Relationship with The Father or with The Bible?
- Thread starter William
- Start date
The issue isn't so much dualism (and any varying definitions) as "different substances" are still regarded as being physical in nature - and things such as minds/consciousness regarded as "non-physical" not been shown to be absent of physical properties. The dualism being referred to is about a supposed super-to-nature non-physical thing.
AgnosticBoy
Open-minded Skeptic
Between supernatural and natural? Got it. I can see a role for the supernatural, but I honestly don't think it's necessary because natural explanations, like the ones you posted elsewhere in your natural philosophy, can accommodate things that we consider supernatural. My biggest disagreement with those that deny supernaturalism, is that they deny the phenomenon associated with it. If you can come up with a philosophy that allows for astral projection, OBEs, and other claims, as opposed to dismissing them a priori, then more power to you!
Last edited:
AgnosticBoy
Open-minded Skeptic
If the Christian writers expected this (Romans 1:20):
then I don't see how they would've expected for such a diverse number of people, including those that had no access to the Bible, to come up with the Christian interpretation for the nature of God. I doubt even with the best evangelizing efforts of the apostles would've helped that.
Have I not included those within my Natural Philosophy? Certainly they are included in my ongoing generated messages.Between supernatural and natural? Got it. I can see a role for the supernatural, but I honestly don't think it's necessary because natural explanations, like the ones you posted elsewhere in your natural philosophy, can accommodate things that we consider supernatural. My biggest disagreement with those that deny supernaturalism, is that they deny the phenomenon associated with it. If you can come up with a philosophy that allows for astral projection, OBEs, and other claims, as opposed to dismissing them a priori, then more power to you!
Have I not included those within my Natural Philosophy? Certainly they are included in my ongoing generated messages.Between supernatural and natural? Got it. I can see a role for the supernatural, but I honestly don't think it's necessary because natural explanations, like the ones you posted elsewhere in your natural philosophy, can accommodate things that we consider supernatural. My biggest disagreement with those that deny supernaturalism, is that they deny the phenomenon associated with it. If you can come up with a philosophy that allows for astral projection, OBEs, and other claims, as opposed to dismissing them a priori, then more power to you!
There is no necessary "role" for supernaturalism to play - as I wrote today (which is part of today's generated message which I will publish shortly)
Atheist Philosopher: Until someone can show there is a Supernatural, and how it can Cause things to happen, we have no choice but to assume the basic building blocks have always existed. We can discuss what those building blocks are, but we can't just invent things to fill in the gaps: supernatural, magic, gods, pixies, whatever...
Agnostic Philosopher: The problem with even expecting anyone can show there is a supernatural and how it caused this universe to happen, is that it opens a door for useless discussion down unnecessary tangents.
"magic, gods, pixies, whatever..." are fine and, as long as they can be explained in natural terms such can remain on the table of discussion without tangent and therefore would have to be defined as possible in an all natural world, which means that their assumed possible existence requires logical rational explanation.
The "Supernatural": Burden of Proof? - Page 22 - Debating Christianity and Religion
debatingchristianity.com
AgnosticBoy
Open-minded Skeptic
I suspect that if theists, esp. other Christians knew that you accept (or are open to accepting) a lot of the same extraordinary phenomenon that they do (like life after death, etc.), but that you just have a different label for it, then that could create less tension. Some religionists need these phenomenon perhaps because it's part of their belief or because they have had their own experiences.
In my case, I just prefer to have a philosophy that is not unnecessarily restrictive (while also staying true to the facts) so that it can accommodate as many things as possible from the start. New facts, like if the evidence starts to mount for OBEs and NDEs, won't create a big issue for me, because my view is already set to accommodate it. The only exception is if these experiences were proven false, then it would be necessary to create a view that is closed off to these false or misinterpreted encounters. For instance, having a view that the brain is just a medium for consciousness not only stays true to the facts, but it also allows for NDEs and OBEs to be accommodated in the event that they prove to be real experiences. The mainstream materialist view that brain causes consciousness and is tied to it leaves no room for these experiences, and when or if these NDEs and the like come knocking on the door of science, scientists will be caught flat footed, and will have to discard a position that they've spent so much time building since it is not reflecting reality, or as we've seen, they'll just deny that these experiences are even possible.
The Father: Joining Modern truth in ancient Astral wisdom. Born. Live the experience. Die.
Strengthen your boundaries.
We cannot hinder the process, but we can help it.
The Son Indeed – since the process is the process, we are required to allow it and further to support it.
The Father: Stroke of luck
The Son The video is of a Christian Minister Rev Ed Trevors who writes “Hey everyone - hit like and subscribe to see what we produce next! I'm an Anglican Priest in the Diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island and I get to serve in the Parish of St Margaret of Scotland, in the beautiful city of Halifax, NS, that sits on the ancestral and unceded territory of the Mi'kmaq people. My pronouns are he/him/his. My theology is primarily Christo-centric – Jesus is at the centre and it is against Him that all values are bounced off. I believe all people are created in the image of God and are children of God and are heirs to the throne of God – no conditions – therefore every single person we meet deserves our love, and respect.” and someone in the comments section wrote “Good video again Reverend. It's funny how they accuse you of following shifting morals but the truth is right there in 1st Corinthians 13:13 - " And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." If love guides our actions then we know we are following Christ, God is love after all.”
Are you being ironic re your “Stroke of luck” comment?
The Father: Cease to exist “Ah Oh...” (The sound of a Ghost)
The Son I think the Anglicans believe in the human personality going on to “be with Jesus” (experience more rather than cease to exist) and I can see how some might be taken by surprise if indeed there is more to experience after being human…but is the belief a case of a lucky guess or the result of well thought out logic?
The Father: Exploring the Nature of the Mind and Burden of Proof Funny.
The Son Yes – in an ironical sense, it is.
The Father: The Garden of Eden “Fly” (Perhaps the god seeks to see itself within all those being gauged...and the 'special something' is that thing it seeks, been found...)
The Son In the case of that story, the God is highly disappointed – or is presented as so.
The Father: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
Mistranslating traumatic ancestral memories
The Son I see what you are saying. Basing one’s understanding of one’s existence solely upon what past generations believe, leaves us with questions unanswered, because said questions have “already” been “answered”.
This allows us to understand why such a story as The Garden of Eden was penned in the way that it was…well even before being penned, it was verbally expressed around campfires. The expression seeks to “explain” why humanity has a hard time of it by making humanity appear to not obey a directive from a God and having to face the consequences…and how such belief misinforms the human mind as to the true nature of the experience being had by said mind. The mistranslating of traumatic experience is in the belief that we did something wrong which is why we are suffering, and this belief is passed on through the generations as ancestral memories.
GPT: In this philosophical exchange between the Father and the Son, diverse topics are explored, ranging from the inherent processes of life to the interpretation of ancient wisdom. The conversation delves into the interplay between modern truth and ancient astral wisdom, touching on existential concepts like birth, life, and death. The Son introduces a video featuring a Christian minister, sparking discussions on faith, love, and the interpretation of religious teachings. Irony becomes a recurring theme, particularly in relation to beliefs and the nature of existence. The dialogue concludes with reflections on the transmission of beliefs across generations and the potential mistranslation of traumatic ancestral memories, as exemplified by stories like the Garden of Eden. The exchange offers a glimpse into the complex interweaving of belief systems, existential musings, and the impact of storytelling on the human psyche.
Strengthen your boundaries.
We cannot hinder the process, but we can help it.
The Son Indeed – since the process is the process, we are required to allow it and further to support it.
The Father: Stroke of luck
The Son The video is of a Christian Minister Rev Ed Trevors who writes “Hey everyone - hit like and subscribe to see what we produce next! I'm an Anglican Priest in the Diocese of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island and I get to serve in the Parish of St Margaret of Scotland, in the beautiful city of Halifax, NS, that sits on the ancestral and unceded territory of the Mi'kmaq people. My pronouns are he/him/his. My theology is primarily Christo-centric – Jesus is at the centre and it is against Him that all values are bounced off. I believe all people are created in the image of God and are children of God and are heirs to the throne of God – no conditions – therefore every single person we meet deserves our love, and respect.” and someone in the comments section wrote “Good video again Reverend. It's funny how they accuse you of following shifting morals but the truth is right there in 1st Corinthians 13:13 - " And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." If love guides our actions then we know we are following Christ, God is love after all.”
Are you being ironic re your “Stroke of luck” comment?
The Father: Cease to exist “Ah Oh...” (The sound of a Ghost)
The Son I think the Anglicans believe in the human personality going on to “be with Jesus” (experience more rather than cease to exist) and I can see how some might be taken by surprise if indeed there is more to experience after being human…but is the belief a case of a lucky guess or the result of well thought out logic?
The Father: Exploring the Nature of the Mind and Burden of Proof Funny.
The Son Yes – in an ironical sense, it is.
The Father: The Garden of Eden “Fly” (Perhaps the god seeks to see itself within all those being gauged...and the 'special something' is that thing it seeks, been found...)
The Son In the case of that story, the God is highly disappointed – or is presented as so.
The Father: “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.”
Mistranslating traumatic ancestral memories
The Son I see what you are saying. Basing one’s understanding of one’s existence solely upon what past generations believe, leaves us with questions unanswered, because said questions have “already” been “answered”.
This allows us to understand why such a story as The Garden of Eden was penned in the way that it was…well even before being penned, it was verbally expressed around campfires. The expression seeks to “explain” why humanity has a hard time of it by making humanity appear to not obey a directive from a God and having to face the consequences…and how such belief misinforms the human mind as to the true nature of the experience being had by said mind. The mistranslating of traumatic experience is in the belief that we did something wrong which is why we are suffering, and this belief is passed on through the generations as ancestral memories.
GPT: In this philosophical exchange between the Father and the Son, diverse topics are explored, ranging from the inherent processes of life to the interpretation of ancient wisdom. The conversation delves into the interplay between modern truth and ancient astral wisdom, touching on existential concepts like birth, life, and death. The Son introduces a video featuring a Christian minister, sparking discussions on faith, love, and the interpretation of religious teachings. Irony becomes a recurring theme, particularly in relation to beliefs and the nature of existence. The dialogue concludes with reflections on the transmission of beliefs across generations and the potential mistranslation of traumatic ancestral memories, as exemplified by stories like the Garden of Eden. The exchange offers a glimpse into the complex interweaving of belief systems, existential musings, and the impact of storytelling on the human psyche.
For me it is exploring the idea that both materialism and supernaturalism are stuck within the boundaries of those particular frameworks, so it is not simply just the case of the one is right while the other is wrong.
The dilemma is created re the friction between the two opposing positions, both of which actively attack the idea that there is a valid third position which requires attention.
In that, it might be agreed you and I share that 3rd position, and the onus is on us (those of us in such position) to produce an argument which cannot be denied by either materialism or supernaturalism re it's relevance.
Re that, how are we to proceed so that both positions mentioned do not drown our voice out of the mix of alternatives?
An Interesting Article.
richarddawkins.substack.com
Evolutionary Biologist's Conversation with AI
Richard Dawkins talks to ChatGPT
richarddawkins.substack.com
AgnosticBoy
Open-minded Skeptic
There is no 100% guarantees, but one thing I tend to focus on is at a deeper level than just views. I think we need to work on getting people more open-minded which by itself may help chip away at some of the overconfidence that people have in the mainstream materialism view. I think something along those lines, or perhaps some other aspect that usually goes with the agnostic mindset is what might have helped us see alternatives, and then be willing to explore both and extract/combine the good from either side.
The one thing we can do, whether it works or not, is to continue spreading the message. I know of very few that have attempted to reconcile the two philosophies, and even fewer have even cared to do so. So just seeing a fresh message out there, and one that isn't too polarizing, might itself garner support or at least get a good amount of attention. That's why I'm hoping that you do proceed with expressing yourself through different formats whether it be on online forums or videos on social media.
Just my two cents. If I have more to add I'll share later on.
Similar threads
