173 replies to this topic

[Singularity]

Or, if there is one, he surely doesn't give a damn about us.

Now, I've spent my whole life pondering the existence of God and ultimately I just have to come back to basic common sense:

1.) Too much suffering in the world: Every single day, for thousands of years, each and every one of your worst nightmares is experienced by at least one person, if not thousands, on this planet... EVERY DAY! Mutilations, disembowelments, rapings, dismemberments, betrayals, broken hearts, psychosis, etc.; it's all par for the course... EVERY DAY! That's a whole lot of suffering going on. Would an all loving God allow such daily horrors to continue just so he can conduct his test of our free will? If so, then this god is no better than Hitler, Stalin, or any other sadistic asshole.

2.) Not a SHRED of evidence: An omnipresent god would have to leave his mark somewhere, if not EVERYWHERE! Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

3.) Absent parent: It would seem to me, than any ALL LOVING god would stick around and nurture and help raise his children to become happy and peaceful beings and help us to learn from our mistakes. If there is a God, then he surely doesn't care to lift a FINGER to help. If there is a god, then he has utterly abandoned us; he doesn't not love us, and does not care and, thus, will probably destroy us when he gets around to it.

Don't shoot the messenger. Rather, cheer up! If you live around long enough and are lucky enough, you might live through The Singularity and get to become a god-like being yourself, which is what you all really want anyway...

[Imminst = pro murder (omega)]

Or, if there is one, he surely doesn't give a damn about us.

Now, I've spent my whole life pondering the existence of God and ultimately I just have to come back to basic common sense:

1.) Too much suffering in the world: Every single day, for thousands of years, each and every one of your worst nightmares is experienced by at least one person, if not thousands, on this planet... EVERY DAY! Mutilations, disembowelments, rapings, dismemberments, betrayals, broken hearts, psychosis, etc.; it's all par for the course... EVERY DAY! That's a whole lot of suffering going on. Would an all loving God allow such daily horrors to continue just so he can conduct his test of our free will? If so, then this god is no better than Hitler, Stalin, or any other sadistic asshole.

2.) Not a SHRED of evidence: An omnipresent god would have to leave his mark somewhere, if not EVERYWHERE! Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

3.) Absent parent: It would seem to me, than any ALL LOVING god would stick around and nurture and help raise his children to become happy and peaceful beings and help us to learn from our mistakes. If there is a God, then he surely doesn't care to lift a FINGER to help. If there is a god, then he has utterly abandoned us; he doesn't not love us, and does not care and, thus, will probably destroy us when he gets around to it.

Don't shoot the messenger. Rather, cheer up! If you live around long enough and are lucky enough, you might live through The Singularity and get to become a god-like being yourself, which is what you all really want anyway...

Hmmm, maybe that has happened already. Maybe we got to a point where our omniscience was so boring we decided to start it all over again with a blank slate and plenty of challenge. To become as gods ourselves, mustn't we learn not to abandon our humanity, to cultivate care in our hearts for all people and life in general, seek to end suffering and death, of us higher life forms at least? Seems to me, to get to god-like existence means becoming some pretty highly moral beings. How else can gods live in proximity to each other without destroying themselves.

Who is always there with you? Who does the most to realize your dreams and aspirations? My goodness, it is you and for me, it is me. We are our own gods? Well, if so, we better get on with the task of building heaven as otherwise, we are liable to make this hell for ourselves what with our tremendous powers et al.

[Loot Perish]

you say a man can't be god? I AM GOD! I come in the name of jesus, by the power of the holy spirit!

[Imminst = pro murder (omega)]

Coming in the name of someone is problematic. Granted Jesus attempted to demonstrate and teach universal compassion and respect for all but his message has been majorly corrupted to serve anarchy. As far as I can tell, Christianity has become the closest thing to the anti-Christ we have and possibly will ever see. His name is most often used in vain. Best to come in the name of principles that one demonstrates and attempts to champion, come in the name of your own inherent spirit, perhaps? For example:

My god is all.
My lord is life.
My temple is our environment.
My spirit is my own.
Every word is the word of god.

[Cassox]

Or, if there is one, he surely doesn't give a damn about us.

Now, I've spent my whole life pondering the existence of God and ultimately I just have to come back to basic common sense:

1.) Too much suffering in the world: Every single day, for thousands of years, each and every one of your worst nightmares is experienced by at least one person, if not thousands, on this planet... EVERY DAY! Mutilations, disembowelments, rapings, dismemberments, betrayals, broken hearts, psychosis, etc.; it's all par for the course... EVERY DAY! That's a whole lot of suffering going on. Would an all loving God allow such daily horrors to continue just so he can conduct his test of our free will? If so, then this god is no better than Hitler, Stalin, or any other sadistic asshole.

2.) Not a SHRED of evidence: An omnipresent god would have to leave his mark somewhere, if not EVERYWHERE! Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

3.) Absent parent: It would seem to me, than any ALL LOVING god would stick around and nurture and help raise his children to become happy and peaceful beings and help us to learn from our mistakes. If there is a God, then he surely doesn't care to lift a FINGER to help. If there is a god, then he has utterly abandoned us; he doesn't not love us, and does not care and, thus, will probably destroy us when he gets around to it.

Don't shoot the messenger. Rather, cheer up! If you live around long enough and are lucky enough, you might live through The Singularity and get to become a god-like being yourself, which is what you all really want anyway...

Each of your arguments are based on assumptions.
1. Ethics/Morality: Any simple minded christian could argue out of this one.
Example counterarguements: Evil is not the product of God, but rather the product of man.
Counter Counter: The problem of Evil

Better Counter arguement: Man cannot conceive of Gods plan: What we see as evil is based upon worldly thinking, but is the best possible path for the good of all. God cannot be immoral as he is the very measure of morality.
CounterCounter: Morality is not an arbitrary creation, but rather an overarching concept. If Gods actions do not fall into the category of morality, he is immoral.


My view of what your saying is that it is rejectionist thinking. You were at one point Christian, and now your rebelling. Your second arguement is much better: No evidence. The first arguement deals with the characteristics of God. If someone says yeah, he is an asshole, then you still have done nothing to argue against his existence. Its like the Christian arguement that "we know god exists because he does miracles." Miracles are irrellevant; If Jesus brings me out to a lake and walks across the water, it only proves he can walk on water. It in no way shows that he is the son of God, or that god exists.

Raising Children? Very poor arguement. Look around you. Everyone around you is suffering. A God interested in making people happy and well adjusted would simply sterilize people. Bringing a child into the world causes its suffering. Its as simple as that. Why think God would be interested in your parenting ability, when the entire world functions on suffering? Plants are eaten by herbivores, herbivores by carnivores.

Even the second argurement is... well arguable. You perceive no evidence of God. Others perceive existence itself as evidence of God. Renee Descartes first philosphy really trumps the whole "no evidence" arguement. There is as much evidence of God as anything else: 0.

I overall agree with you. I am specifically playing the devils advocate because if this is a message you are going to bring to people you need to be able to trump their arguements. These are cookie cutter arguements and any philosophy 101 proffesor at a community college would rip them to shreds.

[Singularity]

Or, if there is one, he surely doesn't give a damn about us.

Now, I've spent my whole life pondering the existence of God and ultimately I just have to come back to basic common sense:

1.) Too much suffering in the world: Every single day, for thousands of years, each and every one of your worst nightmares is experienced by at least one person, if not thousands, on this planet... EVERY DAY! Mutilations, disembowelments, rapings, dismemberments, betrayals, broken hearts, psychosis, etc.; it's all par for the course... EVERY DAY! That's a whole lot of suffering going on. Would an all loving God allow such daily horrors to continue just so he can conduct his test of our free will? If so, then this god is no better than Hitler, Stalin, or any other sadistic asshole.

2.) Not a SHRED of evidence: An omnipresent god would have to leave his mark somewhere, if not EVERYWHERE! Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

3.) Absent parent: It would seem to me, than any ALL LOVING god would stick around and nurture and help raise his children to become happy and peaceful beings and help us to learn from our mistakes. If there is a God, then he surely doesn't care to lift a FINGER to help. If there is a god, then he has utterly abandoned us; he doesn't not love us, and does not care and, thus, will probably destroy us when he gets around to it.

Don't shoot the messenger. Rather, cheer up! If you live around long enough and are lucky enough, you might live through The Singularity and get to become a god-like being yourself, which is what you all really want anyway...

Each of your arguments are based on assumptions.
1. Ethics/Morality: Any simple minded christian could argue out of this one.
Example counterarguements: Evil is not the product of God, but rather the product of man.
Counter Counter: The problem of Evil

Better Counter arguement: Man cannot conceive of Gods plan: What we see as evil is based upon worldly thinking, but is the best possible path for the good of all. God cannot be immoral as he is the very measure of morality.
CounterCounter: Morality is not an arbitrary creation, but rather an overarching concept. If Gods actions do not fall into the category of morality, he is immoral.


My view of what your saying is that it is rejectionist thinking. You were at one point Christian, and now your rebelling. Your second arguement is much better: No evidence. The first arguement deals with the characteristics of God. If someone says yeah, he is an asshole, then you still have done nothing to argue against his existence. Its like the Christian arguement that "we know god exists because he does miracles." Miracles are irrellevant; If Jesus brings me out to a lake and walks across the water, it only proves he can walk on water. It in no way shows that he is the son of God, or that god exists.

Raising Children? Very poor arguement. Look around you. Everyone around you is suffering. A God interested in making people happy and well adjusted would simply sterilize people. Bringing a child into the world causes its suffering. Its as simple as that. Why think God would be interested in your parenting ability, when the entire world functions on suffering? Plants are eaten by herbivores, herbivores by carnivores.

Even the second argurement is... well arguable. You perceive no evidence of God. Others perceive existence itself as evidence of God. Renee Descartes first philosphy really trumps the whole "no evidence" arguement. There is as much evidence of God as anything else: 0.

I overall agree with you. I am specifically playing the devils advocate because if this is a message you are going to bring to people you need to be able to trump their arguements. These are cookie cutter arguements and any philosophy 101 proffesor at a community college would rip them to shreds.

Hello Advocate. Prepare to be defeated.

1.) My arguments cannot be torn to shreds by ANY philosophical argument because I am not being philosophical! Getting into philosophical arguments will not answer something which by very definition is unanswerable (until after death, which is unknowable by the living... at least as of yet, etc., etc.). This is why I have abandoned philosophy for plain old common sense or simple reasoning along with intuition. THAT IS GOOD ENOUGH. Simple common sense is more than enough when dealing with a concept that hasn't a shred of evidence in the first place.

2.) I'm not trying to devise an argument that will beat all pro-theistic arguments once and for all. Not everyone can be saved. I'm only trying to help those who have the potential to be helped.

3.) Another observed contradiction of the Christian faith. On one hand, they say that Man was created in God's image. But, on the other hand, they also say that God works in mysterious ways when presented with the obvious fact that we are utterly incapable of jibing the real world (as I've outlined in my opening post) with God's supposed nature. How can we be made in the image of God, but he also be such a mystery to us to the point that Man and God might as well be from two different universes?

4.) Back to your assumption that I am trying to prove God's non-existence through argument; I am not! To the contrary, I am only poking holes in the theists arguments as they clash with reality and SIMPLE logic! It is the THEISTS who have something to prove, NOT THE ATHEISTS! There is no need for atheists to be put on the defensive.

Now, I know you will still be tempted to argue, as even I see where anyone could quibble with little points here and there, but, is there really any reason to spend one more microsecond even thinking about this ridiculous old cliche of a concept? Life is short... and, no, that's not a cop-out; rather just another practical and real-world decision intended to improve life, which, afterall, is the whole point behind all philosophical arguments in the first place. If there were no claims being made about the serious ramifications of whether or not God actually exists or not, then who would even bother arguing about it?

I'll just stick to good-old simple common sense... good try, though!

[Luna]

I don't believe there is a god.. but who said god has to be of good nature?
maybe he is enjoying this.. someone definitely would.

but there probably isn't.

[Ghostrider]

I don't believe there is a god.. but who said god has to be of good nature?
maybe he is enjoying this.. someone definitely would.

but there probably isn't.

I used to be able to believe in God, but now when I try to consider the possibility, I come to the conclusion that if there is a God, it's can't have all the good proprieties of being all-powerful, all-knowing, and good. It just leads to a lot of conflict. So I allow for the possibility that there could be a God, but don't try to assume any characteristics of that God.

[mentatpsi]

what of Cthulu?

http://upload.wikime...2/Cthulhu_and_R

Edited by mentatpsi, 05 June 2009 - 07:13 PM.

[Ben Simon]

He has a wiki. Does this dent your confidence at all?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

[Connor MacLeod]

Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

Show me an event that does not violate some law of physics.

[mentatpsi]

Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

Show me an event that does not violate some law of physics.

what of deism?

[Singularity]

Show me his footprint! Show me a miracle! Show me an event that violates the laws of physics! There is more evidence for the Easter Bunny than there is for an omni* god.

Show me an event that does not violate some law of physics.

I asked you first.

[Taelr]

rev,

you say a man can't be god? I AM GOD! I come in the name of jesus, by the power of the holy spirit!

Nonsense. I am God. I know this because when I pray I can hear a prayer.

[Taelr]

rev,

you say a man can't be god? I AM GOD! I come in the name of jesus, by the power of the holy spirit!

Don't be silly. The Jesus character is pure myth - he never actually existed. And the holy spirit / trinity gibberish was a real nightmare kludge dreamt up by the early church creators to get themselves out of the mess of having developed a polytheistic religion when it was meant to be monotheist. DOH!

Edited by Taelr, 11 June 2009 - 04:38 AM.

[Duke]

I'm still pondering as to why an omniscient (i.e. can see the future) entity would 'create' Adam and Eve knowing before hand they would 'sin' and as a result of this, God descends to Earth in the guise of Jesus Christ, sacrificing his life for an event he had already predicted.

I've yet to receive a good defense.

Once this conundrum is resolved, I can move on to other matters, such as Noah's Ark!

Edited by Duke, 11 June 2009 - 05:03 PM.

[Ben Simon]

I'm still pondering as to why an omniscient (i.e. can see the future) entity would 'create' Adam and Eve knowing before hand they would 'sin' and as a result of this, God descends to Earth in the guise of Jesus Christ, sacrificing his life for an event he had already predicted.

I've yet to receive a good defense.

Once this conundrum is resolved, I can move on to other matters, such as Noah's Ark!

The book of Genesis (Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, etcetera) is a collection of myths. Some religious people believe them to be literally true, but most don't. Critiques of religion which depend on pointing out that mythology is not real are not serious.

[Taelr]

...but wait, it is worse. What sacrifice? Don't we normally associate sacrifice with a permanent loss? Isn't it the matter of permanance that makes a sacrifice so signficant and sad? Even the tear jerker passage John 3:16 "for God so loved the world that he gave his only son", inspires us to emote over how we would feel if we lost an only son. But hang-on, wasn't there a ressurection here, and the son came back after a couple of days - kinda like a long weekend away. And an omniscient god would know there was no real loss. So Dad and junior are back together again which shows there really was no real sacrifice - it was all just a sham - the essence of Christianity.

So exactly why are we meant to relate to a sad sacrifice that was merely a momentary blink in time? Now if there was no ressurection part then we could relate to a sad loss, but no, the mythmakers messed up that potentially good story-line. But they were just copying the Horus storyline anyway which had the original ressurection script.

[drunkfunk]

GOD IS LOVE!

[Duke]

Actually, I know many people who take the stories quite seriously (e.g. woman made from man). Why do you think Darwin caused such a cataclysm? If Genesis is a collection of myths and should not be a source of critique as a result, then why is the Sabbath still observed rather commonly (albeit not as much as before)? Who is to draw the line as to what is a myth and what is not? Even a general consensus in regard to the most fundamental concepts (e.g. after-death, Final Judgment, does Purgatory exist, pre-destination, etc.) is not established. Why bother pointing out it is a myth?

The point is, many people derive their functional beliefs on how the world works--and came about--through the Bible, Genesis or otherwise. Jesus being resurrected is as "myth"-like as it gets, yet that is a central belief to many sects of Christianity.

Granted, I realize my comment wasn't a serious religious refutation attempt. I had hoped my tone made that obvious. =(

@ Taelr

Definition-warz!!1

–noun
1. the offering of animal, plant, or human life or of some material possession to a deity, as in propitiation or homage.
2. the person, animal, or thing so offered.
3. the surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim.

[dictionary.com]

I don't know about you, but that sounds like a perfect match for Jesus' act. Then again I didn't exactly ponder over my word choice, so getting into a debate over nuanced meanings is rather worthless.

Edited by Duke, 12 June 2009 - 04:08 AM.

[LET ME GET EM!]

If we look at the characteristics of god we shall see that god to many can mean a number of things. Being able to create, control, protect, give and take are the abilities of a god without omitting the greatest of all actions... making decisions that benefits the self and others.

If we were to look at the gods of old time they were in a sense exxagerated icons that of course held human characteristics- thus were human. From the foundations of this world exist the human with it's powerful attributes that has either stood out and been scorned against or have stood out and been exxagerated and exhalted on high as were the historical icons of old day.

The word God- an identification given to represent power and authority has maintained it's existance to the point of no deducement. And applying that title to man in these days in time is somewhat scary but in all reality I must say that only man- a conscious human species with a mental faculty of rationality and honesty can hold that title.

[Forever21]

There is a God. His name is Barack Hussein Obama.

Edited by Forever21, 15 June 2009 - 10:25 PM.

[Loot Perish]

Speak to me! State your name.... Talk to me! Correct God… Correct God… Ain’t none of y’all correct me by my word. I’ll give you some scriptures…
Revelations, Chapter 16… 5 and 7
Revelations, 15:4
Ezekiel, Chapter 5… Verse 15

What do you know about the Lord? What ‘chu know about the Lord? What you know about the Lord. Now tell me… I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. Let’s stay focused! You wanna see the flesh ‘cuz you see flesh and you know they always told you, “A man can’t be God!” Huh, what you calling me for? I told you what I’m about. It’s about getting the lawyers training ‘em up in the word with these scriptures and we going to help the poor and the fatherless that can’t afford… That cant afford them legalities! Them legalities! They can’t afford justice… I know you all into justice! Just like white supremacists, huh? White supremacists!



Haha, you the devil! Haha, you the devil! You a Satanist, huh? ‘Eh ‘eh yo… Then you wrote a book too then right? You got a book with blood on it! You Satan. Huh, who created you, Satan? I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit. I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit.


Wuz ‘hattnin? Wuz ‘hattnin? I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. Whose name you coming in? By who power? Is what? It’s the Spirit of God… See, the Spirit of God is omnipotent and it works and it don’t work on your ass and I can be far, far away ‘cuz it’s considered a conscience, you know? And it ain’t done filling my conscience because I’m sent by Jesus to do what I’m doing. And I keep it all lawful and legal. I come in the name of Jesus by the power of Holy Spirit… and anybody resisting, can kiss it! Man, I come in the name of Jesus by the power of Holy Spirit. It don’t matter if you come with me… Are you down doing what I’m talking about? Doing lawyers can get this book open, trained in these words get the poor, fatherless and widows up out of them penitentiaries. Are you down with that? If you aren’t down with that… shut up!

Edited by Reverend_X, 16 June 2009 - 02:50 AM.

[LET ME GET EM!]

"Haha, you the devil! Haha, you the devil! You a Satanist, huh? 'Eh 'eh yo… Then you wrote a book too then right? You got a book with blood on it! You Satan. Huh, who created you, Satan? I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit. I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit."

Hello Rev. X,

I read your post and it seemed quite extreme (wow!). Well I am not here to flame your beliefs nor your idea system but I will tell you that you are simply asking for it my man. You see, this is the Immortality Institute where the members here are interracting in direct communication, here and now specifics and objective facts to bring about the ideas and actions that will enhance the living system as it exist... Satan, Jesus, the Holy spirit here... acts as effective metaphors to explain the phenomenon of man and his evolution.

Here, let me enlighten you;

God= Very advanced being with the pure state of consciousness
Jesus= God Man or Conscious Man(in his time)
Holy Spirit= The Pure state of Consciousness
Satan= Corrupted Conscious Man
Disciples= See-reactors... Followers

So in a sense Rev, we here are respecting the many ideas that come forth with it's down to earth debates if its worth it but are seeking REAL WORLD answers for such real word problems that ensue. Furthermore, with all the name calling... that is totally uncalled for because in essense it is you that stepped into an immortality institute when you should actually be waiting on your perceptions of an idea to deliver to you via supernatural phenomenon what we are tring to achieve... you babbling hallucigenic.

With love,

LET ME GET EM!

[LET ME GET EM!]

I'm still pondering as to why an omniscient (i.e. can see the future) entity would 'create' Adam and Eve knowing before hand they would 'sin' and as a result of this, God descends to Earth in the guise of Jesus Christ, sacrificing his life for an event he had already predicted.

I've yet to receive a good defense.

Once this conundrum is resolved, I can move on to other matters, such as Noah's Ark!

Well lets get ready to move on!

As you would know my dear friend that those stories itself as it is told as well as holy scriptures were pieces of stories that have been hand scribed, abandoned, discovered and thoroughly edited then culled together into a canon of what we call today the bible. Utilized for centuries as the idea system to subdue the living species and have been the unchallenged pieces of recorded history to perpetuate a plush standarded of living with the results of many simply throwing away their self interest and redering themselves to silent frustration.

Inshort, those of 'old day' could simply relate to the life of that time, thus following was inherent. But today, in these days in time we see the unseeable, think the unthinkable. We are not required to follow anyone... we are only required to THINK and then bring those thoughts to reality.

[drunkfunk]

it's really that simple >

[Singularity]

...but wait, it is worse. What sacrifice? Don't we normally associate sacrifice with a permanent loss? Isn't it the matter of permanance that makes a sacrifice so signficant and sad? Even the tear jerker passage John 3:16 "for God so loved the world that he gave his only son", inspires us to emote over how we would feel if we lost an only son. But hang-on, wasn't there a ressurection here, and the son came back after a couple of days - kinda like a long weekend away. And an omniscient god would know there was no real loss. So Dad and junior are back together again which shows there really was no real sacrifice - it was all just a sham - the essence of Christianity.

So exactly why are we meant to relate to a sad sacrifice that was merely a momentary blink in time? Now if there was no ressurection part then we could relate to a sad loss, but no, the mythmakers messed up that potentially good story-line. But they were just copying the Horus storyline anyway which had the original ressurection script.

LOL, VERY good point.

It always amazes me how I never saw these incongruencies from the start... oh, but wait, I WAS A CHILD WHEN THEY GOT AHOLD OF ME!!! Bastards!

[fatboy]

Yeah, kudos for delivering breaking news to me 30 years after I already realized it for myself.

[Loot Perish]

"Haha, you the devil! Haha, you the devil! You a Satanist, huh? 'Eh 'eh yo… Then you wrote a book too then right? You got a book with blood on it! You Satan. Huh, who created you, Satan? I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit. I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit."

Hello Rev. X,

I read your post and it seemed quite extreme (wow!). Well I am not here to flame your beliefs nor your idea system but I will tell you that you are simply asking for it my man. You see, this is the Immortality Institute where the members here are interracting in direct communication, here and now specifics and objective facts to bring about the ideas and actions that will enhance the living system as it exist... Satan, Jesus, the Holy spirit here... acts as effective metaphors to explain the phenomenon of man and his evolution.

Here, let me enlighten you;

God= Very advanced being with the pure state of consciousness
Jesus= God Man or Conscious Man(in his time)
Holy Spirit= The Pure state of Consciousness
Satan= Corrupted Conscious Man
Disciples= See-reactors... Followers

So in a sense Rev, we here are respecting the many ideas that come forth with it's down to earth debates if its worth it but are seeking REAL WORLD answers for such real word problems that ensue. Furthermore, with all the name calling... that is totally uncalled for because in essense it is you that stepped into an immortality institute when you should actually be waiting on your perceptions of an idea to deliver to you via supernatural phenomenon what we are tring to achieve... you babbling hallucigenic.

With love,

LET ME GET EM!

[LET ME GET EM!]

"Haha, you the devil! Haha, you the devil! You a Satanist, huh? 'Eh 'eh yo… Then you wrote a book too then right? You got a book with blood on it! You Satan. Huh, who created you, Satan? I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit. I come in the name of Jesus by the power of the holy spirit."

Hello Rev. X,

I read your post and it seemed quite extreme (wow!). Well I am not here to flame your beliefs nor your idea system but I will tell you that you are simply asking for it my man. You see, this is the Immortality Institute where the members here are interracting in direct communication, here and now specifics and objective facts to bring about the ideas and actions that will enhance the living system as it exist... Satan, Jesus, the Holy spirit here... acts as effective metaphors to explain the phenomenon of man and his evolution.

Here, let me enlighten you;

God= Very advanced being with the pure state of consciousness
Jesus= God Man or Conscious Man(in his time)
Holy Spirit= The Pure state of Consciousness
Satan= Corrupted Conscious Man
Disciples= See-reactors... Followers

So in a sense Rev, we here are respecting the many ideas that come forth with it's down to earth debates if its worth it but are seeking REAL WORLD answers for such real word problems that ensue. Furthermore, with all the name calling... that is totally uncalled for because in essense it is you that stepped into an immortality institute when you should actually be waiting on your perceptions of an idea to deliver to you via supernatural phenomenon what we are tring to achieve... you babbling hallucigenic.

With love,

LET ME GET EM!

STANDING OVATION!!!!

Creative! In my deepest sincerities, I apologizes Rev. X for actually taking your previous post so serious in assuming you were really writting like a babbling hallucigenic that was wasting very precious increments of time trying to convert reality and it's valuable intergrals into a structure of true believers of something that has no sound basis in reality... The mockery was wonderful! It totally undermines and coincides with today's religious zealots and their backyard preaching to the choir(especially in the urban era).. maybe you should look into the arts!

Edited by LET ME GET EM!, 18 June 2009 - 04:23 PM.