, 05:38 AM (This post was last modified: 10-10-2016 05:42 AM by Deesse23.)
RE: What does the word ‘god’ refer to?
(10-10-2016 12:35 AM)KerimF Wrote:  
(10-10-2016 12:27 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  If you go to different forums, and the reactions are all the same that people think you are delusional, then maybe, just maybe you are delusional?

Reminds me of a joke we have here:
Voice on the radio: "Traffic news report: Be warned, we have a ghost driver on the highway. Please slow down and be careful!"
Guy in a car: "One ghost driver? I see dozens!"

So why do you keep posting here or on other forums this shit about other people accepting things without evidence? You have no evidence that people are "using trusted ideas, inherited by trusted persons", thats bullshit. Its your defense mechanism, so you can keep "unwanted" ideas out of your mind.
All you are doing here is rationalizing your own delusion, that everybody else is manipulated. You are shifting the burden of proof, Instead of providing evidence for your own claims you are asserting that
1) everybody else isnt basing his view on evidence (ignoring the facts to the conrtary)
2) proclaiming that your "pesonal logic" and "personal experiecne" is the only valid evidence
I repeat: you are shrugging off any evidence others have, and declare your own lack of evidence as evidence. You can do that, but then again, you are going to live in a complete fantasy.

Fuck your "personal experience", thats a religious argument, do you know that? I dont have to go myself to Pluto to accept with a reasonable certainty that it is
1) there
and
2) covered in nitrogen ice
Are you so deeply entrenched in your personal delusion/religion, that you have forgotten what makes up an delusion? I guess so.

Again: If the whole world is telling you, you are delusional, then either the whole world is ruled by evil reptilian aliens, or....you.are.delusional. Did you ever question your own position? EVER?

If you are either delusional or everybody else is being manipulated, why go out and bang your head against the proverbbial wall? Do you have a saviour complex?

Now, please, PLEASE dont write down an answer here. I am not interested in your delusional drivel the least, but THINK about what i said. THINK for a second and for a change.

You wrote all this and you are not interested!
I wonder what you would do in case you are Big Grin

I am not interested anymore the least in your delusions, but how and why you are in this mental state of being delusional, and if or how you are still accessible to any rational argument.

You think you are Napoleon, i am a doctor. I am not interested in your stories how you beat Wellington and Blücher, but why you think you are Napoleon. I am interested if it is possible to "heal" you or not. Your Napoleon-stories are completely irrelevant and non-interesting to me.

Ceterum censeo, religionem delendam esse
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Deesse23's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: