If there is a heaven...

GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
If there is a heaven...

 Hi all,

So here's a little thought experiment I'd like Christians to think about and answer for me..

I am an atheist; I have a good friend, whom I love very much, who is a good Christian. I however blaspheme regularly, am lustful, commit heresy, am greedy.. you get the point. Despite this, being a good Christian, my friend still values me and loves me dearly.

We both die in a car crash - He'll obviously ascend straight to heaven for an eternity of bliss while I will be pulled into the 5th circle of Hell and damned for all eternity in everlasting sorrow, pain and misery. Ouch. Sounds nasty.

However, my friend, in a quiet moment of reflection between harp recitals, may pause and wonder what happened to his atheist buddy. He will, no doubt, realise I am suffering in Hell, and this might make him a little sad that I am not with him in Heaven and am in so much pain - surely in order to be truly in bliss one would prefer to have all their best and closest friends and family around them; the fact that I am not there would mean that his heaven isn't quite as nice as it could have been.

Is that still Heaven for him then? How is this rationalised in Christian heads?

 

 

 


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
You,re looking at

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

 Hi all,

So here's a little thought experiment I'd like Christians to think about and answer for me..

I am an atheist; I have a good friend, whom I love very much, who is a good Christian. I however blaspheme regularly, am lustful, commit heresy, am greedy.. you get the point. Despite this, being a good Christian, my friend still values me and loves me dearly.

We both die in a car crash - He'll obviously ascend straight to heaven for an eternity of bliss while I will be pulled into the 5th circle of Hell and damned for all eternity in everlasting sorrow, pain and misery. Ouch. Sounds nasty.

However, my friend, in a quiet moment of reflection between harp recitals, may pause and wonder what happened to his atheist buddy. He will, no doubt, realise I am suffering in Hell, and this might make him a little sad that I am not with him in Heaven and am in so much pain - surely in order to be truly in bliss one would prefer to have all their best and closest friends and family around them; the fact that I am not there would mean that his heaven isn't quite as nice as it could have been.

Is that still Heaven for him then? How is this rationalised in Christian heads?

 

 

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation is correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
You,re looking at

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

 Hi all,

So here's a little thought experiment I'd like Christians to think about and answer for me..

I am an atheist; I have a good friend, whom I love very much, who is a good Christian. I however blaspheme regularly, am lustful, commit heresy, am greedy.. you get the point. Despite this, being a good Christian, my friend still values me and loves me dearly.

We both die in a car crash - He'll obviously ascend straight to heaven for an eternity of bliss while I will be pulled into the 5th circle of Hell and damned for all eternity in everlasting sorrow, pain and misery. Ouch. Sounds nasty.

However, my friend, in a quiet moment of reflection between harp recitals, may pause and wonder what happened to his atheist buddy. He will, no doubt, realise I am suffering in Hell, and this might make him a little sad that I am not with him in Heaven and am in so much pain - surely in order to be truly in bliss one would prefer to have all their best and closest friends and family around them; the fact that I am not there would mean that his heaven isn't quite as nice as it could have been.

Is that still Heaven for him then? How is this rationalised in Christian heads?

 

 

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
GodsUseForAMosquito

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

 Hi all,

So here's a little thought experiment I'd like Christians to think about and answer for me..

I am an atheist; I have a good friend, whom I love very much, who is a good Christian. I however blaspheme regularly, am lustful, commit heresy, am greedy.. you get the point. Despite this, being a good Christian, my friend still values me and loves me dearly.

We both die in a car crash - He'll obviously ascend straight to heaven for an eternity of bliss while I will be pulled into the 5th circle of Hell and damned for all eternity in everlasting sorrow, pain and misery. Ouch. Sounds nasty.

However, my friend, in a quiet moment of reflection between harp recitals, may pause and wonder what happened to his atheist buddy. He will, no doubt, realise I am suffering in Hell, and this might make him a little sad that I am not with him in Heaven and am in so much pain - surely in order to be truly in bliss one would prefer to have all their best and closest friends and family around them; the fact that I am not there would mean that his heaven isn't quite as nice as it could have been.

Is that still Heaven for him then? How is this rationalised in Christian heads?

 

That has always been one of the biggest questions that I have never been able to wrest a satisfactory answer from a theist. Even before I left religion, I used to ask that question : "How could one enjoy an eternity of peace if they knew that millions of people were burning in hell ?"

This is not even counting close friends and family, but to think of the hundreds of millions that are supposedly there, would seem to take away from any possible pleasure that I would be able to receive. Besides that, what would an ETERNITY of PLEASURE look like? How long would it be before things got infinitely boring and utterly pointless ? How many centuries could I float around on clouds and look at god before finally growing utterly sick of it ?

BTW.  I your avatar. Is that your dog ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:the European

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Ktulu
atheist
Posts: 1829
Joined: 2010-12-21
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:Old

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

I'd rather sit through Sunday mass than another Dan Brown book.  At least the mass is over in a few hours, the book you have to endure for days... Horrible.  I guess if people keep buying them, he'll keep writing.

"Don't seek these laws to understand. Only the mad can comprehend..." -- George Cosbuc


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote:Old

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

Has old seer actually ever coughed up some hard material on his 'superior' Christianity? His/her posts are ever vague and rarely easily readable. It's getting pretty annoying with the generic sweeping statements of 'I-know-better'.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Yes

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

we have it right. Logic has it that someday someone will encounter what the problems are and also the solution. Atheism will not solve the problem. There are only two standpoints from which the book can be interpreted, (and life for that matter) a materialistic and/or a spiritual. There is no other ways possible. We have the latter. Then ---it has to be the right one. The concept within the book leads to becoming proper human beings. It's only a matter of whether one wants to look and learn or not. Yes- the Euros botched it (the Pope is "dead" wrong and soon he will know it) be careful, you may not want to learn, then you won't have anyone to condemn. You wouldn't want someone spoiling the fun --huh.   How many billions are claiming to be Christian, and, what's going to happen when they're shown wrong. Happy wake up time children---it's over. All that is left is for the fat lady to sing.   Alpha Smurf isn't on anyone's side---he's in the middle, Both sides got it wrong.      Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 679
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
GodsUseForAMosquito

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

 Hi all,

So here's a little thought experiment I'd like Christians to think about and answer for me..

I am an atheist; I have a good friend, whom I love very much, who is a good Christian. I however blaspheme regularly, am lustful, commit heresy, am greedy.. you get the point. Despite this, being a good Christian, my friend still values me and loves me dearly.

We both die in a car crash - He'll obviously ascend straight to heaven for an eternity of bliss while I will be pulled into the 5th circle of Hell and damned for all eternity in everlasting sorrow, pain and misery. Ouch. Sounds nasty.

However, my friend, in a quiet moment of reflection between harp recitals, may pause and wonder what happened to his atheist buddy. He will, no doubt, realise I am suffering in Hell, and this might make him a little sad that I am not with him in Heaven and am in so much pain - surely in order to be truly in bliss one would prefer to have all their best and closest friends and family around them; the fact that I am not there would mean that his heaven isn't quite as nice as it could have been.

Is that still Heaven for him then? How is this rationalised in Christian heads?

 

There's no need to worry about it since it's all fucking BULLSHIT! You might as well ask what heaven will be like with Zeus and Hercules!

An even bigger question is why do sick kids die most everyday?? How could a kind and loving god let that happen?

 

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
If you wish to

ThunderJones wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

Has old seer actually ever coughed up some hard material on his 'superior' Christianity? His/her posts are ever vague and rarely easily readable. It's getting pretty annoying with the generic sweeping statements of 'I-know-better'.

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:we have it

Old Seer wrote:

we have it right. Logic has it that someday someone will encounter what the problems are and also the solution. Atheism will not solve the problem. There are only two standpoints from which the book can be interpreted, (and life for that matter) a materialistic and/or a spiritual. There is no other ways possible. We have the latter. Then ---it has to be the right one. The concept within the book leads to becoming proper human beings. It's only a matter of whether one wants to look and learn or not. Yes- the Euros botched it (the Pope is "dead" wrong and soon he will know it) be careful, you may not want to learn, then you won't have anyone to condemn. You wouldn't want someone spoiling the fun --huh.   How many billions are claiming to be Christian, and, what's going to happen when they're shown wrong. Happy wake up time children---it's over. All that is left is for the fat lady to sing.   Alpha Smurf isn't on anyone's side---he's in the middle, Both sides got it wrong.      Smiling

Material vs. Spiritual eh ? And please do pray tell, where are the boundaries and which is which ? Base instincts like hunger, shelter, the need for reproduction, and survival, are those the realm of material or spiritual ? Love, compassion, hatred and anger, boredom and awe, are those spiritual or material ? Or do you define spiritual as somehow denying yourself certain things ( i.e. fasting, constant meditation, etc.) ? So please give me the dichotomy of what is spiritual and what is material. Would prefer a clear cut definition, rather than vague interpretation. After all, the only christianity that I know is the ones that those evil Europeans twisted all around.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:re-evaluate

Old Seer wrote:

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

Give me a definition of  "proper" human and exactly what needs to be evaluated.

EDIT : Define " hard " material while we are at it.

You keep talking about "proper" interpretation of the book. Where does that begin at and how ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Excellant-

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

Give me a definition of  "proper" human and exactly what needs to be evaluated.

EDIT : Define " hard " material while we are at it.

You keep talking about "proper" interpretation of the book. Where does that begin at and how ?

Civilization has a skewed concept of "Human". There are different applications of the term. Such as ---Atheists have a "human animal" concept which the world at large also has. The term was just used several weeks ago on PBS news. We say there is no such thing, as human is human and animal is animal. These are two different sets  of relationship values which everyone has. The world runs on the human animal concept, however--if the animal direction can be separated from the human direction then they cannot be used in the same terminology (as human animal) and be correct.. "Human animal is a contradiction in terms". Proper human is one who subtracts disallows) the animal traits leaving only the Human traits in relations with others. In civil societies the animal side/traits gets the priority (higher value), and creates the social problems. If floks learn to reject the animal intents you have a different society based on human traits as the higher value. civilization cannot exist on soley human traits, it will collapse. IE- the stock market would end. And being government floks operate on the animal traits then government also collapses. Why would I want to follow, or support,  a bunch of animal bafoons when I can see they're the ones that keep the problem in operation. If I want to be part of solving the problem then I have to reject animal values and replace them with "human" values. That's simply what the book is about, and that can only be extracted from a proper interpretation.

OK-New heavens and new earth-- Ancient symbolic terms. New heavens--- your heavens contains what you hold as valuable, in this case, you elevate animal characters over human (so does everyone else). Heavens=higher/elevated=value. New earth=soul=person. Replacing the animal values with human values creates you into a new/different person. Civilization cannot operate on this type of person.

OK, now the Pope is wrong ain't he---now you can prove it---to him. He operates on a status above others--that.s anti christ/anti human/animal concept/immoral. He can kiss his own fanny goodbye---he's awwwta here, there's no way he's a Christian. BUT-so can the president of the US and every other leader of any sort. This is the "hard material" TJ is looking for. The only way religion can be dealt with is Alpha Smurfs way. Atheism won't do it. What's God---you me and everyone else. The people, the masses, get the final say so here--and we know it. 

We do not operate on conceit, that is no longer our way. We're not dominating anyone- we are trying to give you what we know. We are merely giving our interpretation of the book, and it is not up to us to make it right or wrong for anyone. What we understand as right for us may also be right for everyone else, but it is up to those who want to think freely to determine for them selves. All we can do is give freely, and not think it for you.

The book isn't wrong. The Euros are. The U S is also Euro, samo samo.

The proper interpretation of the book leads to---everyone is wrong, or, going the wrong way to make peace on the planet. It cannot be done by civilized minds. Right and wrong can be anything anyone wants them to be, but there is only one way to create a peaceful world.

The book merely shows---somebody already knew.

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:ThunderJones

Old Seer wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

Has old seer actually ever coughed up some hard material on his 'superior' Christianity? His/her posts are ever vague and rarely easily readable. It's getting pretty annoying with the generic sweeping statements of 'I-know-better'.

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

Even your attempted retorts don't make any sense.

You have not given any 'hard material'. All you keep doing is making incomprehensible posts referencing your religion, which you have yet to back up.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
So then

ThunderJones wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

Has old seer actually ever coughed up some hard material on his 'superior' Christianity? His/her posts are ever vague and rarely easily readable. It's getting pretty annoying with the generic sweeping statements of 'I-know-better'.

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

Even your attempted retorts don't make any sense.

You have not given any 'hard material'. All you keep doing is making incomprehensible posts referencing your religion, which you have yet to back up.

You want us to interpret the book your way---that's coincides with "your" idea of what you want---namely- as a basis of condemnation of others. You would prefer to remain animal minded so be it. Why worry about it if it's not for you. Or, you are incapable of understanding at this time, we understand this. It will simply take you more time---be patient with yourself, you'll get it in time. Sometimes the simpler things take thousands of words to explain, and a lot of time for another to understand. Just keep at it, you're not stupid. With some, the superficial blocks passage of thought to the spiritual. IE- the two cherubs and the flaming sword-it's a mental block. The cherubs ( as we interpret them) Hate and Contempt, The sword--self destruction. In order to go back to the tree of life one must become destroyed. Destroyed in this case is the same as "transition" , from one manner of person into another, meaning--the previous one is dead. Fire in ancient times meant destruction.  Perhaps you are leaning a bit to hard on the material/physical side of the universe. We're not worried, you'll get it understood.

 

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote: That's

Old Seer wrote:

 That's simply what the book is about, and that can only be extracted from a proper interpretation.

The proper interpretation of the book leads to---everyone is wrong, or, going the wrong way to make peace on the planet. It cannot be done by civilized minds. Right and wrong can be anything anyone wants them to be, but there is only one way to create a peaceful world.

The book merely shows---somebody already knew.

Ok, so how does one go about with "proper" interpretation and how does one determine that they are indeed following " proper " interpretation ?

For instance, if I am factoring an algebra problem incorrectly, all I have to do is reverse the order to see that my calculations were incorrect.

What does one do, when all that one is working on is an interpretation ? In other words, how do you know if the interpretation is correct or not ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Ok, good Qs.

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

we have it right. Logic has it that someday someone will encounter what the problems are and also the solution. Atheism will not solve the problem. There are only two standpoints from which the book can be interpreted, (and life for that matter) a materialistic and/or a spiritual. There is no other ways possible. We have the latter. Then ---it has to be the right one. The concept within the book leads to becoming proper human beings. It's only a matter of whether one wants to look and learn or not. Yes- the Euros botched it (the Pope is "dead" wrong and soon he will know it) be careful, you may not want to learn, then you won't have anyone to condemn. You wouldn't want someone spoiling the fun --huh.   How many billions are claiming to be Christian, and, what's going to happen when they're shown wrong. Happy wake up time children---it's over. All that is left is for the fat lady to sing.   Alpha Smurf isn't on anyone's side---he's in the middle, Both sides got it wrong.      Smiling

Material vs. Spiritual eh ? And please do pray tell, where are the boundaries and which is which ? Base instincts like hunger, shelter, the need for reproduction, and survival, are those the realm of material or spiritual ? Love, compassion, hatred and anger, boredom and awe, are those spiritual or material ? Or do you define spiritual as somehow denying yourself certain things ( i.e. fasting, constant meditation, etc.) ? So please give me the dichotomy of what is spiritual and what is material. Would prefer a clear cut definition, rather than vague interpretation. After all, the only christianity that I know is the ones that those evil Europeans twisted all around.

Love, kindness, compassion etc are spiritual. The spiritual is non-material, that is--it is of no material. Ok- If you feel love for someone where is the love, within the brain, right. Can you draw picture of it, can you see it as a form. Does it have material mass. What does it weigh. Can you take it out of your brain and set it on the table----nope, it is non-material. You can only see the effects. Hug your child and I see---the effects

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:ThunderJones

Old Seer wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

Has old seer actually ever coughed up some hard material on his 'superior' Christianity? His/her posts are ever vague and rarely easily readable. It's getting pretty annoying with the generic sweeping statements of 'I-know-better'.

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

Even your attempted retorts don't make any sense.

You have not given any 'hard material'. All you keep doing is making incomprehensible posts referencing your religion, which you have yet to back up.

You want us to interpret the book your way---that's coincides with "your" idea of what you want---namely- as a basis of condemnation of others. You would prefer to remain animal minded so be it. Why worry about it if it's not for you. Or, you are incapable of understanding at this time, we understand this. It will simply take you more time---be patient with yourself, you'll get it in time. Sometimes the simpler things take thousands of words to explain, and a lot of time for another to understand. Just keep at it, you're not stupid. With some, the superficial blocks passage of thought to the spiritual. IE- the two cherubs and the flaming sword-it's a mental block. The cherubs ( as we interpret them) Hate and Contempt, The sword--self destruction. In order to go back to the tree of life one must become destroyed. Destroyed in this case is the same as "transition" , from one manner of person into another, meaning--the previous one is dead. Fire in ancient times meant destruction.  Perhaps you are leaning a bit to hard on the material/physical side of the universe. We're not worried, you'll get it understood.

 

Do you know how to read? You are extremely condescending and outrageously bad at reading comprehension as well as eloquence.

Point me to a statement I have made that led you to believe I am either 'animal-minded' or that I want you to interpret ANY book 'my way'. All I was asking for is for you to actually post some real material instead of hinting cryptically at your alledgedly amazing understanding of true religion. I have yet to see you make a single direct and informative post. Everything you write is either condescending drivel or mired in poor communication and vague assertions.

Your complete incompetence at not only communication but also putting together a post that is not a complete mess does not bode well for your little society's future.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4172
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:Love,

Old Seer wrote:

Love, kindness, compassion etc are spiritual. The spiritual is non-material, that is--it is of no material. Ok- If you feel love for someone where is the love, within the brain, right. Can you draw picture of it, can you see it as a form. Does it have material mass. What does it weigh. Can you take it out of your brain and set it on the table----nope, it is non-material. You can only see the effects. Hug your child and I see---the effects

Apparently the Smurfs don't have a neuroscientist nor have heard of neuroimaging (or google for that matter). You can simply type "neuroimaging of emotions" and you can get a significant number of research papers analyzing how our brains create and process emotions.

 


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Negative

ThunderJones wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

ThunderJones wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

Has old seer actually ever coughed up some hard material on his 'superior' Christianity? His/her posts are ever vague and rarely easily readable. It's getting pretty annoying with the generic sweeping statements of 'I-know-better'.

re-evaluate and learn to become a "proper" human, You can then reject it. But if you don't want to learn then remain as you are. When the masses learn what a proper human "is, it's over. The systems don't run on humanity, it runs on animalism. You can choose to be snide or not can't you. Go the other way and--------problem solved. If you wish to argue the point you'll only prove us right. Go for it.  There's no such thing as superior Christianity.   Christianity has no prefixes or suffixes.  Everyone has it, it's a matter of learning what it is.  The rules of the forum demands all be treated in a Christian manner, not the Euro brand. I interject that for your learning.  Now you have some hard material. Now you can go to work on yourself---along with everyone else, and we'll do the same.   See, I do know better, somebody has to do it.    Smiling

Even your attempted retorts don't make any sense.

You have not given any 'hard material'. All you keep doing is making incomprehensible posts referencing your religion, which you have yet to back up.

You want us to interpret the book your way---that's coincides with "your" idea of what you want---namely- as a basis of condemnation of others. You would prefer to remain animal minded so be it. Why worry about it if it's not for you. Or, you are incapable of understanding at this time, we understand this. It will simply take you more time---be patient with yourself, you'll get it in time. Sometimes the simpler things take thousands of words to explain, and a lot of time for another to understand. Just keep at it, you're not stupid. With some, the superficial blocks passage of thought to the spiritual. IE- the two cherubs and the flaming sword-it's a mental block. The cherubs ( as we interpret them) Hate and Contempt, The sword--self destruction. In order to go back to the tree of life one must become destroyed. Destroyed in this case is the same as "transition" , from one manner of person into another, meaning--the previous one is dead. Fire in ancient times meant destruction.  Perhaps you are leaning a bit to hard on the material/physical side of the universe. We're not worried, you'll get it understood.

 

Do you know how to read? You are extremely condescending and outrageously bad at reading comprehension as well as eloquence.

Point me to a statement I have made that led you to believe I am either 'animal-minded' or that I want you to interpret ANY book 'my way'. All I was asking for is for you to actually post some real material instead of hinting cryptically at your alledgedly amazing understanding of true religion. I have yet to see you make a single direct and informative post. Everything you write is either condescending drivel or mired in poor communication and vague assertions.

Your complete incompetence at not only communication but also putting together a post that is not a complete mess does not bode well for your little society's future.

mentality extends from the animal mind. Why are you upset (if you are) If you believe you are a human animal then you should have no problem. The problem with "human animal" is- the animal wins the day.

OK-In our interpretation of the book the human is the same as Christianity, which is the same as Adam.

Back to the thread topic--Heaven---- is a  state of mind. A like explanation is ---the Attic where you keep all the goodies that make you happy and that have value. The animal entity is what is valued over the human in today,s world. That's why all the negativity toward others comes from that is prevalent on the forums, enmity is an animal trait. That is what civilization is based upon. That's the best I can do for now. If you disagree then you may want me to agree with you. But I've already lived in your world and am still here. I see differently based on our interpretation of the book. It is up to you to comprehend. I can't do that for you.  Keep trying    Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Old Seer

Beyond Saving wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Love, kindness, compassion etc are spiritual. The spiritual is non-material, that is--it is of no material. Ok- If you feel love for someone where is the love, within the brain, right. Can you draw picture of it, can you see it as a form. Does it have material mass. What does it weigh. Can you take it out of your brain and set it on the table----nope, it is non-material. You can only see the effects. Hug your child and I see---the effects

Apparently the Smurfs don't have a neuroscientist nor have heard of neuroimaging (or google for that matter). You can simply type "neuroimaging of emotions" and you can get a significant number of research papers analyzing how our brains create and process emotions.

 

We have  Psycho Smurfs that agree with us. You're not going to show them to much new. Most Psycho Dudes on your side still have to learn what an animal mind is. We think Freud and others are fools. They believe in a human animal the same as you. All Freud could only do is extoll on gratification through animal tendences and now you're all the worse for it. The idiot couldn't understand what a human was/is. The book is nothing but Psychology and the consequences of how people think. What do you say will solve the worlds problem and what's the source of the problems. It come from how people think would it not be so. Your Psycho Dudes have been around for a century or more and haven't solves a single social problem, not ever. why not. Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


peto verum
atheist
Posts: 46
Joined: 2011-03-09
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:[... ... ...

Old Seer wrote:

[... ... ... Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

 

This isn't the totality of what "love" is, nor have I seen anybody claim they understand the entirety of it, but this article puts a tangible aspect to it and seems to take away the need for magic to describe it.   http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=a-love-hate-relationship

KORAN, n.
A book which the Mohammedans foolishly believe to have been written by divine inspiration, but which Christians know to be a wicked imposture, contradictory to the Holy Scriptures. ~ The Devil's Dictionary


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4172
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:We have 

Old Seer wrote:

We have  Psycho Smurfs that agree with us. You're not going to show them to much new. Most Psycho Dudes on your side still have to learn what an animal mind is. We think Freud and others are fools. They believe in a human animal the same as you. All Freud could only do is extoll on gratification through animal tendences and now you're all the worse for it. The idiot couldn't understand what a human was/is. The book is nothing but Psychology and the consequences of how people think. What do you say will solve the worlds problem and what's the source of the problems. It come from how people think would it not be so. Your Psycho Dudes have been around for a century or more and haven't solves a single social problem, not ever. why not. Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

 

What does Freud have to do with neuroimaging? He has been dead for 70 some odd years. What does a psychologist have to do with neuroimaging? Neuroimaging is a number of methods of measuring and mapping the brain and how it functions. I'm not talking about fucking shrinks that prattle on with no scientific basis. I'm talking about the guys who do surgery to correct physical brain problems and/or are studying to learn how the brain works to develop pharmaceuticals or methods to correct physical problems with the brain. 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1552-6569 

And yes, there are pictures, they are even blue, red and yellow, all of the smurfs favorite colors. 

Yes, they can draw you a pretty picture of the part of the brain that emotions come from. They could even cut it out and weigh it (out of a corpse I would hope). It also explains why brain trauma can cause dramatic changes in personality, emotional experiences and the ability to recognize emotion in others. If emotions are not physical, such symptoms would not occur because of brain trauma or tumors. 


ThunderJones
atheist
ThunderJones's picture
Posts: 433
Joined: 2012-04-23
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:mentality

Old Seer wrote:
mentality extends from the animal mind.

Mentality? A 'mindset or way of thinking' extends from the animal mind? What exactly is this 'animal mind' anyway?

Old Seer wrote:
Why are you upset (if you are) If you believe you are a human animal then you should have no problem.

Human animal is an oxymoron and makes no sense. Even so, being called an animal has negative connotations that any english-speakers should be familiar with.

Old Seer wrote:
The problem with "human animal" is- the animal wins the day.

...? How so? I guess other animal dominated species have built civilizations we don't know about.

Old Seer wrote:
OK-In our interpretation of the book the human is the same as Christianity, which is the same as Adam.

Problems here: You have not defined or displayed specifics of your 'interpretation' of the Bible. What is this Adam? Why are you name-dropping? It would do you well to explain some of the things that come out of your mouth.

Old Seer wrote:
Back to the thread topic--Heaven---- is a  state of mind. A like explanation is ---the Attic where you keep all the goodies that make you happy and that have value.

That made no sense. How is a state-of-mind a storage place? On what do you base this claim? Do you actually have any proof? You do not even have proof Heaven exists, let alone that it is something specific.

Old Seer wrote:
The animal entity is what is valued over the human in today,s world.

You base this statement on what exactly? Stop making vague statements and be specific. It's not that hard.

Old Seer wrote:
That's why all the negativity toward others comes from that is prevalent on the forums, enmity is an animal trait.

So the world causes my dislike for you vague statements? Negativity in my case is in direct response to your nonsensical posts.

Old Seer wrote:
That is what civilization is based upon.

What are you even talking about? You think civilization is based on negativity? Are you just typing random things down, or what?

Old Seer wrote:
That's the best I can do for now. If you disagree then you may want me to agree with you.

I do not care whether you agree with me or not, but don't expect me to take you seriously if you refuse to even put down basic support for your claims.

Old Seer wrote:
But I've already lived in your world and am still here. I see differently based on our interpretation of the book. It is up to you to comprehend. I can't do that for you.  Keep trying    Smiling

Again with the condescending. You do not know anything about me, or my life. Maybe if you would actually give some solid fact or even some theories or something. You piss me off with your arrogant crap.

Put up or shut up.

Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker


Jabberwocky
atheist
Posts: 274
Joined: 2012-04-21
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote: Love is an

Old Seer wrote:

 Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

One material element (perhaps a major one from what I've heard) is oxytocin.

Knowing this doesn't in any way diminish how special it feels. Love is NOT immaterial. Nor are kindness and compassion. While they're a big part of what I live for, it doesn't make them other-worldly, or divine. I may occasionally use the word "divine" to describe it though, because these things are so good they feel as if they were beyond our mental capacities, even though they're not. They're simply the pinnacle of bliss, and that's okay with me. 

Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Good

Jabberwocky wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

 Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

One material element (perhaps a major one from what I've heard) is oxytocin.

Knowing this doesn't in any way diminish how special it feels. Love is NOT immaterial. Nor are kindness and compassion. While they're a big part of what I live for, it doesn't make them other-worldly, or divine. I may occasionally use the word "divine" to describe it though, because these things are so good they feel as if they were beyond our mental capacities, even though they're not. They're simply the pinnacle of bliss, and that's okay with me. 

That's what we call "heaven". Bliss=Heaven. The term divine need not be attached. Whether love is material or immaterial still has to be found out. We look at the product of the brain which is thought and emotions. If the result of the brain is somehow material we're good with that. But so far there's no way to know.

But what we've deciphered is an interpretation of the book that shows animal and human concepts. This is what we found the book to be about. The book points to "invisible things of creation that can be clearly seen from creation onward". The invisible things referred to are spiritual things as the writers seen them . I commented on this on another thread. In the apostles view they see biblical creation as a spiritual construction not a material one. We use the term "spiritual" to explain what the apostles mean. There's no way that we know of that an apostle knows how the material universe is formed and where studies have taken us today. What they did know is how people think and the impending consequences of a line of thought. That goes way back to ancient times long before them.   Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Good

Jabberwocky wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

 Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

One material element (perhaps a major one from what I've heard) is oxytocin.

Knowing this doesn't in any way diminish how special it feels. Love is NOT immaterial. Nor are kindness and compassion. While they're a big part of what I live for, it doesn't make them other-worldly, or divine. I may occasionally use the word "divine" to describe it though, because these things are so good they feel as if they were beyond our mental capacities, even though they're not. They're simply the pinnacle of bliss, and that's okay with me. 

That's what we call "heaven". Bliss=Heaven. The term divine need not be attached. Whether love is material or immaterial still has to be found out. We look at the product of the brain which is thought and emotions. If the result of the brain is somehow material we're good with that. But so far there's no way to know.

But what we've deciphered is an interpretation of the book that shows animal and human concepts. This is what we found the book to be about. The book points to "invisible things of creation that can be clearly seen from creation onward". The invisible things referred to are spiritual things as the writers seen them . I commented on this on another thread. In the apostles view they see biblical creation as a spiritual construction not a material one. We use the term "spiritual" to explain what the apostles mean. There's no way that we know of that an apostle knows how the material universe is formed and where studies have taken us today. What they did know is how people think and the impending consequences of a line of thought. That goes way back to ancient times long before them.   Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer Q1

harleysportster wrote:

BTW.  I your avatar. Is that your dog ?

No, this little guy had apparently just had his injections and was looking very sad for himself, hence the hangdog look, but he's not one of mine.

 

Old_seer, I'm new to your thought processes, having not looked at these forums for years. I think I understand what you mean by the human animal mind - it's possibly a version of what neuroscientists call the old brain and the new brain (Although you appear to be splitting it in a somewhat more convoluted way) where the old brain deals with our more primal urges, flight or fight, etc, while our new brain deals with more recent evolutionary traits, such as logic and reason.

It's not, I would hazard, a particularly clever thing to do to cut yourself off from your old brain. It stops you dying a lot.

 

Can we try and get to the bottom of your through processes one step at a time, as I agree you have a confusing approach to writing.

Question 1:

What qualities would one need to be totally 'Human' and non-'human animal', according to your beliefs? Does it require a knowledge of and active participation in proscribed Christian teachings direct from the bible, or can one be 'Human' without reference to the book? 

 


peto verum
atheist
Posts: 46
Joined: 2011-03-09
User is offlineOffline
GodsUseForAMosquito

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

 

Old_seer, I'm new to your thought processes, having not looked at these forums for years. I think I understand what you mean by the human animal mind - it's possibly a version of what neuroscientists call the old brain and the new brain (Although you appear to be splitting it in a somewhat more convoluted way) where the old brain deals with our more primal urges, flight or fight, etc, while our new brain deals with more recent evolutionary traits, such as logic and reason.

It's not, I would hazard, a particularly clever thing to do to cut yourself off from your old brain. It stops you dying a lot.

 

I'd like to clear something up.  When you say old brain and new brain are you referring to hind, mid and fore brain?  I read this as there has been additions to a foundational, older, brain.  This isn't so.  Some brains are more evolved than others. Most "brains" consist of the same general structures (in those species with a "brain" ) The fore brain (logic and reason) just happened to be more sophisticated in hominids than other species.  The parasympathetic/sympathetic(fight or flight) responses you refer are not isolated to any one section of the brain.  Actually this system in itself has evolved.  For example, if you grab a hot cup of coffee the reflexive and sympathetic response would be to drop it but your fore brain (higher cognitive function) would evaluate your surroundings and if people around you may become scalded you can over ride the impulse to drop the hot cup maintaining your grip and burning yourself.  This isn't because the "new brain" is overruling the "old brain" but because the entire brain has evolved to work together.  Don't confuse autonomic responses with voluntary nor think that they operate independently. 

 

Sorry for interrupting.

KORAN, n.
A book which the Mohammedans foolishly believe to have been written by divine inspiration, but which Christians know to be a wicked imposture, contradictory to the Holy Scriptures. ~ The Devil's Dictionary


GodsUseForAMosquito
ModeratorBronze Member
GodsUseForAMosquito's picture
Posts: 404
Joined: 2008-08-27
User is offlineOffline
 Yes, of course we don't

 Yes, of course we don't operate old, mammalian and new brains as 3 distinct processing engines, with each 'outer' level processing and evaluating the other... I understand that the brain is a vastly more complex organ than that, and has evolved much less discretely than I suggested; I was just trying to work out if Old-seer's analysis of the human animal had anything to do with this area..

(I only have a layman's understanding of this area, so thanks for the additional information!)

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
GodsUseForAMosquito

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

BTW.  I your avatar. Is that your dog ?

No, this little guy had apparently just had his injections and was looking very sad for himself, hence the hangdog look, but he's not one of mine.

 

I meant to type : I love your avatar. Not : I your avatar.

I really need to proofread more often.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Thank youi for the article.

It's very interesting.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
OK

GodsUseForAMosquito wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

BTW.  I your avatar. Is that your dog ?

No, this little guy had apparently just had his injections and was looking very sad for himself, hence the hangdog look, but he's not one of mine.

 

Old_seer, I'm new to your thought processes, having not looked at these forums for years. I think I understand what you mean by the human animal mind - it's possibly a version of what neuroscientists call the old brain and the new brain (Although you appear to be splitting it in a somewhat more convoluted way) where the old brain deals with our more primal urges, flight or fight, etc, while our new brain deals with more recent evolutionary traits, such as logic and reason.

It's not, I would hazard, a particularly clever thing to do to cut yourself off from your old brain. It stops you dying a lot.

 

Can we try and get to the bottom of your through processes one step at a time, as I agree you have a confusing approach to writing.

Question 1:

What qualities would one need to be totally 'Human' and non-'human animal', according to your beliefs? Does it require a knowledge of and active participation in proscribed Christian teachings direct from the bible, or can one be 'Human' without reference to the book? 

 

If I understand the question--(I see two directions to answer). No one can be totally Human. If you mean--without animal traits, that would be impossible. Nature gives both Human and animal traits. What one can do is not live by the animal traits and relate to others only from the human side of one's being. You need the animal---it's your protector and defender. Societies unenlightened of their person normally place higher value on the animal traits. This is what civilizations are founded on. In our study of the book we found that is what it deals with. It separates the animal traits from the human, and then propagates the human by regulating or disallowing the animal as a power in society, thus creating  different social values from both animal and human traits combined. This, we find is what Christianity is about. The disallowing of the animal traits creates Adam.

 The world problem then, is the combining of both traits and still claiming to be human. While one retains the human traits it,s the animal traits that receive the recognition. The world has the "human animal" concept, and from our learning from the book that's an impossibility as it is a contradiction in terms. While each as both sets of traits one can only be on one side at a time. One cannot be both at the same time. at the time one is being humane he is human, and at the next instant he can be animal (inhumane), but not both. IF, the people put away the animal in their relations with others the systems cease to function, civilization collapses, because it is dependent on animal traits to exist.

The book then, is a dealing with this concept. In the "human animal" concept the animal wins the day. That is why the world cannot solve it's problems. Solving social problems on the human animal being promotes the problem.

Brain function I leave to the Psycho Smurfs. I've learned a few things from them over the years but it's not my area. I don't know how the brain works but I know the result of the working.

 Yes-  we work from Biblical extract. What we know in this area is from the book, but not the standard or present interpretation.

yes, one can be human without the book, but-- you'll have to get to know yourself first. We've done that for you. Adam became human without the book, it was  a matter of figueing himselves out. Adam is not understood correctly. Adam is a people not a singular personality

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Holy Kow TJ

ThunderJones wrote:

Old Seer wrote:
mentality extends from the animal mind.

Mentality? A 'mindset or way of thinking' extends from the animal mind? What exactly is this 'animal mind' anyway?

Old Seer wrote:
Why are you upset (if you are) If you believe you are a human animal then you should have no problem.

Human animal is an oxymoron and makes no sense. Even so, being called an animal has negative connotations that any english-speakers should be familiar with.

Old Seer wrote:
The problem with "human animal" is- the animal wins the day.

...? How so? I guess other animal dominated species have built civilizations we don't know about.

Old Seer wrote:
OK-In our interpretation of the book the human is the same as Christianity, which is the same as Adam.

Problems here: You have not defined or displayed specifics of your 'interpretation' of the Bible. What is this Adam? Why are you name-dropping? It would do you well to explain some of the things that come out of your mouth.

Old Seer wrote:
Back to the thread topic--Heaven---- is a  state of mind. A like explanation is ---the Attic where you keep all the goodies that make you happy and that have value.

That made no sense. How is a state-of-mind a storage place? On what do you base this claim? Do you actually have any proof? You do not even have proof Heaven exists, let alone that it is something specific.

Old Seer wrote:
The animal entity is what is valued over the human in today,s world.

You base this statement on what exactly? Stop making vague statements and be specific. It's not that hard.

Old Seer wrote:
That's why all the negativity toward others comes from that is prevalent on the forums, enmity is an animal trait.

So the world causes my dislike for you vague statements? Negativity in my case is in direct response to your nonsensical posts.

Old Seer wrote:
That is what civilization is based upon.

What are you even talking about? You think civilization is based on negativity? Are you just typing random things down, or what?

Old Seer wrote:
That's the best I can do for now. If you disagree then you may want me to agree with you.

I do not care whether you agree with me or not, but don't expect me to take you seriously if you refuse to even put down basic support for your claims.

Old Seer wrote:
But I've already lived in your world and am still here. I see differently based on our interpretation of the book. It is up to you to comprehend. I can't do that for you.  Keep trying    Smiling

Again with the condescending. You do not know anything about me, or my life. Maybe if you would actually give some solid fact or even some theories or something. You piss me off with your arrogant crap.

Put up or shut up.

I can't even make a post on this. What are you looking for? I think it's best you wait and other postings will cause something to from that will get you under way. I mean you no harm, that would be animalistic.  Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I personally have

Beyond Saving wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

We have  Psycho Smurfs that agree with us. You're not going to show them to much new. Most Psycho Dudes on your side still have to learn what an animal mind is. We think Freud and others are fools. They believe in a human animal the same as you. All Freud could only do is extoll on gratification through animal tendences and now you're all the worse for it. The idiot couldn't understand what a human was/is. The book is nothing but Psychology and the consequences of how people think. What do you say will solve the worlds problem and what's the source of the problems. It come from how people think would it not be so. Your Psycho Dudes have been around for a century or more and haven't solves a single social problem, not ever. why not. Love is an emotion, yes. But can you see it, can you draw a pic of it. If you can't then you must consider that it's non material. If it is material what are it's material elements. rock, wood, water, what?       Smiling

 

What does Freud have to do with neuroimaging? He has been dead for 70 some odd years. What does a psychologist have to do with neuroimaging? Neuroimaging is a number of methods of measuring and mapping the brain and how it functions. I'm not talking about fucking shrinks that prattle on with no scientific basis. I'm talking about the guys who do surgery to correct physical brain problems and/or are studying to learn how the brain works to develop pharmaceuticals or methods to correct physical problems with the brain. 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1552-6569 

And yes, there are pictures, they are even blue, red and yellow, all of the smurfs favorite colors. 

Yes, they can draw you a pretty picture of the part of the brain that emotions come from. They could even cut it out and weigh it (out of a corpse I would hope). It also explains why brain trauma can cause dramatic changes in personality, emotional experiences and the ability to recognize emotion in others. If emotions are not physical, such symptoms would not occur because of brain trauma or tumors. 

have little understanding of neuroimaging. That's the Psycho Smurf's area. I'm not sure what your post is about or for. I can't respond to subjects I know little about. I know you and I and all others are resident in the brain. In exactly what form I can't say, We merely refer to it as the spiritual, I'm stuck with that. But we all know people are about love and hate. But then again so are Chimps. My interest is the results of the brain , not the brain itself. One of the results of the brain is the forming of "person", that's what i deal with. I don't know if the personage in the brain is actually material, or, if the person is non material. We find that the book is dealing with the person, and regardless of what it is, material or not, it's the social values of one person toward another is what is important.  Smiling

 

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


Xeletoph2050
atheist
Xeletoph2050's picture
Posts: 9
Joined: 2012-07-24
User is offlineOffline
False Dichotomy

Old Seer wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

we have it right. Logic has it that someday someone will encounter what the problems are and also the solution. Atheism will not solve the problem. There are only two standpoints from which the book can be interpreted, (and life for that matter) a materialistic and/or a spiritual. There is no other ways possible. We have the latter. Then ---it has to be the right one. The concept within the book leads to becoming proper human beings. It's only a matter of whether one wants to look and learn or not. Yes- the Euros botched it (the Pope is "dead" wrong and soon he will know it) be careful, you may not want to learn, then you won't have anyone to condemn. You wouldn't want someone spoiling the fun --huh.   How many billions are claiming to be Christian, and, what's going to happen when they're shown wrong. Happy wake up time children---it's over. All that is left is for the fat lady to sing.   Alpha Smurf isn't on anyone's side---he's in the middle, Both sides got it wrong.      Smiling

Nice false Dichotomy, bub. You know I find it funny that there are 33,000+ sects of Xtianity and yet not a single one of them can agree on what "the truth" is between them. It's like a Bible reader couldn't find his ass if you gave him both hands. Who are you to say that the right and true god isn't Allah, Vishnu, Inana, Ra, Isis, Astarte, Hecate, Demeter, Kalima, Thor, Odin, or Krishna? What if Aliens on other planets have religion too, and they worship their own deity  as well, how do you know THAT deity isn't the real one? The truth is, that you don't - you simply don't, but your psyche is too tarnished for you to even see it. You are full of vicious lies of the intellect and self contradictions- I don't think you know what knowledge is. I doubt you know what equates as truth, evidence, or honesty.

Meanwhile you wax on ecstatic about the prospect of the unimagined torture of untold hundreds of billions for a length time that is non-comprehendable and non-existent - spewing your hate in a language of pseudo intellect. And you call yourself righteous?

If God made us in his own image, then shouldn't we be invisible too?


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
You proved us right


Xeletoph2050 wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

the European interpretations of the book. No such nonsense is forwarded in the book unless one interprets it as such. The Euros had their religion before they ever got the book, there is no difference in their religion before and after JC. If their interpretation were correct then they were Christians before JC arrived. Heaven is a mental condition of happiness and must exist while one is physically alive.  Hell is the same as destroyed--dead. There's no life when dead. The only thing after that is resurrection, and that takes place after Armageddon when all is settled. This interpretation is according to Alpha Smurf, it is up to the receiver of the information to accept or reject.

Yes, yes, yes yes, we know. The Europeans fucked it all up and you guys happened to get the correct secret formula to what it is all about. Yawn. Maybe the author of the Da Vinci Code could spin out another bullshit best-seller with that notion. Especially with their being a secret group involved in all.

we have it right. Logic has it that someday someone will encounter what the problems are and also the solution. Atheism will not solve the problem. There are only two standpoints from which the book can be interpreted, (and life for that matter) a materialistic and/or a spiritual. There is no other ways possible. We have the latter. Then ---it has to be the right one. The concept within the book leads to becoming proper human beings. It's only a matter of whether one wants to look and learn or not. Yes- the Euros botched it (the Pope is "dead" wrong and soon he will know it) be careful, you may not want to learn, then you won't have anyone to condemn. You wouldn't want someone spoiling the fun --huh.   How many billions are claiming to be Christian, and, what's going to happen when they're shown wrong. Happy wake up time children---it's over. All that is left is for the fat lady to sing.   Alpha Smurf isn't on anyone's side---he's in the middle, Both sides got it wrong.      Smiling

Nice false Dichotomy, bub. You know I find it funny that there are 33,000+ sects of Xtianity and yet not a single one of them can agree on what "the truth" is between them. It's like a Bible reader couldn't find his ass if you gave him both hands. Who are you to say that the right and true god isn't Allah, Vishnu, Inana, Ra, Isis, Astarte, Hecate, Demeter, Kalima, Thor, Odin, or Krishna? What if Aliens on other planets have religion too, and they worship their own deity  as well, how do you know THAT deity isn't the real one? The truth is, that you don't - you simply don't, but your psyche is too tarnished for you to even see it. You are full of vicious lies of the intellect and self contradictions- I don't think you know what knowledge is. I doubt you know what equates as truth, evidence, or honesty.

Meanwhile you wax on ecstatic about the prospect of the unimagined torture of untold hundreds of billions for a length time that is non-comprehendable and non-existent - spewing your hate in a language of pseudo intellect. And you call yourself righteous?

You proved us right-there's human and inhumane, man and animal. Try again. If you can play God and make all these determination I can play God too. I'm not going to let you be God all by yourself. (I am not a Christian)  Smiling

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote: You proved

Old Seer wrote:

 

You proved us right-there's human and inhumane, man and animal. Try again. If you can play God and make all these determination I can play God too. I'm not going to let you be God all by yourself. (I am not a Christian)  Smiling

Actually, outside of references to your group, vague references to "proper" interpretation of the "book" (which I am guessing that you mean the Bible, because your always referring to what the Europeans did to it) and some ambiguity, I have failed to see where you have fully defined exactly what position that you are postulating from (and yes, I have read your posts, so telling me to read all of your posts to make a connection will not help). You lay claim to the fact that you infiltrated this site because your "group" selected you for that purpose. Assuming all this is true, what is your position ? You say there have been no christians for centuries because the book has not been "properly" interpreted. So, if you have the "proper" interpretation of the book, what does that make you ? And I will ask again : How do you know what "proper" interpretation is correct ? How do you KNOW ?

Now I know that you'll probably answer me (as you have done with others) and tell me that I have to "find" those answers myself. But, I don't think your playing exactly fair with that.

What if I told you that I was part of an organization that had unlocked the key to time-travel, had evidence of what the future held, and the only way that I had unlocked that was through a "proper" interpretation of a certain science book; then if you asked me to explain that, my answer is : "We know how, you have to find the answers, but you have it all wrong?"

Would you not want a little more clear cut answer than vague ambiguity ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Proper interpretation

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

 

You proved us right-there's human and inhumane, man and animal. Try again. If you can play God and make all these determination I can play God too. I'm not going to let you be God all by yourself. (I am not a Christian)  Smiling

Actually, outside of references to your group, vague references to "proper" interpretation of the "book" (which I am guessing that you mean the Bible, because your always referring to what the Europeans did to it) and some ambiguity, I have failed to see where you have fully defined exactly what position that you are postulating from (and yes, I have read your posts, so telling me to read all of your posts to make a connection will not help). You lay claim to the fact that you infiltrated this site because your "group" selected you for that purpose. Assuming all this is true, what is your position ? You say there have been no christians for centuries because the book has not been "properly" interpreted. So, if you have the "proper" interpretation of the book, what does that make you ? And I will ask again : How do you know what "proper" interpretation is correct ? How do you KNOW ?

Now I know that you'll probably answer me (as you have done with others) and tell me that I have to "find" those answers myself. But, I don't think your playing exactly fair with that.

What if I told you that I was part of an organization that had unlocked the key to time-travel, had evidence of what the future held, and the only way that I had unlocked that was through a "proper" interpretation of a certain science book; then if you asked me to explain that, my answer is : "We know how, you have to find the answers, but you have it all wrong?"

Would you not want a little more clear cut answer than vague ambiguity ?

is derived from --- there's only two ways to interpret it, just as there are only two (according to us) things that exist in the universe, the spiritual and the material. The world (Euros) have the the material one. That leaves the other. The book deals with spiritual matters and the personages of people, it's about people as God, not some dude out in space. We find that Biblical creation is a spiritual matter not a material one. Being that there are only these two ways to interpret the book then----Christianity (as it is understood) has no claim to even exist. Our interpretation of the book proves them wrong.

  Yes-you do have to find we are right or wrong for yourself. In order to find our claim to be correct you need to go to the book itself. Such as- An Apostle mentions -those invisible things of creation that can be clearly seen-. There's your first clue. The Apostle is understanding biblical creation from a spiritual standpoint, not the material one that is commonly held as true. Now Harley, if we are correct (which we say we are)  it is then proven that Euro Christianity is not Christianity. Christianity in it's proper form is derived and formed from Creation, IF they have creation wrong then they can't possibly be Christians. The entire book (we find) is based on creation, except Hebrew history which much of doesn't relate to creation.

In order to understand us, you need to look at the book from our perspective. And to do that you have to go to the book. It's the same as---Einstien running the numbers for E=Mc/2. If you don't run his numbers to see if he's right, then how would you know he's right or wrong.

OK, start with the Apostle and Creation, see where it takes you. Any problems ask. 

I'm thinking I may have to start my own thread, but, I don't think that will work. We've hijacked another thread. What do you think.

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3192
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:I'm thinking

Old Seer wrote:

I'm thinking I may have to start my own thread, but, I don't think that will work. We've hijacked another thread. What do you think.

That might be the best way at this point. We have indeed wandered far off of the topic that was originally stated.  Start your own thread and we'll go from there if you would like.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 710
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Ok

harleysportster wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

I'm thinking I may have to start my own thread, but, I don't think that will work. We've hijacked another thread. What do you think.

That might be the best way at this point. We have indeed wandered far off of the topic that was originally stated.  Start your own thread and we'll go from there if you would like.

I'll start another thread- The Seer's Corner. I'll set it up  in the morning. I've been swamped today with putting up a storage shed for a friend and installing a starter for a grandson. Anyway- I can think better mornings

The only possible thing the world could need saving from are those running it.