light warrior

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by Pagandell

I have become aware that the logical human mind is only part of the human body to get us from A to B on this earth plain

Why do you think so? Do you think a higher self can’t think?

Originally Posted by Pagandell

So my HS tells me spiritual wisdom/ awareness does not come from the logical brain/mind where your beliefs seem to come from.

Spiritual inspiration comes from are spirit that hangs out in the spiritual dimensions and is picket up by the soul the true you that is having an earthly experience

Maybe I should have said the source of my convictions is not pure logic but rather:
logic + observations/experience + intuition.

It might be true that intuition can be a source of wisdom. But you have to use logic and rationality to prove if your intuition is consistent within itself and consistent with your observations.

If you just blindly trust your intuition you never can be sure if it is correct. Many fundamentalistic Christs or Islamists would certainly say that their intuition tells them that their religion is the one and only truth. But is it? Also Hitler might have had the intuition that what he did was right and good. But was it?

So you see: You can use intuition as a source of your convictions but if you use it without logic control you are skating on thin ice. If you rely on pure intuition without logic testing, all the content of your belief can be wrong. I myself could take no person serious who blindly believes all sorts of things that come into his mind.

[Pagandell]

Originally Posted by Siemens

I also do not claim that I am 100% right. I rather claim that my convictions are true with a much higher likelihood than yours.

An atheist would say the same thing.

Have you ever had other worldly experiences, I've had quite a few which have given me a certain conviction towards my spiritual beliefs.

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by Pagandell

An atheist would say the same thing:
[I also do not claim that I am 100% right. I rather claim that my convictions are true with a much higher likelihood than yours]

I can’t assess if atheism or whatever-you-believe is more likely because I don’t know your exact doctrine. However, from a strict rational standpoint atheism isn’t as likely as many atheists might think. Atheism is just another form of religion (the religion that there is nothing more than matter). Although atheists are experts in denying that.

But whether or not atheism makes sense, the point is that if anyone’s convictions came from any form of ideology, i.e. something he has adopted from someone else or something he read here or heard there, you can’t give a damn s**t about it! (I hope this phrase is correct, I’m not native English as I already mentioned.)

Originally Posted by Pagandell

Have you ever had other worldly experiences, I've had quite a few which have given me a certain conviction towards my spiritual beliefs.

What do you mean with “worldly experiences” in this context?
I had a lot of spiritual experiences, where I experienced that I am more than just a brain. I experienced myself as a soul, as a complex structure of energy. And I permanently make the experience that the things that happen in my life follow a precise plan that leads to a very unique form of evolution. (I can tell you more about that if you are interested.)

[TerramineLightvoid]

I am the Lord of Light.

King, Embodiment, Conqueror.

I am the "Lord Lightworker".

[TerramineLightvoid]

Originally Posted by Siemens

I can’t assess if atheism or whatever-you-believe is more likely because I don’t know your exact doctrine. However, from a strict rational standpoint atheism isn’t as likely as many atheists might think. Atheism is just another form of religion (the religion that there is nothing more than matter). Although atheists are experts in denying that.

I like how you just say "They just deny it is all." skimming over the actualy irrefutable truth that Atheists have completely rationally DISPROVED that assertion.

But of course, go ahead and misrepresent the facts and just prove them right about how mindless and self-absorbed religious people are. Making the rest of us look bad. FYI, here's the irrefutable proof that you're bat**** insane:

Definition of Religion: A collection of beliefs, ideas, world views, and perspectives which relate Humanity to the universe and a greater purpose.

Definition of Atheism: The rejection of the God claim. Although Agnostic Atheism could be defined as simply A Lack of a Belief.

So praytellme bro. If religion is basically the product of a bunch of different beliefs combined... and Atheism is AT BEST /a single belief/, little alone AT WORST not even 1 belief. How can it be religion?

Religion: Many beliefs combined.
Atheism: 0 or AT MOST 1 belief.

In fact, the irony is that if there were a Secular/Atheist Religion. Atheism would just be 1 part of the whole. 1 part does not make a whole, you need the other parts too. Hence things like Secular Buddhism and the like. There are "Atheist Religions", but they're not just simply identifying as an Atheist... they are much more on top of that too.

Now what you COULD say perhaps is that people in general, outside of religion even... have the tendency to form their own individual Dogmas. You could say that most Atheists have their own "religion" in a sense. In that they have their own collection of beliefs, ideas, world views, and perspectives which relate Humanity to the universe and/or a greater purpose.

But that's not a criticism of Atheism, and particularly it is not a rebuttal of the argument that Anti-Theists(Who are really the ones you're talking about, in specific, when you talk about people who trash talk the very concept of Religion itself. Atheists who say "Religion is inherentoly toxic" aren't JUST Atheists plain and simple. They are also exhibiting an Anti-Theist philosophy here.) are making. Fact is, if they are saying Religion and Dogma are inherently bad. They probably aren't hypocrites about individual dogmas. That is after all why a majority of the Atheist community are also Skeptics who argue that it's not JUST Religion/Dogma we have to watch out for... but also the intellectual pit traps we /ALL/ fall into that leads into stagnant, restricted, and oppressive thinking.

It is in fact very common in the Atheist community for one Atheist to criticize another for sounding exactly like a Christian in terms of Absolutism, Certainty, Dogma, and Group-Think. I know of 2 songs from 2 different prominent Atheist Idols that talk about it.

Your "logic" isn't some sort of monkey wrench being thrown into the cog of atheism, and does very little to back up your own position.

[TerramineLightvoid]

Originally Posted by Siemens

I can’t assess if atheism or whatever-you-believe is more likely because I don’t know your exact doctrine. However, from a strict rational standpoint atheism isn’t as likely as many atheists might think. Atheism is just another form of religion (the religion that there is nothing more than matter). Although atheists are experts in denying that.

I like how you just say "They just deny it is all." skimming over the actualy irrefutable truth that Atheists have completely rationally DISPROVED that assertion. But of course, go ahead and misrepresent the facts and just prove them right about how mindless and self-absorbed religious people are. Making the rest of us look bad. FYI, here's the irrefutable proof that you're insane:

Definition of Religion: A collection of beliefs, ideas, world views, and perspectives which relate Humanity to the universe and a greater purpose.
Definition of Atheism: The rejection of the God claim. Although Agnostic Atheism could be defined as simply A Lack of a Belief.

So praytellme bro. If religion is basically the product of a bunch of different beliefs combined... and Atheism is AT BEST /a single belief/, little alone AT WORST not even 1 belief. How can it be religion?

Religion: Many beliefs combined.
Atheism: 0 or AT MOST 1 belief.

In fact, the irony is that if there were a Secular/Atheist Religion. Atheism would just be 1 part of the whole. 1 part does not make a whole, you need the other parts too. Hence things like Secular Buddhism and the like. There are "Atheist Religions", but they're not just simply identifying as an Atheist... they are much more on top of that too. Now what you COULD say perhaps is that people in general, outside of religion even... have the tendency to form their own individual Dogmas. You could say that most Atheists have their own "religion" in a sense. In that they have their own collection of beliefs, ideas, world views, and perspectives which relate Humanity to the universe and/or a greater purpose.

But that's not a criticism of Atheism, and particularly it is not a rebuttal of the argument that Anti-Theists(Who are really the ones you're talking about, in specific, when you talk about people who trash talk the very concept of Religion itself. Atheists who say "Religion is inherentoly toxic" aren't JUST Atheists plain and simple. They are also exhibiting an Anti-Theist philosophy here.) are making. Fact is, if they are saying Religion and Dogma are inherently bad. They probably aren't hypocrites about individual dogmas. That is after all why a majority of the Atheist community are also Skeptics who argue that it's not JUST Religion/Dogma we have to watch out for... but also the intellectual pit traps we /ALL/ fall into that leads into stagnant, restricted, and oppressive thinking.

It is in fact very common in the Atheist community for one Atheist to criticize another for sounding exactly like a Christian in terms of Absolutism, Certainty, Dogma, and Group-Think. I know of 2 songs from 2 different prominent Atheist Idols that talk about it. Your "logic" isn't some sort of monkey wrench being thrown into the cog of atheism, and does very little to back up your own position.

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by TerramineLightvoid

I like how you just say "They just deny it is all." skimming over the actualy irrefutable truth that Atheists have completely rationally DISPROVED that assertion.

But of course, go ahead and misrepresent the facts and just prove them right about how mindless and self-absorbed religious people are. Making the rest of us look bad. FYI, here's the irrefutable proof that you're bat**** insane:

Definition of Religion: A collection of beliefs, ideas, world views, and perspectives which relate Humanity to the universe and a greater purpose.

Definition of Atheism: The rejection of the God claim. Although Agnostic Atheism could be defined as simply A Lack of a Belief.

So praytellme bro. If religion is basically the product of a bunch of different beliefs combined... and Atheism is AT BEST /a single belief/, little alone AT WORST not even 1 belief. How can it be religion?

Religion: Many beliefs combined.
Atheism: 0 or AT MOST 1 belief.

In fact, the irony is that if there were a Secular/Atheist Religion. Atheism would just be 1 part of the whole. 1 part does not make a whole, you need the other parts too. Hence things like Secular Buddhism and the like. There are "Atheist Religions", but they're not just simply identifying as an Atheist... they are much more on top of that too.

Now what you COULD say perhaps is that people in general, outside of religion even... have the tendency to form their own individual Dogmas. You could say that most Atheists have their own "religion" in a sense. In that they have their own collection of beliefs, ideas, world views, and perspectives which relate Humanity to the universe and/or a greater purpose.

But that's not a criticism of Atheism, and particularly it is not a rebuttal of the argument that Anti-Theists(Who are really the ones you're talking about, in specific, when you talk about people who trash talk the very concept of Religion itself. Atheists who say "Religion is inherentoly toxic" aren't JUST Atheists plain and simple. They are also exhibiting an Anti-Theist philosophy here.) are making. Fact is, if they are saying Religion and Dogma are inherently bad. They probably aren't hypocrites about individual dogmas. That is after all why a majority of the Atheist community are also Skeptics who argue that it's not JUST Religion/Dogma we have to watch out for... but also the intellectual pit traps we /ALL/ fall into that leads into stagnant, restricted, and oppressive thinking.

It is in fact very common in the Atheist community for one Atheist to criticize another for sounding exactly like a Christian in terms of Absolutism, Certainty, Dogma, and Group-Think. I know of 2 songs from 2 different prominent Atheist Idols that talk about it.

Your "logic" isn't some sort of monkey wrench being thrown into the cog of atheism, and does very little to back up your own position.

The only problem seems to be that I define religion simply as a belief in something that is neither proven nor probably. Atheism is the belief that the whole cosmos consists of nothing more than atoms and the belief that human consciousness arise from the human brain (not the human soul). So atheism is positive belief = religion by my definition.

[Pagandell]

Originally Posted by Siemens

I this point we are different. I generally do not respect other people’s beliefs, if they can’t reason them.

You have the right to believe everything what you want. But I also think the most dangerous people in the world are those who hold beliefs just because they heard or read something without questioning it (and without being able to reason it). This is what led to National-Socialism and other atrocities.

Should I respect ideological dogmatism or should I condemn it?

I said I respect your beliefs, I did not say every ones.

I may have empathy for a christian who is in service to others for instance, but being a bisexual shaman I do not like being told I am going to hell for my sins.

[TerramineLightvoid]

Originally Posted by Siemens

The only problem seems to be that I define religion simply as a belief in something that is neither proven nor probably.

You mean the problem is... that you didn't look up the definition in a dictionary to see that you were... wrong? You don't get to just make up definitions of words, especially when trying to scrutinize other people. In order to do that you have to be looking at what /they/ are saying, not your unfathomably wrong assumption of what they are saying.

Atheism is the belief that the whole cosmos consists of nothing more than atoms and the belief that human consciousness arise from the human brain (not the human soul). So atheism is positive belief = religion by my definition.

So again... instead of just realizing your definition is /wrong/. In fact even when I JUST defined atheism to you in the post you are responding to. You decide what other people believe, and put words in their mouths? That's not how things work.

That is the very definition of Straw Man, attacking a position the opposition isn't even arguing.

What you just said is a common mentality among people who take a more secular and scientific approach to things. But it is not reflective of what Atheism itself REQUIRES you to believe. It is not by NECESSITY that Atheists think that way and most certainly not all do. But even if they did, or even if most do, or even if just some do. It doesn't matter because that is still completely SEPARATE from their Atheism.

So like I said, you could say most people form Dogmas/Religions. That even most Atheists do. It wouldn't change the fact that the ones criticizing religion aren't too attached to their own dogma if they have any.

Also, you're just wrong even from your own perspective. What you stated is the logical default. There has been NO proof. Zilch. Nada. From an objective standpoint. Of anything beyond materialistic science. You're free to have your own opinion, but you don't get to lie and say that believing in science is equivalent to believing in half the stuff people talk about on this forum.

You believe in "higher things". Okay? But the fact is, you must've been convinced from a purely ANECDOTAL position. Unless you claim to have evidence that nobody else has, in which case what's taking you so long to blow the world's mind with your secret info? Why does nobody else have this evidence, why have they not produced it and cashed in on it already?

The point is. If you saw a fairy once. That's all well and good to think fairies exist, yourself. But to convince others? You don't try to convince someone based on you TELLING THEM that it happened. To try to do that and to try and convince people to defy skepticism and logical consistency is Toxic and Destructive. Meanwhile it is not even remotely the same as say... inventing computers or cures for cancer. At least science can back it's **** up, it doesn't need to "believe"... It knows, it makes damn sure it KNOWS.

[Siemens]

Originally Posted by TerramineLightvoid

You mean the problem is... that you didn't look up the definition in a dictionary to see that you were... wrong? You don't get to just make up definitions of words, especially when trying to scrutinize other people.

I don’t have to devote myself to the definitions of dictionary authors. Each definition is arbitrary to a certain degree. The real problem is that you are petty minded stickler. In sophisticated conversations people use something called ironic exaggeration and other things as a means of rhetoric. That’s what I did. There obviously is a high analogy between “a belief in something that is neither proven nor probably” and a religion. I’m sorry that you didn’t get that.

Originally Posted by TerramineLightvoid

It is not by NECESSITY that Atheists think that way and most certainly not all do....

If you are an atheist it is NECESSIARILY required that you have to BELIVE that the human brain causes consciousness or that you as a person evolved through natural selection. An atheist who believes in souls isn’t an atheist by the common usage of the word.

Originally Posted by TerramineLightvoid

The point is. If you saw a fairy once. That's all well and good to think fairies exist, yourself. But to convince others? You don't try to convince someone based on you TELLING THEM that it happened. To try to do that and to try and convince people to defy skepticism and logical consistency is Toxic and Destructive. Meanwhile it is not even remotely the same as say... inventing computers or cures for cancer. At least science can back it's **** up, it doesn't need to "believe"... It knows, it makes damn sure it KNOWS.

I made experiences that showed me that supernatural things exist and that I AM a soul not a brain. But I accept if others do not believe me. I could be more detailed here but I had this kind of discussions many times in my life and I’m not interested in repeating them again and again and again....