i myself do not fully believe in afterlife... where to get one for u... current life already not enlightened... im not so keen on afterlife.
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:i myself do not fully believe in afterlife... where to get one for u... current life already not enlightened... im not so keen on afterlife.
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:i myself do not fully believe in afterlife... where to get one for u... current life already not enlightened... im not so keen on afterlife.
How much do you need to know about something in order to conclude that it exists?
Originally posted by Fugazzi:One can play-mind games with onself, but ti always surfaces!
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
That is being wise, everybody is thinking of the moon and the stars and death and afterlife but they cannot even appreciate what is rite in front of them. So, I can only assume that they are trying to live as opposed to living.
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
How much do you need to know about something in order to conclude that it exists?
hmmm how about being there... have a look look see see feel feel touch touch experience myself. then i will tell myself that it really exist. If thats has not happen, i wld like to be more focused on my living life rather than afterlife.
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Dont know say dont know lah, knowledge pretending wisdom does not make sense
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
hmmm how about being there... have a look look see see feel feel touch touch experience myself. then i will tell myself that it really exist. If thats has not happen, i wld like to be more focused on my living life rather than afterlife.
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
I think you missed the point. How much must you know about something in order to conclude it is real? Does your not knowing much about it logically lead to the conclusion that it is not real or does not exist?
er... i tot we are talking about afterlife so i replied with regards to afterlife ma. How about u? in the context of afterlife?
whether it is real or it exist anot.. to me i have to at least see it or know of it existance. If its afterlife we are talking about, we cant even see it.
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
er... i tot we are talking about afterlife so i replied with regards to afterlife ma. How about u? in the context of afterlife?whether it is real or it exist anot.. to me i have to at least see it or know of it existance. If its afterlife we are talking about, we cant even see it.
I am alive now (living, as Fuzzy said) so I can't tell you from personal experience about the afterlife. But I believe Jesus was the best authority on this.
Yes, we can't see the afterlife, but then again, what we cannot see does not necessarily negates its existence.
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Whehter it is self-refuting or a contradiction, i rather stay with that. consistency is a dead thing. When I leave the house for 10 days, the furniture will be the same after 10 days.
Can I say the same or expect the same fo a sibling or a spouse or .. unless I see them as a thing (dead). If I see another as a means to an end – I have already reduced another to a thing to be used and put aside again.
These are not absolutes, these are relative and not literal and methaphorical and meant for those who are keen and earnest to know.
If you cling on to your self-refuting statements, then your worldview is necessarily false. And you are BEING consistently contradicting yourself. And must it be necessarily to see another as a means to an end if one does not agree with your existentialist musings?
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
I am alive now (living, as Fuzzy said) so I can't tell you from personal experience about the afterlife. But I believe Jesus was the best authority on this.Yes, we can't see the afterlife, but then again, what we cannot see does not necessarily negates its existence.
welll thats solely to me... what i cant see i cant prove it does not exist, but neither i can prove it exists too. since it cant be proven to be existant, i prefer to take it as non existant. Far too intangible for me... i prefer things more real than such things as afterlife loh.
Originally posted by [imdestinyz]:
welll thats solely to me... what i cant see i cant prove it does not exist, but neither i can prove it exists too. since it cant be proven to be existant, i prefer to take it as non existant. Far too intangible for me... i prefer things more real than such things as afterlife loh.
Yes, that's your preference and choice, but not one that is rationally defensible.
There are many things you have experienced that cannot be seen or touched, yet you do not doubt that they are real.
Originally posted by Fugazzi:contradicting- yes I am – cos it allows for intelligence an opportunity for oneself to find out … . The stupid one fears contradictions, cos it is uncertainty so goes for consistency (certainty) – no exploration, just sheep bleating away!
If you are contradicting yourself, that is hardly the mark of intelligence. It is irrationality confused as intelligence! It is rational people that fear and avoid contradictions, not stupid people. People who lack critical thinking? They embrace contradictions.
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Muse over this :
Intelligence cannot be learned, cannot be cultivated – it is intuitive,it is inner. It cannot be found in books, bible, or another person. it is thru exploration of the inner dimension of one’s being. Intellect is knowledge, is borrowed, it is conclusion. It comes from the outer.
Muse over this more: Humans are intelligent beings because we are made in God's image. So I agree with you, intelligence cannot be learned. It is something we are wired with. But intellectual prowess can be honed by training in critical thinking. But you seemed to be one who frowns upon logical thinking.
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Logical thinking is useful,certainly not to be rejected, but sadly the mind has usurped the master of the house. So one either uses the mind and puts it aside or the mind uses the person.
As for God having created human beings as intelligence beings – is very true but one has to grapple with this dilemma – and that is the dilemma of of the conditionings of the … hence, i remarked this – one can find a Chinese mind, one can find a Buddhisht Mind, one can find a Indian Mind, but one cannot find a chinese or Buddhist or … heart.
Heart (aka in conventional usage soul, God, Buddha, Jesus and …. ) is intelligence that intuits and of course, it does not abide to rules n … eg, why is love so difficult for many people, not cos it is difficult but becomes difficult cos the intuitive heart is eclipsed by the conditionings of the mind. Wrong – no I wont say it is wrong but at some point, the pain of ignorance becomes so unbearable one turns towards the heart, aka god or … for one’s salvation or whatever it is labelled or called.
I lament not the mind but rather the lack of understanding of its limitations. Can I try as I might understand the phenomena of love. Love comes faceless and the most I would do is use the logic of the mind and impose color on what is a transpiring phenomena.
When Jesus or Krishna or Buddha invite – they invited …. to partake of their spiritual being (experiences expressed in human form). However, sadly, the human experience has been miscontrued as spiritual experiencing. One’s heart is the abode of ’’God’’ not mind.
Hence, in the matters of religion, love, joy and peace – it cannot be reconciled by the mind. The intuitive heart simply intuits – the problem is that of risking alienation, excoriation by others around who expects everyone one to think and live the same.
All human beings are having spirutual experiences (spiritual beings , being eg love being polite, being ….? in human form( experiencing ….) but the millenia of conditioning has one looking outwards when it has always been inside. As long as there is no synthesis of inner and outer the inner split will at some point manifest.
The mind is ’’good’’ to acheive , ’’good’’ at the market place. The heart is ’’good’’ for love, for relating, for communing.. As long as there is no synthesis of inner and outer the inner split will at some point manifest.Lest it is misconstrued – nothing here is the truth, whether it is true or not true is for one to find out.
But in holding on to self-refuting statements and other contradictory beliefs, how can you now be said to be embracing logic? The heart cannot rejoice with what the mind rejects. Knowledge precedes doing. But the book of James say, be doers of the Word and not mere listeners.
BTW, if nothing you said is the truth, then what's the point of asking us to find it out? It's like saying "All I have written is fiction. Whether it is fact or not is for you to find out." But why should anyone be bothered to do that after hearing what you admitted?
Originally posted by Fugazzi:Please lah, ur quoting texts and the Bible or some authority is empty and bereft of meaning. has it been true for YOU? Have u expereince it firsthand. It it is not, dont just be like sheep and parrot or borrow concepts, defintions. To simply belief means not willing to admit that one does not know, one is not sure but one wants to be certain and hence one clings on to a belief that allows for certainty (it is pyschological and only real in the head)
One who has no fears will listen to the heart . (uncertainty)
One who is a coward will always be dictated by the mind (certainty)What is rationale – If god created human beings in his OWN image, why the prayer of supplication? Why must he save ….? Is this rationale?
If God created the universe- who created god? Is this a contradiction or a rationality?As long as u sit on dictionary definitions and conclusions – u are wasting ur time responding to what I say.
Jesus quoted Scriptures in responding to His critics and enemies. It was the authoritative Word of God that Jesus quoted to His hearers. My point in that verse is that the Bible has its "existentialist" part, where it calls us to BE DOERS, not merely hearers. Apparently you missed that, amusing as it is to me, since you talked so much about being this and being that!
Your definition of belief does not resonate with me nor with what the Bible teaches. Belief in the Biblical sense is based on God's revelation to us. I do not know all things but certainly I can put my trust in God who does!
And who taught you that no fear means that one listens to the heart? What's your authority? Or is this your own musings you invent to make yourself look wise? God gave us brains so that we can use it to think and reason through things. Yet here you are telling people to ditch the mind.
Your questions betray the superficiality of your thinking. How is praying not rational? And asking who created God is like asking who is the bachelor's wife. But since you are not trained or given to logical thinking you would erroneously think that your questions are reasonable stumpers for me.
Yes, it is rather a waste of time responding to your nonsensical musings because you refuse to engage in rational reflection at all. But I do not fret, I merely wish to point out to readers (and to your stubborn self) that your worldview is rationally flawed and plagued by contradictions and totally unlivable. It is your own delusion.