Well, in turn I could say in my way, as I see it. What people call God
I can only call nature, now what that may mean to me you won't find in
books or the words I speak.
I would go further to say we have this in common, and as it would be
in error to think this means one thing or three, a thousand I know
would be to make the same error as to call it one.
To me it seems a cartographic feat to find acceptance, affirmation and
give up power for
On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Vam <atewari2007@gmail.com> wrote:
> James, what God can we speak of ? You, RP or I ?
I think if we keep examining our experiences, sharing and reflecting
we might find something of value, even if it is more informative of
our identity (characteristically).
> We do not know enough about ourself. What the f do we know about God ?
They are all hypothetical gods to me.
> I am Voltaire's quote on " politicians "... " who cannot manage their
> wives... " !
I think that has been said before here a while back but I'm unfamiliar
with the reference.
> It would be fine, and we could speak, if we are sharing our personal
> experiences of God ! And, that's an informal matter.
Well, if it is shit how about throwing down a competing or alternative
explanation or a better framework. That's really what I'm looking for
in discussion is something to think about and new ideas or clarity on
a subject. I happen to see it from both your perspectives and would
like some explanation for why (not anyone elses responsibility except
with the hopes of facilitation) it would be a facilitation to the
awareness pool besides. The name calling I don't care much for, but I
care more for the opportunity for clarity so leave that to RP to meet
however he likes. And for round 2?
> On Jan 22, 11:29 pm, James Lynch <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As an aspect I find RP's view on god respectable, and find it
>> powerful, but where it has little power there are other aspects. Is
>> this not an important part of the dynamic multidimensional mind Vam,
>> can you find nothing of value with meeting this view at least as a
>> challenge? I am curious how you would assimilate it, inquiring minds
>> would be grateful as it is a bit jarring of a concept.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > What you wrote, RP, was ridiculous. It you I found to be funny.
>>
>> > I don't see why God's choices have to be of a kind and scale that
>> > preoccupies you.
>>
>> > You would be hard put at defining, or drawing up a portrait of, the
>> > God you speak of with such aplomb ! And then you presume to know of
>> > his choices !! Or, worse, his choicelessness !!!
>>
>> > On Jan 21, 1:04 am, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> A man jumps from a plane without a parachute and when he reaches a
>> >> great velocity God exercises His choice and drastically slows his
>> >> fall. Funny Vam , isn't it ? Again God exercises His choice and
>> >> cancels all His laws and there is mayhem ! Or better still , at times
>> >> there are laws and at times there are none. God keeps on exercising
>> >> His choice and man keeps on playing the fool , he doesn't get wet in
>> >> the pool and doesn't get burned in the fire. Imagine a world without
>> >> God's laws , a world in which He keeps on exercising His choice.
>>
>> >> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Vam <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > A choiceless God is shite...
>> >> > So there goes all such pontification !
>>
>> >> > #DeepakMRanade's article "Uncovering Relative Truths"
>> >> > in @timesofindia neatly summarises the approach to Advaita,
>> >> > its conceptual layout. You are invited to discover the answers.
>>
>> >> >http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=...
>>
>> >> > On Jan 19, 10:21 pm, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> Interesting RP. I'm atheist only in that I reject stories that are
>> >> >> full of holes, talking snakes and such. The Gnostics have it that
>> >> >> creation was a mistake - though I have no means to determine any truth
>> >> >> in this I am struck most argument can be undercut like this. I often
>> >> >> wonder what might explain why we don't just know what life is about
>> >> >> and how this might be explained.
>>
>> >> >> On Jan 19, 10:59 am, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > I as a human have the choice , even if it is apparent and not real ,
>> >> >> > to do this or do that , that is, there is an element of uncertainty in
>> >> >> > my actions , but God has a steadfastness of purpose. God's will is
>> >> >> > sure and certain , the whole space-time continuum emanates from Him
>> >> >> > without any active choice on His part which raises the question of
>> >> >> > responsibility. God cannot be held responsible for any event as it
>> >> >> > happens without any wavering on His part , He has no choice and hence
>> >> >> > cannot be held responsible. This brings us to the question of
>> >> >> > worship , why worship a Being who has a fixed purpose ? In that case ,
>> >> >> > even though believing in a supreme Being and determinism , I can be
>> >> >> > called an atheist.
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário