The reason why Christianity seems so unrealistic and naive

Quite right, I think you should probably stop with the alien fantasy...

Quote from PatternRec:

I can tell that this is going to get more psuedo-esoteric, circular and convoluted if it continues.

So I'll stop here.
More...
 
"God is certainty without fact"
"Science is fact without certainty.


just sayin'

Yes...you are just sayin'


"Certainty of Totality is still certainty without fact."

Totality is a fact...that is certain.


Quote from stu:

Well, many people will say they are truly certain of God, not even .000001% doubt. Then they are at one with God, no doubt in their heart of mind..... that there isn't one.

Every bit as valid as your idea to the contrary.


What are you trying to be so unclear about?

"Certainty of Totality is still certainty without fact." ...same difference


You've said belief in God is a practice of faith as you are not certain of God. ok, fine.

So then you called God something else . A so called Totality.
Now you believe Totality is God, as if shifting one uncertainty over to another confirms certainty.

Like I said to unretired, belief seems to be something which gets made often and easy with the religious.

Apparently both of you make-belief, for any old reason .
..... is it only because you can't abide belief to sound in any way inferior to the original point that ....

"God is certainty without fact"
"Science is fact without certainty.

just sayin'
More...
 
Quote from PatternRec:

In as much as a lie is truth because I imagined and therefore experienced it.

:-/
More...
Through the delusion of religion certainty is the fact of confusion.
 
No, Totality is a fact, it is the reality.

Under no condition can Totality not be a fact.

Already explained, Totality of some things, Totality of all things, Totality of no things, Totality of some things, all things, and no things combined remains Totality.

No matter if a balloon is inflated fully, partially, or not at all, it is a balloon. The physical size of the balloon changes on inflation and deflation, but the balloon as a balloon remains unchanged.

Totality remains unchanged, as it is not determined by size or number of parts. Totality is the sum of the parts, and each part is equal to the Totality, because the very fabric and nature of Totality is Totality. Totality is, was, and always will be. Totality is not created, it cannot be destroyed, there are no a bigger or a smaller Totality...there is only Totality.

From the point visual observation and interaction, a block of iron is a fully solid object. From a deeper point of view it becomes more porous. From a deeper point of view it is mostly space with a few particles. Deeper still, it is something different.

So which reality is the correct point of view to take?

Practically speaking, depends on the situation, but philosophically speaking all points of view are just that...points of view. What doesn't change is when the point of view of pure existence is taken. Simply speaking, the block of iron exists in time and space, and looking at it on a surface level, or molecular, or atomic, or sub atomic, or quantum level doesn't change that it exists in time and space...what changes is how we experience the block of iron.

A block of iron is generally thought of as a part of the universe, not the whole universe. However, if you had the perspective of the entire universe, you would know that the block of iron was not separate from the entire universe. The block is the universe, just as everything within the universe is the universe. The real problem is that science looks from the point of view of the parts, and not the point of view of Totality.

The universe from day one to the last day is a Totality of the universe, and/or if the universe is eternal, there is always a Totality of the universe. A totality of the universe however is not Totality.


Quote from PatternRec:

In as much as a lie is truth because I imagined and therefore experienced it.

:-/
More...
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

No, Totality is a fact, it is the reality.

Under no condition can Totality not be a fact.

Already explained, Totality of some things, Totality of all things, Totality of no things, Totality of some things, all things, and no things combined remains Totality.

No matter if a balloon is inflated fully, partially, or not at all, it is a balloon. The physical size of the balloon changes on inflation and deflation, but the balloon as a balloon remains unchanged.

Totality remains unchanged, as it is not determined by size or number of parts. Totality is the sum of the parts, and each part is equal to the Totality, because the very fabric and nature of Totality is Totality. Totality is, was, and always will be. Totality is not created, it cannot be destroyed, there are no a bigger or a smaller Totality...there is only Totality.

From the point visual observation and interaction, a block of iron is a fully solid object. From a deeper point of view it becomes more porous. From a deeper point of view it is mostly space with a few particles. Deeper still, it is something different.

So which reality is the correct point of view to take?

Practically speaking, depends on the situation, but philosophically speaking all points of view are just that...points of view. What doesn't change is when the point of view of pure existence is taken. Simply speaking, the block of iron exists in time and space, and looking at it on a surface level, or molecular, or atomic, or sub atomic, or quantum level doesn't change that it exists in time and space...what changes is how we experience the block of iron.

A block of iron is generally thought of as a part of the universe, not the whole universe. However, if you had the perspective of the entire universe, you would know that the block of iron was not separate from the entire universe. The block is the universe, just as everything within the universe is the universe. The real problem is that science looks from the point of view of the parts, and not the point of view of Totality.

The universe from day one to the last day is a Totality of the universe, and/or if the universe is eternal, there is always a Totality of the universe. A totality of the universe however is not Totality.
More...

All good until you start anthropomorphizing "Totality."

If all you were saying is, one quark or boson is as much a part of the universe as a galaxy or cluster of galaxies is a part of the universe and all these thing together make up the totality, then there's no problem. Even going so far as saying everything being part of the totality is therefore a totality unto itself is metaphysically palpable though having no meaningful substance or basing in testable reality.

But anything else, any other concepts that you might conjure that do not have the ability to be tested for or plausibly account for some phenomena is pure metaphysics. The foundation of which religion is built upon.
 
"All good until you start anthropomorphizing "Totality."

Totality doesn't need anthropomorphizing. It either is or it isn't limited to the static qualities of a lifeless condition.

However, there certainly is life with the universe, and there is certainly consciousness within the universe, so to take a position that there is no life and no consciousness in Totality is a weak position...

Quote from PatternRec:

All good until you start anthropomorphizing "Totality."

If all you were saying is, one quark or boson is as much a part of the universe as a galaxy or cluster of galaxies is a part of the universe and all these thing together make up the totality, then there's no problem. Even going so far as saying everything being part of the totality is therefore a totality unto itself is metaphysically palpable though having no meaningful substance or basing in testable reality.

But anything else, any other concepts that you might conjure that do not have the ability to be tested for or plausibly account for some phenomena is pure metaphysics. The foundation of which religion is built upon.
More...
 
Quote from OPTIONAL777:

"All good until you start anthropomorphizing "Totality."

Totality doesn't need anthropomorphizing. It either is or it isn't limited to the static qualities of a lifeless condition.

However, there certainly is life with the universe, and there is certainly consciousness within the universe, so to take a position that there is no life and no consciousness in Totality is a weak position...
More...

you need your head examined

you been listening too much depak chopra :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top