Wouldn't it be nice is there really was a ? ?
Options
Goddammit
Members Posts: 87
A real higher power that would actually help us out and settle all the confusion. Not an ? ass ? though.
Comments
-
Damn Bro ? ain't no punk ? , you disrespect the lord and find nothing goes your way in your daily life.
You never hoped and wished for things(not money) that came true and was beyond your power?
When I was a kid I would pray for things and I would recieve some of the things I prayed for, as a kid I would be shocked I recieved what I asked for.
Its a good feeling to be in tune with ? .
Your tone is very negative, would you ask your Mother for something then turn around and tell her she's an ? if she doesn't do it or comply with your wishes?
If you want to invoke ? you need to Respect what your trying to invoke. Also realize ? is not your employee, its actually the other way around. So if you get something you ask for you must be respectful and thankful for your blessings.
Not trying to impose just saying -
edwardnigma wrote: »Damn Bro ? ain't no punk ? , you disrespect the lord and find nothing goes your way in your daily life.
Where/how do you observe ? in your daily life? Things can go your way (or not) whether you believe in ? (or not). There's a lot of happy (and unhappy) atheists, there's a lot of happy (and unhappy) theists. Surely, belief in ? isn't a deciding factor on how satisfied you are in life or how well your life is going.edwardnigma wrote: »You never hoped and wished for things(not money) that came true and was beyond your power?
When I was a kid I would pray for things and I would recieve some of the things I prayed for, as a kid I would be shocked I recieved what I asked for.
Its a good feeling to be in tune with ? .
there's only two possible outcomes there. You either get what you want or you don't. Sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. no proof of ? there. also, something i've noticed, when theists get what they pray for, they say ? granted their wishes, but if they don't get it, ? was holding out for something better or the answer to their prayers was "no". either way, if you believe in ? or not, it doesn't matter what happens in your life; your belief is obviously primaryedwardnigma wrote: »Your tone is very negative, would you ask your Mother for something then turn around and tell her she's an ? if she doesn't do it or comply with your wishes?
If you want to invoke ? you need to Respect what your trying to invoke. Also realize ? is not your employee, its actually the other way around. So if you get something you ask for you must be respectful and thankful for your blessings.
Not trying to impose just saying
Your mother is real. You are able to converse with your mother and negotiate. if she doesn't grant your wishes, she can explain why. Same applies for an employer.
-
I like things as they are. Life is already easy as ? without any magical beings.
I don't need any help. -
? wrote:A real higher power that would actually help us out and settle all the confusion. Not an ? ass ? though.
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want. -
alissowack wrote: »? wrote:A real higher power that would actually help us out and settle all the confusion. Not an ? ass ? though.
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then? -
alissowack wrote: »? wrote:A real higher power that would actually help us out and settle all the confusion. Not an ? ass ? though.
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
mAAAAAN...Thats so key to understand. I find it bewildering as to how people can engage such errant processes of thought and be content with the result. Religious cats make a ? in ther image, which is wrong. atheists become on some stupid ? too when they state something doesnt exist because it doesnt fit their standard of what it should be. that doent make sense. just because the creator aint some care bear cuddly universal slot machine dont mean that he doesnt exist.
-
WHAT???? t/s you know that YHWH shows you the way (so that = to helping you out) to settle all the confusion that you may have and that you may cause on yourself by your own free will and actions, i mean what more do you want, and i bet you migt got the bluebrint in your house
-
waterproof wrote: »WHAT???? t/s you know that YHWH shows you the way (so that = to helping you out) to settle all the confusion that you may have and that you may cause on yourself by your own free will and actions, i mean what more do you want, and i bet you migt got the bluebrint in your house
Yeah really? That kid born with ? caused it on his or her self? That kid that got cancer as a kid caused it on his or her self?
-
I don't know if there is a ? or not but I sure think it would be nice if he really needed us to know he exists. He obviously does not need that or anything else from us if he exists because he never makes his intentions clear enough for any and everyone to understand. Thus, it is just always some endless conversation about nothing concrete.
-
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then?
It means that we can't think we can rest in our assumptions on who ? is. I can believe that because ? exists, that ? also shares in my perverted perceptions of Him...that ? supports "my" cause. If anything, ? supports His Own Cause; apart from what anybody thinks and if we just happened to be "on board", so be it. -
waterproof wrote: »WHAT???? t/s you know that YHWH shows you the way (so that = to helping you out) to settle all the confusion that you may have and that you may cause on yourself by your own free will and actions, i mean what more do you want, and i bet you migt got the bluebrint in your house
Yeah really? That kid born with ? caused it on his or her self? That kid that got cancer as a kid caused it on his or her self?
yes and no. no he probably did nothing to personally deserve ? . yes because the price of free will is that our actions can affect other people. somebody harmed the child. Yah didnt do it. we got free will. He lays down instructions however and provides mercy as we should all be dead if the wages of sin are death -
alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then?
It means that we can't think we can rest in our assumptions on who ? is. I can believe that because ? exists, that ? also shares in my perverted perceptions of Him...that ? supports "my" cause. If anything, ? supports His Own Cause; apart from what anybody thinks and if we just happened to be "on board", so be it.
1. What is ? 's cause? Not necessarily what CAUSED ? , but what is his intention or purpose
2. If you're not resting on an assumption of who ? is, where do you get your idea of ? to begin with? Theism requires that you know who ? is or what ? does or what ? thinks at least to some degree if not completely
3. What is your definition of ? ? I'm interested in knowing -
Freedom of choice is an illusion
Whoever said there wasn't restrictions, conditions and consequences to choices? -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »
There are no choices though.
Do tell.... -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then?
It means that we can't think we can rest in our assumptions on who ? is. I can believe that because ? exists, that ? also shares in my perverted perceptions of Him...that ? supports "my" cause. If anything, ? supports His Own Cause; apart from what anybody thinks and if we just happened to be "on board", so be it.
1. What is ? 's cause? Not necessarily what CAUSED ? , but what is his intention or purpose
2. If you're not resting on an assumption of who ? is, where do you get your idea of ? to begin with? Theism requires that you know who ? is or what ? does or what ? thinks at least to some degree if not completely
3. What is your definition of ? ? I'm interested in knowing
1. What is ? 's Cause? Whatever it is, it not for man to decide. Whatever He sees as good, right, or just...we in not in a position to say different.
2. Maybe it's just me, but I have a different perception on what is an idea and what is an assumption. If ? is an idea, then there is no reason to assume. I...or somebody else...can make ? to be anything. I can determine what I want ? to be and no one can tell me different. But if ? exists, then I am only left to assume who (or what...just to be unbiased) this deity is.
3. This is much like number one. It is not up to man to define who ? is. I don't think that it is a secret that I in favor on what the Bible says about ? , but it doesn't mean that my assumptions about what the Bible says are...in favor of what the Bible says. I can say that ? is good...but it would only be based on what I assume "good" to be; not what good means to ? . -
1.) to know itself. to experience and be the experience of intention and purpose.Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then?
It means that we can't think we can rest in our assumptions on who ? is. I can believe that because ? exists, that ? also shares in my perverted perceptions of Him...that ? supports "my" cause. If anything, ? supports His Own Cause; apart from what anybody thinks and if we just happened to be "on board", so be it.
1. What is ? 's cause? Not necessarily what CAUSED ? , but what is his intention or purpose
2. If you're not resting on an assumption of who ? is, where do you get your idea of ? to begin with? Theism requires that you know who ? is or what ? does or what ? thinks at least to some degree if not completely
3. What is your definition of ? ? I'm interested in knowing
-
alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then?
It means that we can't think we can rest in our assumptions on who ? is. I can believe that because ? exists, that ? also shares in my perverted perceptions of Him...that ? supports "my" cause. If anything, ? supports His Own Cause; apart from what anybody thinks and if we just happened to be "on board", so be it.
1. What is ? 's cause? Not necessarily what CAUSED ? , but what is his intention or purpose
2. If you're not resting on an assumption of who ? is, where do you get your idea of ? to begin with? Theism requires that you know who ? is or what ? does or what ? thinks at least to some degree if not completely
3. What is your definition of ? ? I'm interested in knowing
1. What is ? 's Cause? Whatever it is, it not for man to decide. Whatever He sees as good, right, or just...we in not in a position to say different.
2. Maybe it's just me, but I have a different perception on what is an idea and what is an assumption. If ? is an idea, then there is no reason to assume. I...or somebody else...can make ? to be anything. I can determine what I want ? to be and no one can tell me different. But if ? exists, then I am only left to assume who (or what...just to be unbiased) this deity is.
3. This is much like number one. It is not up to man to define who ? is. I don't think that it is a secret that I in favor on what the Bible says about ? , but it doesn't mean that my assumptions about what the Bible says are...in favor of what the Bible says. I can say that ? is good...but it would only be based on what I assume "good" to be; not what good means to ? .
1. So you follow a ? , but this ? 's intentions or goals you know nothing of. How do you know where ? is going? How do you know ? is acting at all? "Whatever it is" means you don't really know. If he sees destruction of humanity "right", you agree with that? If ? wakes up one day and decides the "good" thing to do is "evil", you roll with that just because he is ? ? Where does the authority come from?
2. Whether you want to say ? is a deity/supernatural being or an "idea", you're assuming that "? " takes a certain role in your personal life. You're making an assumption on what or who ? is and what ? does. If you're not assuming, you have to be certain. What makes you certain ? is one way and not the other?
3. It sounds like you're confused about who ? is. The Bible was written by man, therefore you contradict yourself by saying that it is not up to man to define ? . The Bible tells you ? is good. If not for the Bible, how would you arrive at such a conclusion? What exactly does good mean to ? ? Any answer you provide, you go back to number one: assuming.
It sounds to me as if you're admitting that your ? is essentially imaginary -
1.) to know itself. to experience and be the experience of intention and purpose.
So we are ? 's "consciousness", you would say?
-
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »
yep. a part of it anyway. i think the movie the nines talks about this in a way. them jews be putting the real ? the bible says in a lot of their science-fiction or mind ? type of movies. and the more i study buddhism the more i think he was tapping into the same thing and was a messiah of sorts to his people. i'd prolly get jumped if i was in a church or a synagogue saying this ? lol -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »Jaded Righteousness wrote: »alissowack wrote: »
The thing is however...? 's Existence doesn't necessarily mean that we get what we want.
what does it mean then?
It means that we can't think we can rest in our assumptions on who ? is. I can believe that because ? exists, that ? also shares in my perverted perceptions of Him...that ? supports "my" cause. If anything, ? supports His Own Cause; apart from what anybody thinks and if we just happened to be "on board", so be it.
1. What is ? 's cause? Not necessarily what CAUSED ? , but what is his intention or purpose
2. If you're not resting on an assumption of who ? is, where do you get your idea of ? to begin with? Theism requires that you know who ? is or what ? does or what ? thinks at least to some degree if not completely
3. What is your definition of ? ? I'm interested in knowing
1. What is ? 's Cause? Whatever it is, it not for man to decide. Whatever He sees as good, right, or just...we in not in a position to say different.
2. Maybe it's just me, but I have a different perception on what is an idea and what is an assumption. If ? is an idea, then there is no reason to assume. I...or somebody else...can make ? to be anything. I can determine what I want ? to be and no one can tell me different. But if ? exists, then I am only left to assume who (or what...just to be unbiased) this deity is.
3. This is much like number one. It is not up to man to define who ? is. I don't think that it is a secret that I in favor on what the Bible says about ? , but it doesn't mean that my assumptions about what the Bible says are...in favor of what the Bible says. I can say that ? is good...but it would only be based on what I assume "good" to be; not what good means to ? .
1. So you follow a ? , but this ? 's intentions or goals you know nothing of. How do you know where ? is going? How do you know ? is acting at all? "Whatever it is" means you don't really know. If he sees destruction of humanity "right", you agree with that? If ? wakes up one day and decides the "good" thing to do is "evil", you roll with that just because he is ? ? Where does the authority come from?
2. Whether you want to say ? is a deity/supernatural being or an "idea", you're assuming that "? " takes a certain role in your personal life. You're making an assumption on what or who ? is and what ? does. If you're not assuming, you have to be certain. What makes you certain ? is one way and not the other?
3. It sounds like you're confused about who ? is. The Bible was written by man, therefore you contradict yourself by saying that it is not up to man to define ? . The Bible tells you ? is good. If not for the Bible, how would you arrive at such a conclusion? What exactly does good mean to ? ? Any answer you provide, you go back to number one: assuming.
It sounds to me as if you're admitting that your ? is essentially imaginary
1. I guess maybe I should have revealed the source for my belief for some clarity on what I "know". My belief in ? is based in what the Bible says. The problem with this is that...because the Bible says something doesn't mean that it is perceived with the same discretion and discernment as what it is intended to...or the way ? sees things. Yes, there are rules and laws in which to abide by and the Bible stresses that importance. But I can't assume that because I do good, that I should get good in return...or that ? better reward me for my goodness. Even apart from religion, I can't think that because I treat somebody kind and nice that I should expect somebody to treat me the same.
2. I disagree. If I decided that it would be a good idea to make a deity, then I come up with the grounds in which ? should or shouldn't be. I can make my deity as I see fit and it doesn't have to comply with anybody else's deity. My deity doesn't have to have any significance to how I live my life. Now if ? exists and the Bible (or any other text) sets the groundwork for what I should do with my life, then I am left to determine for myself or assume what is said by what I should do with my life.
3. Again, I disagree. I don't think you quite understand the angle I'm coming from when I say "man can't define ? ". Maybe you've gone through this before. Someone comes at you talking about what they know about you. They assume that you are something that you are not and keeps pushing the point that they have you figured out. You say to yourself (or at that person), "You don't know anything about me". That person doesn't have the authority to tell you who you are...you do. I have the Bible and the it says a bunch of things...but it doesn't me I know ? . There is a relational knowledge that I'm trying to project in saying that man can't define ? .
Because someone's deity is imaginary doesn't mean that ? isn't real.
-
Why create a seperate deity for a ? you believe in, or may or may not exist? Are you polytheist?
The Bible ? says that he will reward you for good deeds. No, I guess it would not be "right" to do good just to receive reward or in fear of punishment, but the Bible ? does, in fact, act on reward and punishment.
There's a problem with your last point. The Bible ? WANTS you to know him. If I wanted that person to know me like the Bible ? does, I'd stress it as he does and repeatedly tell them who I am like the Bible does. Of course, they don't have the authority to decide who I am or change who I am, but through me, they would know me. Again, theism suggests that you know ? -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »
"All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXmzcroUmdU
DAMN NOW IMA HAFTA PAY A LIL CLOSER ATTENTION TO BILL HICKS. I LIKE THAT QUOTE. -
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »Why create a seperate deity for a ? you believe in, or may or may not exist? Are you polytheist?
The Bible ? says that he will reward you for good deeds. No, I guess it would not be "right" to do good just to receive reward or in fear of punishment, but the Bible ? does, in fact, act on reward and punishment.
There's a problem with your last point. The Bible ? WANTS you to know him. If I wanted that person to know me like the Bible ? does, I'd stress it as he does and repeatedly tell them who I am like the Bible does. Of course, they don't have the authority to decide who I am or change who I am, but through me, they would know me. Again, theism suggests that you know ?
Maybe I should have made this clear. I drew up this idea hoping that you would assume that I had no knowledge of the Bible ? and I was like..."wouldn't it be a good idea to make one?"
The "? rewarding for good deeds" part...the Bible speaks out a whole lot about people who do "good" just for reward or fear of punishment. In fact, that is the mistake that some churches make in preaching the message.
You know...? does want people to know Him. But does ? "need" people to know Him? Is ? 's existence totally depended on how many people embrace Him? I did a "Webster" and theism isn't what you are suggesting. If people can know ? , we would need it to be an -ism or -ology. -
Apparently, ? needs people to know him. If no one knew of him, would he exist? He's omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent: need, want.. what's the difference?
-
Jaded Righteousness wrote: »
"All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. We are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXmzcroUmdU
DAMN NOW IMA HAFTA PAY A LIL CLOSER ATTENTION TO BILL HICKS. I LIKE THAT QUOTE.
cosign. That quote always sticks out to me
