The ending of the era of Philosophical thought

[questfortruth]

.....You can imagine or create or envision God to be whatever to wish/desire and do so without any validation what so ever. ......

You are describing the making of an idol. My God is not a man-made. Why? Because the Christianity is not the paganism.

 

[crowfeather]

Sometimes I wonder if this is the grace that is found in Buddhism. No thought, no mind. Where consciousness gets out of the way of us being who we are.

I call it intuition. Intuitive action. It's quite different to mind-based activity. I can do both, but almost never use mind, so perhaps it will atrophy, finally.
If it does, I'll barely miss it. Everything I do is better, more accurate, and very much faster, when thinking is bypassed.
Wild creatures love me for it, as a side benefit, and that may be the best thing of all.

 

[questfortruth]

Look: the Trump is reading the Bible. Today he liker wanting to pollute the Earth. But read again, "Trumpy":

"And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth."
(Revelation 11:18 KJV)

 

[Nakosis]

I call it intuition. Intuitive action. It's quite different to mind-based activity. I can do both, but almost never use mind, so perhaps it will atrophy, finally.
If it does, I'll barely miss it. Everything I do is better, more accurate, and very much faster, when thinking is bypassed.
Wild creatures love me for it, as a side benefit, and that may be the best thing of all.

Sure, I've been able to calm wild animals, well maybe not wild animals but angry ones.

 

[Nakosis]

You are describing the making of an idol. My God is not a man-made. Why? Because the Christianity is not the paganism.

Not consciously created. However your lack of awareness is not proof of a God.

An attack on idol worshipers is really just a power struggle between religions. Christianity has it's own idols, like the cross. Calling folks idol worshipers is just a way for Christians to snarl at the beliefs of other religions to discourage any tolerance of those religions.

 

[questfortruth]

Not consciously created. However your lack of awareness is not proof of a God.

An attack on idol worshipers is really just a power struggle between religions. Christianity has it's own idols, like the cross. Calling folks idol worshipers is just a way for Christians to snarl at the beliefs of other religions to discourage any tolerance of those religions.

Please list the idols of the false atheism. Let me start:
1) Nihilo (the denial of God, and, thus the denial of all reality), 2) money.

 

[Nakosis]

Please list the idols of the false atheism. Let me start:
1) Nihilo (the denial of God, and, thus the denial of all reality), 2) money.

You're making this stuff up so go fer it.

Tell you what, you do the false atheist idols and I'll do the religious idols..

1) the Cross 2) the Bible 3) the church building 4) money... Hey! look at that some cross idoling. 5) Jesus Christ.

I'm up to 5, whats you got?

 

[questfortruth]

You're making this stuff up so go fer it.

Tell you want, you do the false atheist idols and I'll do the religious idols.. .....

Opposer: "You can imagine or create or envision God to be whatever to wish/desire and do so without any validation what so ever."

You are describing the making of an idol. My God is not a man-made. Why? Because the Christianity is not the paganism. Why? The Absolutely Superior Being is the True God, not the idol: "Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than He?" 1 Corinthians 10:22.
But the false atheism is the "strongest" form of Paganism. The endless list of the idols of the false atheism begins with:
1) Nihilo (the denial of God, and, thus the denial of all reality), 2) money.

 

[Windwalker]

Descartes derailed the whole Western world with his inanity: "I think, therefore I am".
Either he was the biggest dope in human history, or the biggest dopes in human history completely misconstrued his words.

They have misconstrued his words. What he was saying is I can doubt the reality of all things, but I cannot doubt my own existence because there is the one that is doubting. "I doubt, therefore I exist". If you want to understand this in your context, when you strip away all thought, you have the Witness of all thoughts. I Exist, before thoughts and doubts, else how could there be any doubt or thought? That's what he was getting at.

One exists before one thinks. By thinking, one becomes aware of oneself as separate from what one thinks about.

A dualistic reality is not a non-reality. It's simply a perspective of Reality, just as monism is. Nonduality does not deny duality. If it did, it would be a subtle-duality, claim this is real and that is not. That's a split of true versus false, hence it is a duality.

A human is screwed as soon as he starts to think. Only by backtracking, undoing all thought, can he once again exist.
And only then, if he is exceedingly skilled, and also exceedingly lucky.

I prefer to understand that instead of going backward, we move forward beyond an exclusive duality into nonduality. If we go backward, denying the unique individual self altogether, then we are an undifferentiated mass of prehuman infantilism. An infinite is undifferentiated from the mother and the world in its mind. It is fused with the world and has no sense of self. But we cannot function as humans in this condition. Instead we have to differentiate into a dualistic reality, and then when we are grown, hopefully, we as awake adults are able to realize we are all that is in the world, within ourselves. We are both and neither.

 

[Windwalker]

Nothing I write is the product of thought; you only think it is.
That may sound trite, and absurd, but actually it is true.
I never think about what I'm going to write: I just do it. Either my mind works instantaneously, or there isn't any thinking going on.

You are mistaking and conflating several things here. You are conflating being in a "flow state", where you are spontaneously moving and expressing feelings, such as I do playing music, writing my book, doing photography, doing Tai Chi, etc, with a state of "no thought". This is incorrect thinking on your part. The thoughts are there, as you in fact are expressing things using words, or notes, or movements of the body as in dance, etc.

You are simply accessing those with a 'higher mind' as it were. Instead of looking at your feet as you dance and trying to consciously 'think' about the movements, you 'let go' and let the whole person, the body, the mind, the emotions, the spirit, 'take over' as it were. This is not to the exclusion of thought, rather it is the mastery of it, integrating it into the whole person. These are what are called nondual flow states. I do this all the time in very many areas of my life.

I know what it is to have pure "no thought' in high-causal meditative states. These flow states are not that, even if the mind seems 'at rest' during them. It's just operating at 'very subtle', or low-causal states.

I drive the same way. I engage in combat the same way. I build wooden structures the same way. Nothing I do is the product of thought.

Imagine something you have no knowledge of, such as piloting a submarine or flying a commercial airliner. Do you imagine you could just sit in the pilot's seat and execute maneuvers with no training or prior knowledge at all in these states?

In order for what you are saying to be true, you are talking literal pure magic; something out of nothing. And if so, I'd just have to say prove it. You are simply taking skills that your mind as learned and using them at higher functional levels. But the mind is still using thoughts, even if you are not consciously focused on them. You have through practice moved them into your nervous system. They don't just magically get there without thought and practice. Do they?

This is something the reader either takes on faith, because he/she is intrigued by it, or not. It is an unknown state to any who do not know it.

It is a state well-known to me. I just disagree with your interpretations of what this is.

 

[Nakosis]

Opposer: "You can imagine or create or envision God to be whatever to wish/desire and do so without any validation what so ever."

You are describing the making of an idol. My God is not a man-made. Why? Because the Christianity is not the paganism. Why? The Absolutely Superior Being is the True God, not the idol: "Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than He?" 1 Corinthians 10:22.

Ok, if I'm wrong then where is the validation? According to you, you're not an idolater because your God is not man-made. So I'll leave it to you to prove that the Bible and your God are not man-made. Barring that, the truth is you are an idolater just the same as those you criticize.

But the false atheism is the "strongest" form of Paganism. The endless list of the idols of the false atheism begins with:
1) Nihilo (the denial of God, and, thus the denial of all reality), 2) money.

First what you call a false atheist is usually considered an antitheist.
Antitheism - RationalWiki

Second, I'm not sure why you attach money to false atheism. I suspect it's just low hanging fruit. It's easy to connect the love of money to idolatry, so it gets tossed into a argument like trying to connect a person to Hitler as a way to invalidate their argument. Atheists and religious folks are equally as capable of being materialistic or non-materialistic.

 

[questfortruth]

..... So I'll leave it to you to prove that the Bible and your God are not man-made. Barring that, the truth is you are an idolater just the same as those you criticize. ....

The Presumption of Innocence. Heard of it?

 

[Nakosis]

The Presumption of Innocence. Heard of it?

Yes, ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies)

You declared that your God was not man made.

 

[questfortruth]

Yes, ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies)

You declared that your God was not man made.

Nobody is wrong, until he is proven wrong. So, stop the trolling against the Christianity, please. You can not publicly say "no God".

 

[Nakosis]

Nobody is wrong, until he is proven wrong.

Nobody need listen to you or anyone else until they are proven right.

So, stop the trolling against the Christianity, please.

Sure, when you stop making declarations which are unproven.

You can not publicly say "no God".

Like anything else without proof, I can say no to it.

 

[questfortruth]

.....
Like anything else without proof, I can say no to it.

Say "maybe", not "no". But my Religion is proven in the link:

 

[Nakosis]

Say "maybe", not "no". But my Religion is proven in the link:

Your idea of proof and mine differ. However it is totally up to you what you accept. If you feel it is the best possible answer, it's how you feel.

 

[questfortruth]

Your idea of proof and mine differ. However it is totally up to you what you accept. If you feel it is the best possible answer, it's how you feel.

A proof is the proof, because is objective! Not subjective. There are no subjective proofs. Use the different word then.

 

[osgart]

the world is sorely lacking in the art of good bull. maybe we are on the threshold of the dawning of a new age of philosophy.

good bull that is highly plausible.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Please list the idols of the false atheism. Let me start:
1) Nihilo (the denial of God, and, thus the denial of all reality)

#1 is a non-sequitur. Denial of your god does not logically lead to a denial of all reality. In fact it can be argued that the opposite is the case - that worship of your god is a denial of reality.