182 replies to this topic

[johnross47]

Shadowhawk is a fairly interesting choice of name.....even by comic book standards the backstory of the character is paranoid.....and has had several reincarnations to fight evil in various vicious guises....which reincarnation are you?

thats your most intelligent reply to date.......at least it is a response to the actual content of the post you're reacting to. Keep it up.

[shadowhawk]

Before a father leaves for his longest business trip yet, he encourages his son and daughter to remember, "Even when I'm not here, God is always with you." After he leaves, the boy and his sister spend a fun-filled day and star-filled night remembering everything their father told them about their heavenly Father: He is powerful, loving, everywhere, all-knowing, perfect, merciful, unchanging, creator, and a Father who wants to be known, talked to, obeyed, and worshipped.

Why does a perfect being want to be obeyed and worshipped? Why does god need eternal praise?

I can see how that picture might make some people think badly of God... that really is awful isn't it?

God and truth are not the same things they're aspects of the same higher dimension, he's like a major exploiting his current divine emperor status
see full metal alchemist brotherhood, for details on FATHER.

In order to maintain his power over this domain he must sacrifice humans to contain the power of the full truth within him, the moment he stops doing this is the moment he loses the power of godhood and ends up crucified amongst men as they were able to halt the cycle of feeding necessary to keep him from breaking down.

As all he cares about is the truth and nothing but the truth he shall seek worlds and devour them because he is an elemental balance of the equation of existence, a thing beyond good and evil and necessary to avoid the collapse of the system.

Interesting. I noticed your videos but only watched a couple of them. The videos seem to have influenced you and your beliefs greatly. Are they the basis of your belief in God? What does that make the video maker? Thanks

[shadowhawk]

Shadowhawk is a fairly interesting choice of name.....even by comic book standards the backstory of the character is paranoid.....and has had several reincarnations to fight evil in various vicious guises....which reincarnation are you?

thats your most intelligent reply to date.......at least it is a response to the actual content of the post you're reacting to. Keep it up.

Off topic, the reason you get no response.

[hooter]

Off topic, the reason you get no response.

You're acting like a broken record.

Edited by hooter, 06 March 2012 - 11:09 PM.

[shadowhawk]

Off topic, the reason you get no response.

You're acting like a broken record.

Either stay on topic or i am going to make a complaint. It is obvious you are harassing the subject. Anyone can see what you are doing by looking at your posts.. Some people are interested in the topic without your endless bigotry. I like open debate but this is not debate.

[hooter]

Off topic, the reason you get no response.

You're acting like a broken record.

Either stay on topic or i am going to make a complaint. It is obvious you are harassing the subject. Anyone can see what you are doing by looking at your posts.. Some people are interested in the topic without your endless bigotry. I like open debate but this is not debate.

Go on make a complaint, see if anyone listens to you after acting like such a fervent lunatic for endless threads.

[johnross47]

I've been around Imminst for a while and been a member for a couple of years but the only threads where I've ever seen such massive flaming and grotesquely intemperate fury is in your posts Shadowhawk. That's the reason people are "picking" on you. You don't answer people's real points so they satirise you and provoke you for a laugh. This may well be troll-like behaviour but it is understandable in the circumstances you create.

[shadowhawk]

http://www.longecity...post__p__428913

“Members have the option to utilize moderation powers in their regimen thread. This can be useful for maintaining an up-to-date list in the first post, and keeping the discussion on-topic.

While you have discretion in deciding what constitutes appropriate discussion, I suggest using this ability with tact and restraint. Heavy moderation will reduce the likelihood that users will participate in your thread.

Several buttons should appear at the bottom of posts.

Edit allows you to edit all posts in the thread (note that there is no way to undo edits).
Unapprove will hide the post from view of users. This can also be useful for 'reserving' posts at the top of the thread for later use.
Delete will remove the post from active status: in the next dialog box, clicking Remove will allow the post to be toggled and restored by moderators, while Delete will remove it irreversibly. Using Remove, and typing a brief reason for deletion, is generally better practice.


Chrono “

[hooter]

http://www.longecity...post__p__428913

“Members have the option to utilize moderation powers in their regimen thread. This can be useful for maintaining an up-to-date list in the first post, and keeping the discussion on-topic.

While you have discretion in deciding what constitutes appropriate discussion, I suggest using this ability with tact and restraint. Heavy moderation will reduce the likelihood that users will participate in your thread.

Several buttons should appear at the bottom of posts.

Edit allows you to edit all posts in the thread (note that there is no way to undo edits).
Unapprove will hide the post from view of users. This can also be useful for 'reserving' posts at the top of the thread for later use.
Delete will remove the post from active status: in the next dialog box, clicking Remove will allow the post to be toggled and restored by moderators, while Delete will remove it irreversibly. Using Remove, and typing a brief reason for deletion, is generally better practice.

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

[shadowhawk]

http://www.longecity...post__p__428913

“Members have the option to utilize moderation powers in their regimen thread. This can be useful for maintaining an up-to-date list in the first post, and keeping the discussion on-topic.

While you have discretion in deciding what constitutes appropriate discussion, I suggest using this ability with tact and restraint. Heavy moderation will reduce the likelihood that users will participate in your thread.

Several buttons should appear at the bottom of posts.

Edit allows you to edit all posts in the thread (note that there is no way to undo edits).
Unapprove will hide the post from view of users. This can also be useful for 'reserving' posts at the top of the thread for later use.
Delete will remove the post from active status: in the next dialog box, clicking Remove will allow the post to be toggled and restored by moderators, while Delete will remove it irreversibly. Using Remove, and typing a brief reason for deletion, is generally better practice.

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

Logical Fallacy, this is about behavior here in Longecity. Instead you attack religion and other peoples views of God. Also again off topic. What Do You Think God is Like?

[wowser]

its amazing how just cos a thread is talking about God it attracts atheist haters like moths to a flame! lol!

now getting back on topic... i think that our ability to truly know what God is like is limited by our corporeal form, but once the soul leaves the contrains of the corporeal form we find that we truly know God and wonder how we could have ever not done so...

Edited by wowser, 08 March 2012 - 08:11 AM.

[shadowhawk]

What is god like? IS GOD A MORAL MONSTER?

[shadowhawk]

/watch?v=oyiDRoqGh1I&feature=uploademail

Edited by shadowhawk, 13 March 2012 - 12:43 AM.

[steampoweredgod]

It is believed and evidence suggests the maximum speed of gravity is C same as light, simultaneity or the present is relative for some it is the past for others the present and for others the future

Yet we view events in the past as set in stone and unchanging and those in the future as gaps yet to be filled.

We can say that whatever man writes contradicting the cold laws of reality, will have some explaining to do if it is to connect as it must with the underlying reality of the universe.

Edited by steampoweredgod, 18 March 2012 - 08:46 AM.

[shadowhawk]

GENOCIDE AND BIBLE VS ATHEIST POSITION - what God is like.

[shifter]

I think there is a fair bit of hypocrisy in this thread. The entire sub forum is to do with 'Spirituality and Religion' and this whole thread is designed for theist inputs. Why are so many hardcore theist hating atheists giving their 2cents worth and flaming the thread starter about his views.

I haven't been exploring these subforums very long so have no idea of shadowhawks history here, but if you honestly dont like religion, and dont like what shadowhawk has to say, then why are you here? Especially in a thread that was asking for theists to contribute. You dont like it if (or when) he posts religious topics in other forum sections, well I would have though that this thread is one where atheist views are not welcome (or needed). There are other threads where you can discuss atheism to your hearts content.

If there was a separate subforum for atheism or one of you atheists started a thread asking for views on atheism, you wouldn't like religious zealots barging in with their propaganda. So maybe you need to think how it makes you look when the roles are reversed.

I say let shadowhawk have his view and his threads. It's an entitlement we all allowed to have. If this guy pisses you off so much and you disagree with everything he says, then why bother participating on his friends? Either it's hypocrisy or you find the whole sagas entertaining and your anger is just a keyboard warrior show).

As for shadowhawk, I respect your right to religion and the freedom you have to preach, but one thing I do agree with others here is that simply posting a link without your own personal insight, does not entice me to click on the link. Pushing religion on people who dont want anything to do with it impacts negatively on your own religion and arguing about it indeed is not encouraged even by your own faith.

PEACE PEOPLE Extremism in either direction is never healthy

[shadowhawk]

shifter: As for shadowhawk, I respect your right to religion and the freedom you have to preach, but one thing I do agree with others here is that simply posting a link without your own personal insight, does not entice me to click on the link. Pushing religion on people who don’t want anything to do with it impacts negatively on your own religion and arguing about it indeed is not encouraged even by your own faith.

I do not consider my contribution as doing anything that others don’t do all the time. What I do when anyone posts a source is look it up to see what it is. Doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Twelve years of college and graduate work have taught me to do this and I am not afraid of audio visual sources either. Frankly, if you don’t want to look at something, you are a big boy, don’t. I am not pushing religion on you or anyone else if I give a reference. It is beyond me to see a footnote or reference as something someone is trying to force on me. Be an adult, turn the page if religious topics bother you.

[Link]

shifter: As for shadowhawk, I respect your right to religion and the freedom you have to preach, but one thing I do agree with others here is that simply posting a link without your own personal insight, does not entice me to click on the link. Pushing religion on people who don’t want anything to do with it impacts negatively on your own religion and arguing about it indeed is not encouraged even by your own faith.

I do not consider my contribution as doing anything that others don’t do all the time. What I do when anyone posts a source is look it up to see what it is. Doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Twelve years of college and graduate work have taught me to do this and I am not afraid of audio visual sources either. Frankly, if you don’t want to look at something, you are a big boy, don’t. I am not pushing religion on you or anyone else if I give a reference. It is beyond me to see a footnote or reference as something someone is trying to force on me. Be an adult, turn the page if religious topics bother you.

There is nothing wrong with posting something as a reference to a point you are making, but this is not the same thing as simply pasting a video or link as your entire post. You should be able to explain why something that you have posted is relevant to the discussion.

Simply posting links and videos of others opinions, demonstrates that you lack the ability to discuss and articulate your own understanding of ideas.

Accusing others of "being afraid of audio visual sources" because you are too lazy to actually write anything in your own words is quite frankly, juvenile. Tell me, when you were doing your 12 years of college would it have been acceptable to hand in an essay comprised entirely of work cut and pasted from other sources, with no explaination or conclusion?

[shadowhawk]

Link: There is nothing wrong with posting something as a reference to a point you are making, but this is not the same thing as simply pasting a video or link as your entire post. You should be able to explain why something that you have posted is relevant to the discussion.

I agree with this and would argue most of my posts reference a point I am making. Debates are a different thing where two sides are fairly being presented such as you will find in my posts in the
atheist / theist debates in England. Here one could accuse me of posting atheist positions as well as theist positions

Simply posting links and videos of others opinions, demonstrates that you lack the ability to discuss and articulate your own understanding of ideas.

I don’t think so at all, depends on what it is. How does ir demonstrate that someone lacks the ability to articulate ones own understanding. I disagree with this jump to conclusion. Perhaps you have an example of this to back up your own conclusions.

Accusing others of "being afraid of audio visual sources" because you are too lazy to actually write anything in your own words is quite frankly, juvenile. Tell me, when you were doing your 12 years of college would it have been acceptable to hand in an essay comprised entirely of work cut and pasted from other sources, with no explaination or conclusion?

“Lazy,” “juvenile,“ ad hominem without any evidence. This is not a place where we are turning in papers. Of course this is fairly informal. I doubt you are not recognizing what this is. I wouldn’t turn in anything raw as it is presented here, would you? You are reminding me of a professor I once had. Everything I turned in to him had to be done with Campbell’s Form which is very formal format. I labored for three weeks on a paper. I usually got great grades but this paper cane back an “F.”

Big red marks showed my margins were one letter to wide and every time I went outside the line I lost a point. I made up my mind the next paper would be a nonsense paper that had no content but was correct form. I got an, “A.”

What I don’t hear is very many dealing with the substance but a lot of crying over the form. You are not doing this are you? Explain why you are so uptight with everything but the content.

There is nothing wrong with posting something as a reference to a point you are making, but this is not the same thing as simply pasting a video or link as your entire post. You should be able to explain why something that you have posted is relevant to the discussion.

I agree with this and would argue most of my posts reference a point I am making. Debates are a different thing where two sides are fairly being presented such as you will find in my posts in the
atheist / theist debates in England. Here one could accuse me of posting atheist positions as well as theist positions

Simply posting links and videos of others opinions, demonstrates that you lack the ability to discuss and articulate your own understanding of ideas.

I don’t think so at all, depends on what it is. How does ir demonstrate that someone lacks the ability to articulate ones own understanding. I disagree with this jump to conclusion. Perhaps you have an example of this to back up your own conclusions.

Accusing others of "being afraid of audio visual sources" because you are too lazy to actually write anything in your own words is quite frankly, juvenile. Tell me, when you were doing your 12 years of college would it have been acceptable to hand in an essay comprised entirely of work cut and pasted from other sources, with no explaination or conclusion?

“Lazy,” “juvenile,“ ad hominem without any evidence. This is not a place where we are turning in papers. Of course this is fairly informal. I doubt you are not recognizing what this is. I wouldn’t turn in anything raw as it is presented here, would you? You are reminding me of a professor I once had. Everything I turned in to him had to be done with Campbell’s Form which is very formal format. I labored for three weeks on a paper. I usually got great grades but this paper cane back an “F.”

Big red marks showed my margins were one letter to wide and every time I went outside the line I lost a point. I made up my mind the next paper would be a nonsense paper that had no content but was correct form. I got an, “A.”

What I don’t hear is very many dealing with the substance but a lot of crying over the form. You are not doing this are you? Explain why you are so uptight with everything but the content.

[Lister]

So... Uhh

I think God is the collective consciousness of either a past universe/multi-universe that has ascended and unified... I would imagine this collective consciousness would probably have a hard time even being aware of our existence.

I would also think that due to the level of this consciousness it cannot help but have an enormous impact on the consciousness of the majority of life below it. If you think about it you could logically argue for the existence of God from this point.

Wanna see me try? =D

[mikeinnaples]

Wanna see me try? =D

Not really, because you are wrong.

[Lister]

Wanna see me try? =D

Not really, because you are wrong.

Tough.

What is one of the main goals of consciousness? That would be to continue to exist. The majority of life that we know of on this planet wants to survive and continue living. This is point 1.

While we can allow for very broad and extreme variations in life throughout the universe (assuming there is life) considering what we know we could come to the conclusion that this is a common theme.

We could also come to the conclusion that our will to live is rare but that’s another line of thought.

If we assume that the life on our planet is similar to life throughout the universe we could conclude that the will to survive is a goal of the majority of consciousness throughout the universe. This is Point 2.

Given a broad interest in continued existence we could add science in there, add in few thousand years from where we are now and you may find consciousness has obtained extreme longevity (hey we’re on this forum aren’t we?)

Also if you calculate in the social nature of extremely successful societies (like Ants and Termites and Humans) you can start to see that a society is one of the best ways for a species to be successful. A move towards singularity is critical. This is point 3.

So now wanting to continue to exist is critical. Wanting to join together as a society makes us successful and is also critical. If you add in the vast expanse of time the universe has been through and could have gone through in the past you’re left with this: Consciousness existing, ascending and unifying and becoming God. Selfishness, independence, Greed… etc. could explain for the existence of multiple Gods.

This of course is just a possibility and I challenge you to prove that it’s wrong. There’s no way we could prove it right but does it make sense? Yes it does. (You don’t think so? Sounds like someone’s living under a rock.)

This doesn’t mean that religion is right or that God or Gods are perfect. All it does is provide an example where one could connect reality to the existence of a God or God like persons.

Remember that to your Dog we are an Ascended and Unified Godly existence. Who knows, Maybe God is religious?

Edited by Lister, 17 July 2012 - 01:01 AM.

[mikeinnaples]

This of course is just a possibility and I challenge you to prove that it’s wrong. There’s no way we could prove it right but does it make sense? Yes it does. (You don’t think so? Sounds like someone’s living under a rock.)

I am quoting just the small section above for a very specific reason:

1. You are basically saying that if I disagree with you, I am living under a rock. I shouldn't have to explain to you where that comment is a failure on your part.

2. You are also challenging me to prove that the possibility you mentioned is wrong. Do you understand how completely absurd that is? If not, I will make you this deal. *If* you can prove to me that it isn't possible for pink unicorns to exist, I will gladly take you up on your challenge.

Edited by mikeinnaples, 17 July 2012 - 01:56 PM.

[Lister]

This of course is just a possibility and I challenge you to prove that it’s wrong. There’s no way we could prove it right but does it make sense? Yes it does. (You don’t think so? Sounds like someone’s living under a rock.)

I am quoting just the small section above for a very specific reason:

1. You are basically saying that if I disagree with you, I am living under a rock. I shouldn't have to explain to you where that comment is a failure on your part.

2. You are also challenging me to prove that the possibility you mentioned is wrong. Do you understand how completely absurd that is? If not, I will make you this deal. *If* you can prove to me that it isn't possible for pink unicorns to exist, I will gladly take you up on your challenge.

Ok so that's your opinion of how I said it. Also I probably could prove that Pink unicorns don't exist or do but on such a specific issue making connections would be difficult for me. Without extensive knowledge of biology I’m not sure I could do it.

I realize my example of a possible God is absurd (I mean do you even have to say that?) but is it possible? Considering there is almost no absolutes you have to argue from a likely to less likely position. In that I would say that if you tried to prove the possible existence of a God like entity my argument is on the more likely side of things.

At least no one has successfully poked holes in the logic of that God existence example before… Yet.

[mikeinnaples]

Considering there is almost no absolutes you have to argue from a likely to less likely position. In that I would say that if you tried to prove the possible existence of a God like entity my argument is on the more likely side of things.

I agree with you that there are almost no absolutes, but I disagree with the application of your logic. You are applying it to one side and not the other equally, when it encompasses both. There is nothing -more likely- about your position.

[Lister]

Considering there is almost no absolutes you have to argue from a likely to less likely position. In that I would say that if you tried to prove the possible existence of a God like entity my argument is on the more likely side of things.

I agree with you that there are almost no absolutes, but I disagree with the application of your logic. You are applying it to one side and not the other equally, when it encompasses both. There is nothing -more likely- about your position.

Well, I mean I could probably add in the self destructive nature of humans and label some sort of trend to that but hey! One thing at a time man!

If we wanted to argue for the existence of God we would have to take several dozen huge leaps off the edge of what we know and pretty much just rely on logic to make even the vaguest sense of things. If you read my example a couple times you could say “Hey wait a minute! I’ve seen that somewhere haven’t I?” Yes! You have! (Star Trek and several other science fiction stuffs)

If we’re talking about what we think God would be like I don’t see why a logical thinker can’t imagine up something using logic to make connections. We’re not asking “What do you think the Higgs Boson weights?” here we’re asking something infinitely more subjective.

In that; keeping in mind that we can make a topic for “Make an example for Gods Non-Existence”; Does my logical connected existence of God work? Where am I wrong? Don’t make me ask you to Prove Me Wrong!

[platypus]

My experience of God has been incredible love. I have often gone on retreats of several weeks of silence with God. The experience of love is beyond words. God loves us deeply in my experience. How about other religions?

The terms are different but the experience is pretty much the same. Meditation retreats make people experience wonderful things..

[LeonardElijah]

From my DMT/ayahuasca experiences

God is something that cannot be labeled or known. To this extent, I'm agnostic. It's beyond comprehension.

It seems like we're in itty bitty compartments, each a manifestation of the same Godhead, constricted in perception to individual bodies. In this way a "Son" is always linked to the veiled "higher self" we sometimes call "Father." The Son/Father is a unity.
Our lives are interconnected by a Great Spirit. Events will happen in your lifetime that let you know, beyond a doubt, that it's real.

[LeonardElijah]

Jesus is the fulfillment of a creative reading of the Old Testament.

Things only begin to get messy when we think that God requires propitiation for individual sins.
"If you see your Maker's face tonight (the presence of God is called the face of God)
Look him in the eye
Look him in the eye
and tell him"

[LabyrinthianEpiphanies]

God is probably a scientist. Or maybe god is like the great oz from "the wizard of oz" ? A humbug