freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
The consciousness that contemplates, knows and perceives....is very real. It is the reality behind any thought, idea or concept.
pj
The Late Great Urantia Revelation
- Thread starter Caino
- Start date
- Status
The consciousness that contemplates, knows and perceives....is very real. It is the reality behind any thought, idea or concept.
pj
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Everything,...what do you think 'Infinite Consciousness' or 'Universal Mind' is? :sherlock:
What do you think 'God' is?
God is the Light of Infinite Consciousness.
pj
But you used the word consciousness, and now you are using those other terms. What do I think they are? I have no idea what they are. So a god is a compound of meaningless words.
Stuart
While the conflict between accepted science and the UB persist as regards this life dating issue, there have been interesting developments. Scientist have discovered that radioactive decay rates may not be a constant as long believed.
Another fascinating theory in the UB community is that the Master Force Organizers that manipulate the spiritual fabric upon which material reality rest could potentially influence the presence of radioactivity. The UB claims that evolution was "fostered" up to a point. The Cambrian explosion is still consistent with the UB dates.
Mysteriously, Solar Activity Found to Influence Behavior of Radioactive Materials On Earth
The Sun NASA
Rebecca Boyle
How's this for spooky action at a distance? The sun, at 93 million miles away, appears to be influencing the decay of radioactive elements inside the Earth, researchers say.
Given what we know about radioactivity and solar neutrinos, this should not happen. It's so bizarre that a couple scientists at Stanford and Purdue universities believe there's a chance that a previously unknown solar particle is behind it all.
The big news, according to Stanford's news service, is that the core of the sun -- where nuclear reactions produce neutrinos -- spins more slowly than the surface. This phenomenon might explain changing rates of radioactive decay scientists observed at two separate labs. But it does not explain why the decay-change happens. That violates the laws of physics as we know them.
While examining data on radioactive isotopes, Purdue researchers found disagreement in measured decay rates, which goes against the long-accepted belief that these rates are constant. While searching for an explanation, the scientists came across other research that noted seasonal variation in these decay rates. Apparently radioactivity is stronger in winter than in summer.
Science, Rebecca Boyle, elements, neutrinos, radioactive isotope, radioactivity, solar flares, sun
A 2006 solar flare suggested the sun was involved somehow. Purdue University nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins noticed the decay rate of a medical isotope dropped during the solar flare, and what's more, the decline started before the flare did. The latter finding could be useful for protecting satellites and astronauts -- if there is a correlation between decay rates and solar activity, changed decay rates could provide early warning of an impending solar storm.
But while that's good news for astronauts, it's bad news for physics.
Peter Sturrock, Stanford emeritus professor of applied physics and an expert on the inner workings of the sun, told the researchers to look for evidence that the changes in radioactive decay vary with the rotation of the sun. The answer was yes, suggesting that neutrinos are responsible.
But how could the nebulous neutrino, which does not interact with normal matter, be affecting decay rates? No one knows. It might be a previously unknown particle instead.
As Jenkins puts it, "What we're suggesting is that something that doesn't really interact with anything is changing something that can't be changed."
Though disaster movies would have you believe otherwise, we should not yet worry about solar neutrinos warming the core of the Earth. But perhaps we should worry that our understanding of the sun -- and perhaps our understanding of nuclear physics in general -- is a lot weaker than we thought.
Caino
Another fascinating theory in the UB community is that the Master Force Organizers that manipulate the spiritual fabric upon which material reality rest could potentially influence the presence of radioactivity. The UB claims that evolution was "fostered" up to a point. The Cambrian explosion is still consistent with the UB dates.
Mysteriously, Solar Activity Found to Influence Behavior of Radioactive Materials On Earth
The Sun NASA
Rebecca Boyle
How's this for spooky action at a distance? The sun, at 93 million miles away, appears to be influencing the decay of radioactive elements inside the Earth, researchers say.
Given what we know about radioactivity and solar neutrinos, this should not happen. It's so bizarre that a couple scientists at Stanford and Purdue universities believe there's a chance that a previously unknown solar particle is behind it all.
The big news, according to Stanford's news service, is that the core of the sun -- where nuclear reactions produce neutrinos -- spins more slowly than the surface. This phenomenon might explain changing rates of radioactive decay scientists observed at two separate labs. But it does not explain why the decay-change happens. That violates the laws of physics as we know them.
While examining data on radioactive isotopes, Purdue researchers found disagreement in measured decay rates, which goes against the long-accepted belief that these rates are constant. While searching for an explanation, the scientists came across other research that noted seasonal variation in these decay rates. Apparently radioactivity is stronger in winter than in summer.
Science, Rebecca Boyle, elements, neutrinos, radioactive isotope, radioactivity, solar flares, sun
A 2006 solar flare suggested the sun was involved somehow. Purdue University nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins noticed the decay rate of a medical isotope dropped during the solar flare, and what's more, the decline started before the flare did. The latter finding could be useful for protecting satellites and astronauts -- if there is a correlation between decay rates and solar activity, changed decay rates could provide early warning of an impending solar storm.
But while that's good news for astronauts, it's bad news for physics.
Peter Sturrock, Stanford emeritus professor of applied physics and an expert on the inner workings of the sun, told the researchers to look for evidence that the changes in radioactive decay vary with the rotation of the sun. The answer was yes, suggesting that neutrinos are responsible.
But how could the nebulous neutrino, which does not interact with normal matter, be affecting decay rates? No one knows. It might be a previously unknown particle instead.
As Jenkins puts it, "What we're suggesting is that something that doesn't really interact with anything is changing something that can't be changed."
Though disaster movies would have you believe otherwise, we should not yet worry about solar neutrinos warming the core of the Earth. But perhaps we should worry that our understanding of the sun -- and perhaps our understanding of nuclear physics in general -- is a lot weaker than we thought.
Caino
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Anyone familiar with basic metaphysics and my own theological perspective and terminology understands that 'God' is a word symbolizing/representing 'Spirit', 'Mind', 'Consciousness', 'Being', - we can call this reality 'Infinite Intelligence', 'Universal Mind', 'Supreme Being', 'Light', 'Existence', etc. God is the very Life, essence, mind, consciousness that is omnipresent and pervades the entirety of existence, the very life and substance of everything that is.
'God' is the one absolute reality behind all phenomena, being Life itself. God is Being itself. God is pure consciousness, Light, knowledge. All that exists, is of the substance of God, since all things are made out of consciousness.
God is a living spirit-reality, the very life and light of our own being.
pj
Lost Comet
New member
Interesting, Caino. Thanks. I was unaware of that.
Ever notice that when atheists or agnostics get stuck on a question or problem they ask for definitions? They call theism “stupid” but, apparently, don’t know how to use a dictionary. And what part of “what must be in order for what is to be as it is” is so alien that it cannot be answered?
Reality is not a concept and our understanding cannot be more than relative to the actual. Nevertheless, the ancients were able to organize and build great monuments like Stonehenge and the pyramids because they had clear, if inaccurate, conceptions of what must be. Given today‘s trend toward “I don’t know” and “just because,” they would have never been able to create those marvelous feats of engineering.
Tillich was right: “Everyone who dwells within a system feels after some time that it becomes a prison. …You try to go beyond it in order not to be imprisoned in it. Nevertheless, the system is necessary because it is the form of consistency.” What form of consistency do “I don’t know” and “just because” have? How do such attitudes foster organization, collective creativity or wisdom?
Ever notice that when atheists or agnostics get stuck on a question or problem they ask for definitions? They call theism “stupid” but, apparently, don’t know how to use a dictionary. And what part of “what must be in order for what is to be as it is” is so alien that it cannot be answered?
Reality is not a concept and our understanding cannot be more than relative to the actual. Nevertheless, the ancients were able to organize and build great monuments like Stonehenge and the pyramids because they had clear, if inaccurate, conceptions of what must be. Given today‘s trend toward “I don’t know” and “just because,” they would have never been able to create those marvelous feats of engineering.
Tillich was right: “Everyone who dwells within a system feels after some time that it becomes a prison. …You try to go beyond it in order not to be imprisoned in it. Nevertheless, the system is necessary because it is the form of consistency.” What form of consistency do “I don’t know” and “just because” have? How do such attitudes foster organization, collective creativity or wisdom?
Aimiel
Well-known member
God isn't everything, even though your mis-guided theology has led you to believe that He is. He is God. He isn't Satan. He doesn't sin, even though He created sin. There is no evil in Him. He is capable of being in hell, without being party to it. He is omni-present, but that doesn't make Him all things. He has nothing whatsoever to do with anything that is harmful.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
The Infinitude of God......
The Infinitude of God......
God is.
Everything that has existence, being, shape, form or substance....is possible because of 'God' (the source of all potential). Understanding and stating the Allness of 'God' does not necessary imply God created 'sin', 'evil', 'harm',...yet such phenomena seems apparent in the finite experience of man, due to ignorance, imperfection, limitation, undervelopment, freedom of choice, etc.
The statement that 'God' is all...being the absolute reality here and everywhere (since there is nowhere God is not) holds. There is only this One Presence, Consciousness, Life, Existence, Energy-Awareness...that is 'God'. The anomolies of imperfection or 'sin' are mortal preoccupations and human features limited by space/time and what is finite.
pj
The Infinitude of God......
God is.
Everything that has existence, being, shape, form or substance....is possible because of 'God' (the source of all potential). Understanding and stating the Allness of 'God' does not necessary imply God created 'sin', 'evil', 'harm',...yet such phenomena seems apparent in the finite experience of man, due to ignorance, imperfection, limitation, undervelopment, freedom of choice, etc.
The statement that 'God' is all...being the absolute reality here and everywhere (since there is nowhere God is not) holds. There is only this One Presence, Consciousness, Life, Existence, Energy-Awareness...that is 'God'. The anomolies of imperfection or 'sin' are mortal preoccupations and human features limited by space/time and what is finite.
pj
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
evil
evil
My former observations stand.
I never implied God did not create evil or whatever your 'projecting' here, but that apparently....evil or the potential for it exists (somehow) because of God's allowing, and due to imperfections/limitations within this space/time dimension and our current level of development. That was my observation.
It appears to be your viewpoint that God created sin and evil,...but somehow He somehow is not responsible for its effects :think:
From a thread on the subject of 'evil'.... Here are my observations with insights from the Urantia Papers about it.
pj
evil
My former observations stand.
I never implied God did not create evil or whatever your 'projecting' here, but that apparently....evil or the potential for it exists (somehow) because of God's allowing, and due to imperfections/limitations within this space/time dimension and our current level of development. That was my observation.
It appears to be your viewpoint that God created sin and evil,...but somehow He somehow is not responsible for its effects :think:
From a thread on the subject of 'evil'.... Here are my observations with insights from the Urantia Papers about it.
pj
What is a spirit?
Is mind the same thing as described in the theory of mind? Do you agree that mind is a function of the chemical contents of the brain?
Do you also agree that consciousness is a function of the chemistry of the brain?
Is being that thing which is described by the Descartian existentialist assumption?
How does that relate to the above?
My brain is not connected chemically to any other brain. By what mechanisms are you suggesting the connections implied in this term?
And how does that relate to the terms above, once you have finished defining them?
I don't think you need all that stuff above to define electromagnetic radiation.
Isn't that the same thing as being?
So the word "is", how does that differ from "existence" or "being"?
How is life omnipresent? What is "essence" and how is that omnipresent? I asked you how a mind can be universal, so I guess that will go for omnipresent as well, but what metaphorical meaning are you placing on the word substance here?
What do you mean by absolute reality? Are you not limted by Descartes in the conclusions you can draw?
I think you could have a difficult time convincing me of what you mean by "life" here. You have gone from suspected platitudes to almost certain ones in this.
Religious platitude.
Religious platitude.
Religious platitude and a just ordinary one.
Three more religious platitudes.
Platitudes are statements that are designed to appear impressive but have no meaning. Specifically, the problem with the use of individual words with no particular definition above leads directly to the later compound terms that sound more impressive but mean even less given that you multiply together the scopes of uncertainty in meaning of each of the words therein. You can see the point you switched from poor definition to platitude, about 3/4 of the way down.
Stuart
John Mortimer
New member
From Psalm 137 -
4How shall we sing the LORD's song in a strange land?
5If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.
6If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.
7Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof.
8O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.
9Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
...and of course this is just one of many.
You must have a very interesting definition of "harmful", Aimiel!
John Mortimer
New member
You DO believe this??!!
Verily, I have not found such faith - no, not in all of Christendom!
Ever noticed that the definition gives the meaning, and if you cannot define the word then you are not communicating? Ever notice the whole swathe of words that are used by the religious which are so poorly defined that they achieve their goal of convincing others that when you use a word like "soul" or "eternity" that you are actually talking about something real? The words don't actually have any kind of meaning, but nonetheless the game of emperor's new clothes in which they convince one another that these meaningless words actually do refer to something real continues: a proper definition would burst the bubble of woo that must be maintained for the god delusion itself not to pop.
Put it into different words for me.
What does that mean??
Huh?
I recognise "just because" as a common enough concept in religious mythology, but "I don't know" is meaningless out of context.
What does "the form of consistency" mean? That really is not an explanation is it, it asserts that a description of something is a reason, which is not an explanation.
Stuart
Are you trying to dismiss the entire basis of modern psychiatric medicine? How do you justify that?
Stuart
Reference please.
Reference please. From a physics journal or respected popular science source, if you can.
Stuart
John Mortimer
New member
Psychiatric medicine does NOT depend upon the absurd idea that consciousness is a function of brain chemistry.
It's all-or-nothing with people like you and Aimiel, isn't it?
Brain chemistry has a profound impact upon the mind of one in embodiment, yes. Brain chemistry can be controlled by the mind itself however... it's only a materialist that would say a person is nothing more than a chemical cocktail.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Omniradiant Reality.........
Omniradiant Reality.........
God is Spirit (John 4:24)....not 'a' spirit.
Mind is different from the physical chemical elements of the brain, for consciousness is not limited to nor dependent upon matter.
'Being' is this living awareness that I Am. I exist,...this is the most intimate reality I know.
God is Light. - 'light' here means 'knowledge, consciousness, awareness'...omniscience. All energy has its source in 'God', apart from which nothing could exist. God is the First Source and Center of all reality.
pj
Omniradiant Reality.........
God is Spirit (John 4:24)....not 'a' spirit.
Mind is different from the physical chemical elements of the brain, for consciousness is not limited to nor dependent upon matter.
'Being' is this living awareness that I Am. I exist,...this is the most intimate reality I know.
God is Light. - 'light' here means 'knowledge, consciousness, awareness'...omniscience. All energy has its source in 'God', apart from which nothing could exist. God is the First Source and Center of all reality.
pj
But you can't tell me what area of psychiatry does not actually work on that basis, can you.Psychiatric medicine does NOT depend upon the absurd idea that consciousness is a function of brain chemistry.
It's all-or-nothing with people like you and Aimiel, isn't it?
Brain chemistry has a profound impact upon the mind of one in embodiment, yes. Brain chemistry can be controlled by the mind itself however... it's only a materialist that would say a person is nothing more than a chemical cocktail.
And that is because you are wrong.
Stuart
- Status