Rampage explains how outer space is a hoax

[Deleted member 577981]

I'm not sure what you mean, I haven't ruled out a branch of unknown hominids like Bigfoot existing. In fact, I think it would be pretty cool if they did exist. I'm just waiting for more tangible evidence before I believe. Is that wrong in your eyes?

My position in this thread has never varied. People have lied about it but let me state it clearly so you know. I think if a person chooses to wait to believe in something until it is proven, that's a fair game for them to play and I don't judge it. I have no interest in convincing that person. It might be nice to discuss things with that person, but a need to convince them doesn't exist for me. I respect the way they choose to move forward with knowledge.

I am just stating that it is reasonable and reasoned to believe in this phenomenon based only on other people's accounts, even if you haven't experienced it yourself.
It is reasoned and reasonable to believe in this phenomenon based on your own experience.

The only thing I have said that is out of place and completely unwarranted is the mocking of people who do believe based on other people's accounts or their own experience. The certainty that a phenomenon doesn't exist because a scientist hasn't proven it in the lab is a religious kind of certainty.

You might catch me leaning towards judging people for not believing in things unless science has proven it in a lab, but it's really just in the context of this thread and being attacked and mocked and ridiculed and accused of being crazy by these people that I say those things.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

So you believe that Allah, whom the Muslims pray to as God, IS the Judeo-Christian God, and that their experiences with Allah are actually the Judeo-Christian God? No novel, just yes or no?

If you read my post carefully, you'll realize I already answered that question.

Is light a particle or a wave? Just yes or no. Not a novel. Just answer the question yes or no?

See?

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

If you read my post carefully, you'll realize I already answered that question.

Is light a particle or a wave? Just yes or no. Not a novel. Just answer the question yes or no?

See?

So you still won't answer the question. Yes or no, is the Allah that Muslim's pray to and say they believe they've experienced the same God as the Judeo-Christian God?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

So you still won't answer the question. Yes or no, is the Allah that Muslim's pray to and say they believe they've experienced the same God as the Judeo-Christian God?

I expect you to read the posts I post.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

I expect you to read the posts I post.

I'm asking you a simple question. Why hide behind obfuscation and the expectation that one would read between the lines. I'm truly attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you in it's simplest form. Is the God that Muslim's pray to, and claim to have had personal experiences with, actually the Judeo-Christian God?

 

[Deleted member 577981]

I'm asking you a simple question. Why hide behind obfuscation and the expectation that one would read between the lines. I'm truly attempting to have an intelligent conversation with you in it's simplest form. Is the God that Muslim's pray to, and claim to have had personal experiences with, actually the Judeo-Christian God?

Is light a particle or a wave? Yes or no. No novels just yes or no.

Answer me that and I will answer your question. You can Google it if you don't know the answer.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

Interspiritual thought has already handled this straw man that comes from the atheist community.

If you gather the advanced templatives from Buddhism, Hinduism and Christian spirituality and Judaism and Muslims, there are differences that a certain but we also find striking similarities.

Saccitananda for instance, is the experience of pure being which causes bliss. So there are three elements to this, pure being, consciousness of pure being, and the bliss that results. It is a non-personal experience. You're just experiencing a state, a force, or an energy. It's not personal.

The holy Trinity, Father, son and holy spirit is more accurately stated as pure being pure consciousness and love. It is a strikingly similar experience to the Hindu version, only it's personal so there is an element of personal connection to it and it's love instead of bliss because of that personality.

These are the two highest states known by either tradition. These traditions arrived at these states independently from one another through completely different world views and yet here we have striking similarities.

You can do the same thing with all the world's traditions. Yes, there are differences but there are profound similarities which I think is strong evidence that we're independently coming to states of consciousness and to realities that are really there.

I have had both of these encounters in their fullness multiple times as I am an avid meditator and have spent three to five hours a day in meditation since I was 20 years old. They're not exactly the same but they are profoundly similar.


The notion that because they're given different names means they're different things is idiotic even.

Just verifying, using your own words from your post, that just because Allah and God are given different names doesn't mean they are different things. So, in simplest terms, you believe Allah and God are the same entity. You believe that Muslims who claim they have been touched by Allah through prayer have actually been touched in a positive way by the Judeo-Christian God? If my interpretation of what you've said is wrong, then you can simply answer... do you believe that Allah and the Judeo-Christian God are actually one and the same?

 

[Natural Order]

Imagine thinking Bigfoot exists with the number of cameras and people in the woods.

Rofl

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

Is light a particle or a wave? Yes or no. No novels just yes or no.

Answer me that and I will answer your question. You can Google it if you don't know the answer.

You're intentionally answering questions with questions, and the answer to your question is it is relative to the observer. But it is still light. How it moves doesn't change what it is. How it is observed doesn't change what it is.

Now that I've answered your question, it's time to answer mine: Is Allah that Muslims pray to and claim to have experienced the same as the Judeo-Christian God?

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

My position in this thread has never varied. People have lied about it but let me state it clearly so you know. I think if a person chooses to wait to believe in something until it is proven, that's a fair game for them to play and I don't judge it. I have no interest in convincing that person. It might be nice to discuss things with that person, but a need to convince them doesn't exist for me. I respect the way they choose to move forward with knowledge.

I am just stating that it is reasonable and reasoned to believe in this phenomenon based only on other people's accounts, even if you haven't experienced it yourself.
It is reasoned and reasonable to believe in this phenomenon based on your own experience.

The only thing I have said that is out of place and completely unwarranted is the mocking of people who do believe based on other people's accounts or their own experience. The certainty that a phenomenon doesn't exist because a scientist hasn't proven it in the lab is a religious kind of certainty.

You might catch me leaning towards judging people for not believing in things unless science has proven it in a lab, but it's really just in the context of this thread and being attacked and mocked and ridiculed and accused of being crazy by these people that I say those things.

Believing in something like Bigfoot is a little different then say believing in Antarctica when you've never been there. Bigfoot's existence would be a significant deviance from our current understanding of biology and evolution. It's an extraordinary claims that requires extraordinary (or at least extra) evidence to be considered reasonable in my eyes. Something like a skeleton or a living bigfoot would meet that criteria for me. While anecdotal accounts are interesting, and open the possibility, they don't meet the threshold of extraordinary evidence for me.

 

[BearGrounds]

Dude. We know Bigfoot is real.

He’s either really real
Or supernaturally real.

Now take your L.

You guys should start a support group.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Just verifying, using your own words from your post, that just because Allah and God are given different names doesn't mean they are different things. So, in simplest terms, you believe Allah and God are the same entity. You believe that Muslims who claim they have been touched by Allah through prayer have actually been touched in a positive way by the Judeo-Christian God? If my interpretation of what you've said is wrong, then you can simply answer... do you believe that Allah and the Judeo-Christian God are actually one and the same?

The problem is you tried to force the question into a yes or no.

The answer to whether light is a particle or a wave is both and.....
not yes or no. And neither can the question you're asking be answered yes or no.

You don't want a novel written, but you're asking a question that requires you to understand a whole bunch of concepts you have no understanding of yet. Most of these concepts you haven't even heard of even.

I have less experience with Muslims, although I've read most of Rumis work.

But in the case of saccitananda from Hinduism in comparison with the Holy Trinity, we think yes it is the same god. However, it is absolutely clear that we are not experiencing the same thing ultimate state. So we think we are experiencing different penetrations of intimacy with the same thing and having very different experiences with it.

The main difference as I already explained our love instead of bliss and a personal experience with a personal god versus emerging with a not personal energy and a loss of self in that not personal energy.

Here my knowledge of Hinduism is weak. I'll admit, but built into their philosophy is a very complete and detailed understanding of how ultimate reality or even just spiritual reality can appear differently to different people. And there are quantum physicists like Wolfgang Smith trying to use that kind of thinking to kick the ball forward for quantum physics to explain how we seemingly affect reality through our own observation of it.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

Is light a particle or a wave? Yes or no. No novels just yes or no.

Answer me that and I will answer your question. You can Google it if you don't know the answer.

My last response to you, and you're welcome to have the last word after, as it no longer makes any sense to speak with you:

Your game is laughably transparent. You won't answer the question because either way it doesn't work out for you. If you say "Yes, they are one in the same" then you discount the book of Exodus (among others) 20:3 ; Thou shalt have no other gods before me. and 20:5 ; Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them (which Muslims do 5 times a day), not serve them. So now, God is just fine with denouncing Jesus as the son of God in favor of the story of Muhammad. So good with it, in fact, that He will still perform miracles and give you supernatural, positive experiences, even if you call him Allah.

And if you say "No, there is only one God and the others are false", then the experiences they shared aren't experiences at all, and just beliefs. But that can't be true in your world, because those beliefs ARE experiences. So you would discredit your own argument about what people feel and believe is their truth, even if it isn't 'proved by a scientist in a lab.'

Again, like Bear Grounds, you NEED the answer to be more complicated than a yes/no to fit your batshit crazy narrative. Anyone who has read the last 2 pages will see right through your farce of pseudo-intelligence for exactly what it is... bullshit. Have a great day, and enjoy writing out whatever response you feel you can pat yourself on the back for.

Byeeeeee!

 

[BearGrounds]

You didn't reply to my last message on this. Why is that the only other option? You believe in mass conspiracies, is it possible that the anecdotal information you've heard is part of a conspiracy as well or maybe part conspiracy part misidentification, hoaxes, or natural phenomena?

I get a lot of notifications from threads like these, and I don't always feel like addressing them all. Some get lost or abandoned.

That's the only other option I see thus far, because I'm sufficiently convinced that the creature exists physically (due to experience and investigation). I'm as sure of it, as you are that the earth is a globe.

For it to be part of a conspiracy a couple of close friends of mine, and some people I worked for, would have to have be in on it. Not likely, unless I'm in the Truman Show.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

Believing in something like Bigfoot is a little different then say believing in Antarctica when you've never been there. Bigfoot's existence would be a significant deviance from our current understanding of biology and evolution. It's an extraordinary claims that requires extraordinary (or at least extra) evidence to be considered reasonable in my eyes. Something like a skeleton or even a living bigfoot would meet that criteria for me. While anecdotal accounts are interesting, and open the possibility, they don't meet the threshold of extraordinary evidence for me.

My position is that's a fine position for you to have as I just stated and have been perfectly consistent about all throughout this thread. But if you cross the line into a kind of certainty that warrants mocking you will be going too far.



Believing in Bigfoot would not be a significant disruption to our understanding of evolution. In fact the culprit gigantopithecus already existed it is just thought that it survived in a remnant form undetected by us. And we know for a fact that homo sapiens lived alongside other hominids not so far back in evolutionary history.


Also the claim that extraordinary events require extraordinary evidence is false. it's just something some guy said and it's repeated as a dogma but it's not even a scientific principle.

We Believe Caesar exists based on the data that has been left behind and we believe Jesus exists based on the data that has been left behind. there's actually more data for jesus's existence than there is for Cesar. IF Jesus happened to work miracles there would be no extra ordinary evidence 2,000 years later to prove that but it wouldn't mean it didn't happen!!

If Jesus worked miracles you would just have the exact same kind of evidence you would have for any other historical events.... there isn't any such thing as extraordinary evidence for something like that.

This just comes down to whether or not you wait for scientists to tell you something exists before you will believe it and as I have said that's a perfectly fine stance to have but it is by no means required by logic or reason to do.

This is why over 50% of scientists believe in God... they're not violating scientific principles in that belief!!!

 

[Deleted member 577981]

My last response to you, and you're welcome to have the last word after, as it no longer makes any sense to speak with you:

Your game is laughably transparent. You won't answer the question because either way it doesn't work out for you. If you say "Yes, they are one in the same" then you discount the book of Exodus (among others) 20:3 ; Thou shalt have no other gods before me. and 20:5 ; Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them (which Muslims do 5 times a day), not serve them. So now, God is just fine with denouncing Jesus as the son of God in favor of the story of Muhammad. So good with it, in fact, that He will still perform miracles and give you supernatural, positive experiences, even if you call him Allah.

And if you say "No, there is only one God and the others are false", then the experiences they shared aren't experiences at all, and just beliefs. But that can't be true in your world, because those beliefs ARE experiences. So you would discredit your own argument about what people feel and believe is their truth, even if it isn't 'proved by a scientist in a lab.'

Again, like Bear Grounds, you NEED the answer to be more complicated than a yes/no to fit your batshit crazy narrative. Anyone who has read the last 2 pages will see right through your farce of pseudo-intelligence for exactly what it is... bullshit. Have a great day, and enjoy writing out whatever response you feel you can pat yourself on the back for.

My last response to you, and you're welcome to have the last word after, as it no longer makes any sense to speak with you:

Your game is laughably transparent. You won't answer the question because either way it doesn't work out for you. If you say "Yes, they are one in the same" then you discount the book of Exodus (among others) 20:3 ; Thou shalt have no other gods before me. and 20:5 ; Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them (which Muslims do 5 times a day), not serve them. So now, God is just fine with denouncing Jesus as the son of God in favor of the story of Muhammad. So good with it, in fact, that He will still perform miracles and give you supernatural, positive experiences, even if you call him Allah.

And if you say "No, there is only one God and the others are false", then the experiences they shared aren't experiences at all, and just beliefs. But that can't be true in your world, because those beliefs ARE experiences. So you would discredit your own argument about what people feel and believe is their truth, even if it isn't 'proved by a scientist in a lab.'

Again, like Bear Grounds, you NEED the answer to be more complicated than a yes/no to fit your batshit crazy narrative. Anyone who has read the last 2 pages will see right through your farce of pseudo-intelligence for exactly what it is... bullshit. Have a great day, and enjoy writing out whatever response you feel you can pat yourself on the back for.

Byeeeeee!

Byeeeeee!

I gave you a full response in post 1192!!!

Instead of reading it, you posted a laughing emoji. It's not a game that you are not intelligent or willing enough to understand interspiritual thought any more than it's a game that I can't answer if light is a particle or a wave in a simple yes or no for you. Most scientific questions are a little more complicated than that. Why would you expect anything else to be any different?

 

[BearGrounds]

Declaring victory together while failing to intelligently respond to 95% of what is put forth is an astounding fact of this thread.

It is a religion at this point.

One of the discussions that thinking people are having these days is the question of "how do we like our new priests?". Are they the same, better or worse than the old ones? Even some atheists say they would prefer the old priests back although they are actually busy trying to move forward away from both groups.


I think it's worse because Christianity at least laid the groundwork for deep philosophical and intellectual thoughts and carried us forward, gave birth to the sciences, whereas these new priestly class of the sciences stand in the way of thinking outside of narrowly defined (by them) areas.

I mean think about it. Probably more than 50% of the country has had either a paranormal experience, a UFO experience, or an experience with God. And yet the priestly class of the false religion of scientism has got a majority of people convinced none of that ever happened!!

They really do think that if a tree falls in the woods and a scientist wasn't there to capture the sound of it in a lab, it didn't happen!!

That is an astounding feat of closed mindedness and hubris and irrationality. When you're religion separates you from your fellow man so much that you can't take his or her word for anything that isn't proven in a lab, then a degree of thought control has stepped in that's pretty scary.

The state and big business took over science.

It's a corrupt mess.

 

[Deleted member 577981]

The state and big business took over science.

It's a corrupt mess.

I think the new atheists did more damage than the state or big business honestly. I mean I'm not denying what you said but the state and big business is not the reason that people have stopped believing one another or even being able to hear one another.


It is absurd to me that so many people simply cannot know someone, trust them and then hear what they say and take it in. The religion of scientism separates people from one another instead of bringing people together.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

My position is that's a fine position for you to have as I just stated and have been perfectly consistent about all throughout this thread. But if you cross the line into a kind of certainty that warrants mocking you will be going too far.



Believing in Bigfoot would not be a significant disruption to our understanding of evolution. In fact the culprit gigantopithecus already existed it is just thought that it survived in a remnant form undetected by us. And we know for a fact that homo sapiens lived alongside other hominids not so far back in evolutionary history.


Also the claim that extraordinary events require extraordinary evidence is false. it's just something some guy said and it's repeated as a dogma but it's not even a scientific principle.

We Believe Caesar exists based on the data that has been left behind and we believe Jesus exists based on the data that has been left behind. there's actually more data for jesus's existence than there is for Cesar. IF Jesus happened to work miracles there would be no extra ordinary evidence 2,000 years later to prove that but it wouldn't mean it didn't happen!!

If Jesus worked miracles you would just have the exact same kind of evidence you would have for any other historical events.... there isn't any such thing as extraordinary evidence for something like that.

This just comes down to whether or not you wait for scientists to tell you something exists before you will believe it and as I have said that's a perfectly fine stance to have but it is by no means required by logic or reason to do.

This is why over 50% of scientists believe in God... they're not violating scientific principles in that belief!!!

Believing Bigfoot is a gigantopithecus is a very big stretch without any fossil evidence to back that theory up as gigantopithecus existed in East Asia. There is no evidence to suggest that gigantopithecus ever inhabited the regions of North America. Now if fossil remains were found, or if a living gigantopithecus were found then that would change things.

Also, I also included in brackets (extra evidence) in case "extra-ordinary evidence" wasn't to your liking. I have no problem believing that Caesar existed and I have no problem that a carpenter from Galilee named Yeshua became the focal point of a religion existed either. For me to believe in the Roman gods, or to believe that Jesus was the actual son of god, well that would take some extra evidence.

 

[KnockoutsGalore]

Believing Bigfoot is a gigantopithecus is a very big stretch without any fossil evidence to back that theory up as gigantopithecus existed in East Asia. There is no evidence to suggest that gigantopithecus ever inhabited the regions of North America. Now if fossil remains were found, or if a living gigantopithecus were found then that would change things.

Also, I also included in brackets (extra evidence) in case "extra-ordinary evidence" wasn't to your liking. I have no problem believing that Caesar existed and I have no problem that a carpenter from Galilee named Yeshua became the focal point of a religion existed either. For me to believe that he was the actual son of god, well that would take some extra evidence.

Which makes you part of the problem. Since you are so unintelligent to see what's in front of you be believing people's word of mouth, because you've been duped by the new religion of science, state, and big business. Duh...