Existential depression.....

VeritasBlue

We know our hearing isn't as acute as some animals. We are limited with our other senses too.
Therefore, we cannot completely understand our physical world if we are made deaf and blind. So our understanding is limited by our human "design" proven empirically by our very physical nature or what we think our physical nature is.

I have always maintained a similar idea that we really do miss a great deal of the space time spectrum in regard to our local human senses. It should be said however, that we are able to find other ways to detect things like radiation, infrared, sounds that travel outside the spectrum of human reception. So far in the history of science there isn't one deviation or oddity (that I know of) within the spectrum we are capable of detecting, that contradicts those basic laws. Unless of course we get into Quantum Theory but as I'm sure you know those are formulas more than observable deviations, I think. lol

So our understanding is limited by our human "design" proven empirically by our very physical nature or what we think our physical nature is.

Well said. I know I keep bringing up Quantum Physics, but it's a very good example of what you just said. It's very difficult in a personally observable, materialistic way; to map out various facets of the universe because it begins to operate in a somewhat nonsensical way that even negates measurement.

I think the ideas of solipsism would attract a childish mindset that would limit the Creator Source. I would discount that because of the concept of infinity that cannot be held or known but is real in concept as an idea. ( don't know if I stated that very well)

Epistemological Solipsism as a philosophical concept is very interesting, and I do agree with the idea about certainty of self. That is to say that on a philosophical level, you really are all there is that you can be (questionably) certain about. Everything you experience: people, sensations, sounds, ideas, are highly probable statistically but not necessarily guaranteed lol. Additionally, I am inclined to agree that there is a childishness that comes with Metaphysical Solipsism especially. Its funny, the concept of infinity has been coming up a lot, I just watched a documentary on it in fact. I was going to comment on Infinity, instead I'll share this link. I am not mathematically minded so for me to even comment on it is a travesty.

Well I don't think energy disappears. I think it converts
Into something. Ergo when we pass we pass into something.

I have up until recently found comfort in that idea, but I wanted to understand the concept a little better. You will often hear someone bring up The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics . Not by any means an attempt at debunking a concept but expressing a question of relevance.

You are probably familiar with it, put simply: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. This is where we all rejoice in that on some level the matter we are made up of will always exist, but unless we can prove that some portion of our sentience exists within the energy itself, what good does this law do in the interest of a continued existence?

It seems this is where Neuroscience comes along and ruins our day. I'm not stating this as fact so I don't want anyone to misunderstand my personal context but based on current research, our consciousness is the culmination of our senses working together. Most current theories admit that even defining consciousness is difficult, and mapping it out with complete accuracy is a long way off, but thus far; they seem to be able to map (via stimulation) nearly every sensation we can experience. That includes OBEs, NDEs, a grandiose sense of self or others, a sense that you are being watched, a sense that you're flying. I find this more than a little a troubling.

a reply to: EviLCHiMP

Your ideas seem very much in line with my wife's, EvilChimp.

Energy cannot be seperate from itself and because of this it is impossible for energy to observe itself, watching itself. Therefore there must exist an even subtler type of energy, an anti-energy, anti-matter for that matter.

Certainly not out of the realm of consideration for me, as I have often contemplated that it is completely bizarre that if we are all composed of the same matter, that matter has evolved to observe itself, or simply put; it became self aware. I would ask you, why does that require a subtle/separate energy? If energy can change forms simultaneously than it can exist not separate from itself, but infinitely separate in it's diversity. It could and seems to have found so many forms by which to evolve that sentience and consciousness came into play; various forms of it in fact.

That in and of itself is kind of a mindf8&k.

In our human ignorance we have mistaken ourselves as the lesser forms and have forgotten we are the highest most perfect energy.

The interesting thing about your beautifully written post is that it really doesn't yank particularly hard at the cords of disbelief. I would ask you this however; is there not something one could demonstrate to prove such a design within a physical, empirical context? Also,Is the "Dark Matter" you speak of the same as the concept theorized in cosmology?

No matter how we map out the concept of energy and our role as such, I can't dismiss the sense of randomness. This randomness seems to juggle human consciousness, and human physical experience in much the same way it juggles everything else. This does not suggest to me that humans are the highest or even relevant in the grand scheme of things. The concepts you're exploring would suggest that humans could alter that somehow if by no other means, than sheer force of will, or belief since we would technically all be the same being.

Furthermore, if I am WE, did I ever have a beginning?

a reply to: BS_Slayer

They just can't imagine things otherwise, but is it really that difficult to give in to the evident randomness of the universe? Especially when observing the randomness of nature?

Some of things that science is observing is exactly the opposite of the picture you are painting of it. New information is not leading to the idea that everything is an accident. Scientists have never said anything is random. Why do you think they constantly use words like patterns? Why do they use words like laws? because there seems to be laws involved everywhere.

New information showing that consciousness actually creates response and the possibilities arising that we are in a simulated existence all to yet be explored, none of those speak of disordered random universe. You are reading into the new information quickly coming to light something that is simply not there.

Vera Kistiakowsky (MIT physicist): "The exquisite order displayed by our scientific understanding of the physical world calls for the divine."

Alan Sandage (winner of the Crawford prize in astronomy): "I find it quite improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explanation for the miracle of existence, why there is something instead of nothing."

Fred Hoyle (British astrophysicist): "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."

What's the Universe Made Of? Math, Says Scientist

www.livescience.com...
www.godandscience.org...

a reply to: Char-Lee

Excellent points, Char-Lee and your premise is similar to the many hopes I have, it's why I will always continue to observe without ever really subscribing to anything fully. You mention systems and patterns and they can definitely defy description when it comes to complexity, but that doesn't automatically dictate that they are not created as a result of some larger randomness. I would have to disagree with you that no scientist has ever suggested something isn't random. Randomness certainly exists as probability. Is the universe itself not chaotic in it's behavior? Does that not sustain the possibility that the formation of life as we know it is not a random reaction? Please keep in mind I'm not arguing for that, just saying that it is possible.

New information showing that consciousness actually creates response and the possibilities arising that we are in a simulated existence all to yet be explored, none of those speak of disordered random universe. You are reading into the new information quickly coming to light something that is simply not there.

Are you referring to Qbism ? because that is only a theory, and not necessarily the favored one among the majority of Physicists. I think it is beyond interesting and the implications if proven true would be earth shattering, but that is not the same as saying new information "shows" that consciousness creates response. The double slit experiment is a pretty interesting phenomena though.

The quotes you are using certainly lend hope for many, but there are equally convincing arguments against those opinions by a majority of equally qualified physicists. Just something to keep in mind.

originally posted by: BS_Slayer
I'll go ahead and presume your source for such a statement is the Bible..

It was a very general sentence. It means that every time I turn on the television or go out into the public I am let down by the deception. It is either that they have been deceived and don't know it, or they are deceiving on purpose, I would say the ladder is not as common. I have to teach people when I go outside. They make judgement upon a person's character, but it is like they need conformation of a genuine character to have confirmation in themselves to be righteous.

But it does have a relation to the bible. 10 years ago I read the bible, it was mostly for a historical account (if any) but I was religious, I believed some of it and question other parts of it. With intense study, I have come to know that the bible is all fake, it has it's purpose but the purpose is secret. The purpose is to control the world and it worked. Because of that, I have to teach people the actual new covenant, which is the Essene Way.

I have no problem that you believe this, but can you fathom the absolute volume of material that contradicts such a statement? Are you the kind of person that looks away or puts down a book, or closes the web page the second it goes in a direction that opposes the Bible? Or do you take it all in if for no other reason than to understand your philosophical adversaries? I ask not in sarcasm, but pure curiosity.

I think my last paragraph was enough to convey that I understand the fabrication of the bible from beginning to end, OT and NT. Now I understand that is something you cannot argue with the masses on - they are so stuck that the bible is the absolute truth, and they are so stuck on worshipping Christ the same way as deity, quoting from them that Christ is 100% God and 100% man. But since the NT was fabricated they are not able to see that it was a very strict teaching to worship the Creator only. Even though Christ taught to be a servant, when they tried to call him master he said 'no.' His example was to wash the feet of other people, that is not a message or teaching to worship him. The true Christ warned us about them, that the world is full of hypocrites. And they call him Jesus which is the wrong name, it is amazing how the truth was made to be hidden by the cruel world, and the innocent world isn't smart enough to see the deception.

Sure you may have been burned a few times, but that only says things about our species, not females as a sub group. Men lie, cheat and steal just as much as women do. No less a dissatisfying aspect of the human experience, but a flaw we share equally.

I admit to have had strange experiences, but I was saying that based on the last couple years of change. I feel that I can take a video camera and record the new hatred that women show man any day. I said that yesterday and went out, even though the first couple women did not show this, is was because I was projecting myself positively. Remember it is the people in need which the snake hates to give to. If you are sad or negative they won't come near you. but within about an hour I saw a girl with her boyfriend, she was completely ignoring him and texting away on the phone like they all do now, then he got sick of it and grab her hand. Remember body language says much more than words.

The problem I think is that you are categorizing entire aspects of your sociological observations. Your melancholia seems a direct reflex of a biblical perspective of the world. If you adhere completely to the Bible, than you are damned to wallow in the shadow of it's contradictions. If you're strong enough to keep your mind hardened by the principles of faith, I commend your discipline, but it is a discipline I do not have.

I am certainly not admitting to being perfect and I am opening to work with a professional, because lets admit stress can get to us all and it's not healthy or easy to endure. But remember I understand the deception that the world since ancient times have propagated to society. The church is probably the worst example. For some reason the Elite have always wanted to keep pagan traditions and not be entirely holy.

I was born a Christian, and there are several moral and logical issues that forced me to abandon my former stance a long time ago. If you have answers to some of these, by all means feel free. I personally am troubled merely by the fact that the questions can even be formulated.

1. If God knows all things. Why would he bother to create a soul that he already knows is destined to end up in a lake of fire? Wouldn't that make him malevolent? Please don't answer with free will, free will negates God's ability to see its outcome.

For me it is the dimension of time which is so important. Or soul is an energy form. The creation of time and the physical reality is more marvelous than it is harmful. The earth appears to be living also, there have been intense natural calamities, nature appears to be completely indifferent. I wish there was a miracle every time an accident happens, or disaster. I cannot completely answer. In order to even have physical reality, it appears that is has to be this way, as in not easy to survive, and survival of the fittest and smartest. But yes I wish there was a divine intervention more often and maybe there sometimes is.

2. What need would an omniscient being have of worship, praise? What possible function could it serve an almighty creator?

The relation we have the eternal is very very mysterious as it is complex, and the laws of this interaction are just the same, very complex and mysterious. We have a relationship with time. We can produce coincidences, or synchronizations in this relationship. The laws are also strange, for example the soul does not like the ego because the law is that pride is bad. The proud are made humble. Maybe because the soul knows it's perfection and the mind's limits? I believe the psychologists were on track, that there is a Subconscious and Super Id. That is why I was so interested in finding the true mystery religions and teachings, because they know the true laws: how to truly please the Spirit. Of course I did not make the laws, but they are there because of our unescapable relationship with the Holy One.

3. Essentially, a biblical perspective plays out like a formula. God creates mankind as an imperfect species. God demands atonement for said imperfect behaviors. God is truly the only means by which his creations can be atoned. God is also the only means by which a human soul can reach a demise via the creation of hell, hence he is directly responsible for either outcome. Does any of this premise sound like the work of anything like a God?

Yes, and let us remember where the bible came from. Originally it was the plural 'gods' who created Adamu, who was a set of presumably hybrid experiments - because there was a set of 8 of them, the first 7 having deformities, and because of the original picture with the story on an ancient cuneiform tablet has a 'god' humanoid woman holding a baby with test tubes in the background. It is extremely questionable that these gods were referenced all over the ancient world as coming down from the sky. it is also extremely questionable how they lifted and built a structure with 1,000 ton blocks of stone, which we cannot lift with a crane today. Going back to the local tradition, it was the son of Adam who lifted those stones. So we have a bunch of Sumerian stories filling the book of Genesis, why wouldn't the whole OT have been fabricated if that was? Well I am studying the NT deception now and am coming across references to it. Funny to know that the Jews are not even Isrealites in reality - they are Sumerians lol. This means that the Sumerian were in control of all aspects of religion until Christ. Even the Greek Zeus was based on it, and Egypt Osiris but remember they still had the mystery practices and scripture that only the high priests and elite had access to. So just as there was a deception created by Greece and Rome for the whole age of Pisces, there was also a deception for the age of Taurus and Aries created by the powers of those ages. The Essenes were there the whole time, from Moses, to Abraham, to Adam, (who were not called Essenes back then but a sacred mystery religion), the true single one going back to the very first days. It's quite possible that the OT is more twisted in truth than the NT.

So no it is not the work of the Spirit, but the work of man trying to control the world. That is the biggest secret of all. But, there was a true sect that did know the truth and follow the truth, Christ came to be a leader of this group in it's last days, then the group turned into Christianity. But remember Christianity was persecuted in those days because they wanted to get rid of all the Essenes and keep their control, so they created the New Testament, and took the mindset of a counter intelligence operative, I mean it is very methodical and well thought out, a very good deception.

The whole point, and what the teachings stressed is that we are going back to our Creator. If we live a life of sun and cause suffering, we are going to have to see ourselves and everyone else in that image, which is not the image of holy light. A lot of this is hard to get around because one would think "Why is it like this?" I don't know why things are like that, but it is a good thing that the life force of creation is 'good.' I mean the whole thing doesn't make sense to us, it is too hard to grasp the extent of eternal. And that can be fearful, but that is good, it is the Fear of God, rather than having pride and thinking you are better than that, well what happens when you meet that?? So that is part of the law against pride.

I'm not here to play demonic atheist with you, it is not my place to attempt to manipulate anyone's faith. I just want to understand how you are able to compute these examples within your world view and still feel comfortable intellectually?

I do not talk about any of these things with other people in society. So feeling comfortable intellectually wouldn't be a factor because I wouldn't be talking about this outside of this forum. I don't talk to anybody about religion or sex (or even UFOs or ancient mysteries) unless they are a close friend.

What about feeling comfortable personally?

Deep inside I feel that after decades of being presented with evidence of Christ, that after tremendous amounts of time and effort, that I have finally uncovered the true Way to the divine spirit of Christ.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

BS-Slayer!
I wish to compliment you on your ability to write everyone a reply on a variety of complex issues! You remind me of a chess master playing several chess games all at once! I do believe I am no where near your level of cerebral accomplishments!
Yet, here I am writing to you once again! This bantering is very brain stimulating and yet I am not too much a verbal person and writing words into sentences to express ideas feels alien to me. I just hope you are not secretly Stephen Hawking or a coeval because I would be so embarrassed!

Anyway, I have always been interested in physics because of all the weirdo (breaking laws of matter) experiences I have had. I wanted to understand the why and how of my world/worlds. In history when a personal witness' testimony is recorded they are referred to as a "Primary Source". I consider myself a Primary Source to events not necessarily explainable. This propels me to search out and think of what are the rules of earth life really? I cannot not easily define the rules, but I have some ideas about them. I have a very limited education on these things so do excuse my rudimentary efforts to communicate with you on Quantum Theory and Einstein's General Relativity.

I am curious about understanding more of what you wrote. So I would like to probe further and ask you more questions on your replies. Thanks in advanced!

You said:
>>So far in the history of science there isn't one deviation or oddity (that I know of) within the spectrum we are capable of detecting, that contradicts those basic laws. Unless of course we get into Quantum Theory but as I'm sure you know those are formulas more than observable deviations, I think. lol

Humm..... Deviation or oddity (please define your definition)
" Capable of detecting a spectrum".. .. Are you meaning empirical observation?

What I was thinking about was miracles of healing. I am not sure if this would contradict basic laws. I think it would. A medically unexplained healing is called a miracle. Which I think means they don't know how it happened so they call it a miracle.

Would you consider a "miracle" healing a qualifying deviation or oddity that contradicts basic laws?

You said:

>>Well said. I know I keep bringing up Quantum Physics, but it's a very good example of what you just said. It's very difficult in a personally observable, materialistic way; to map out various facets of the universe because it begins to operate in a somewhat nonsensical way that even negates measurement.

Are you referring to the Quantium Physics vs Einstein's General Relativity not following the same laws of behavior? Is this negating measurement make prediction unsuccessful?


You said:
>>Epistemological Solipsism as a philosophical concept is very interesting, and I do agree with the idea about certainty of self. That is to say that on a philosophical level, you really are all there is that you can be (questionably) certain about. Everything you experience: people, sensations, sounds, ideas, are highly probable statistically but not necessarily guaranteed lol. Additionally, I am inclined to agree that there is a childishness that comes with Metaphysical Solipsism especially. Its funny, the concept of infinity has been coming up a lot, I just watched a documentary on it in fact. I was going to comment on Infinity, instead I'll share this link. I am not mathematically minded so for me to even comment on it is a travesty.

Okay I had to look this term up.

Epistemological Solipsism according to Wikipedia:
Epistemological solipsism is the variety of idealism according to which only the directly accessible mental contents of the solipsistic philosopher can be known. The existence of other minds and the external world generally is regarded as an unresolvable question...

I think some of these concepts would be classified as sophistry. They are interesting
To ponder but are they practical? Can they take you to any conclusions that could apply to something?

The reason I stated that solipsism is childish is from observations that a child in the crib would only be aware of its own wants and needs as all that exists. When the child goes to school, he becomes aware of his neighborhood of kids and that is about all. When the child grows up more, he learns about his city and he can even grasp the idea of his city state and even other nation states.
Finally the childish mind expands to understanding there is an earth world interconnected and a galactic universe at large.
A service to self mindset has not expanded into a greater connected consciousness outside of self and that is why I would classify this person's lack of awareness as childish or stunted if you will. This lack of consciousness is fashionable and culturally encouraged unfortunately.

Thanks for the Live Science link. That was a good read.
My personal ideas on infinity would parallel infinite infinity because I define infinity as omnipresent and therefore Creator Source! Ta Da!

a reply to: VeritasBlue

BS-Slayer!
I wish to compliment you on your ability to write everyone a reply on a variety of complex issues! You remind me of a chess master playing several chess games all at once! I do believe I am no where near your level of cerebral accomplishments!

Hah! Be weary of appearances my friend, for I am a true "pseudolectual". Not by intent of course. It's just that I'm sitting here discussing several topics for which I admittedly have no formal education in. I think its a great way to learn though, especially since whenever you say something stupid in a place like this, you can rest assured knowing that someone will let you know lol. I was actually worried that I was replying too much but I didn't want people to feel like they contribute something and it goes unseen, that certainly doesn't feel very good.

Yet, here I am writing to you once again! This bantering is very brain stimulating and yet I am not too much a verbal person and writing words into sentences to express ideas feels alien to me. I just hope you are not secretly Stephen Hawking or a coeval because I would be so embarrassed!

lmao. I'd be willing to bet Stephen Hawking could probably write coherent sentences and paragraphs, let alone lecture on several different types of calculus lol. You give me far more credit than I deserve, but thank you, it is certainly nice to complimented. I'm not a verbal person either, AT ALL. It drives my wife crazy. She jokingly refers to me as a "Zeta" from time to time, referring to a because my mind is usually off somewhere else.

Anyway, I have always been interested in physics because of all the weirdo (breaking laws of matter) experiences I have had. I wanted to understand the why and how of my world/worlds. In history when a personal witness' testimony is recorded they are referred to as a "Primary Source". I consider myself a Primary Source to events not necessarily explainable. This propels me to search out and think of what are the rules of earth life really? I cannot not easily define the rules, but I have some ideas about them. I have a very limited education on these things so do excuse my rudimentary efforts to communicate with you on Quantum Theory and Einstein's General Relativity.

I concur completely, on a few accounts. I have experienced only a few things that one could interpret as seemingly being "supernatural". So much so that based on pure emotion for a good portion of my life; no one would have been able to convince me otherwise. I still value these experiences, but am in perpetual debate within myself as to legitimize them. You have a fairly humble attitude about the "rules" of existence, which is actually a fun place to be in my opinion. As far as Quantum Theory, you may very well be able to teach me something as my understanding of Quantum Physics is equally limited. I only know which theories (more or less 4) are considered as contenders among physicists. I can in a somewhat feeble, roundabout way explain them but my rendition would make any physics major cringe were he or she to read them lol.

You said:
>>So far in the history of science there isn't one deviation or oddity (that I know of) within the spectrum we are capable of detecting, that contradicts those basic laws. Unless of course we get into Quantum Theory but as I'm sure you know those are formulas more than observable deviations, I think. lol

Humm..... Deviation or oddity (please define your definition)
" Capable of detecting a spectrum".. .. Are you meaning empirical observation?

I can definitely explain better, so long as you understand that when I attempt to speak on the behalf of science, I'm not personally preaching a "materialist" view of things, even though at times I find myself seeing the world in a materialist way. By deviation, I'm referring to anything that defies the basic laws of physics. Ghosts, spirits, demons, gods, an afterlife, out of body experiences. etc. I'm not saying such things don't exist, but I would say that once anecdotal evidence is removed from the table entirely, there is nothing for science to actually observe to the best of my knowledge.

What I was thinking about was miracles of healing. I am not sure if this would contradict basic laws. I think it would. A medically unexplained healing is called a miracle. Which I think means they don't know how it happened so they call it a miracle.

Would you consider a "miracle" healing a qualifying deviation or oddity that contradicts basic laws?

I would say that in a very profound way, this type of miracle has pulled of a contradiction of probability, E.G. "Sara was told that she would only have a few months to live due to cancer. Sara prayed to God and went to a faith healer and later doctors found her condition had miraculously improved. The odds of such a turn around could statistically be profoundly low, but that (hypothetical) 5% still exists. So long as that 5% exists, the lottery may still be one by the pure randomness of some other logically or physics-adhering reason. It leaves too many other slots by which a rational or probable reason for improvement to exist. I think that would fall into the "God of the gaps" argument.

Are you referring to the Quantium Physics vs Einstein's General Relativity not following the same laws of behavior? Is this negating measurement make prediction unsuccessful?

Exactly. They say that Einstein didn't like Quantum Theory, or at least it's implications because they took his General Theory of Relativity and added an element of uncertainty (that's putting it lightly). Around the time of his death he was working on his Unified Field Theory which attempted to string together the Electromagnetic field, and the gravitational field (which wasn't completed and is still left open).

To ponder but are they practical? Can they take you to any conclusions that could apply to something?

It depends. There is one interesting speculative Quantum theory referred to as Qbism. Simultaneously, but not related there is a sort of New Age philosophy known as Law of Attraction. Law of attraction defies physics as we know it, but the overall premise is that a probability itself is affected by an agent, or put simply, there is a direct link between thought and matter. The implications of that even being a little true would be astounding. Now Qbism, if ever proven THE true quantum theory; could in a roundabout way empirically provide the structure by which Law of Attraction could theoretically work. Because it would provide the link between thought and outcome, in regards to energy and matter. The speculation is limitless.

a reply to: VeritasBlue

The reason I stated that solipsism is childish is from observations that a child in the crib would only be aware of its own wants and needs as all that exists. When the child goes to school, he becomes aware of his neighborhood of kids and that is about all. When the child grows up more, he learns about his city and he can even grasp the idea of his city state and even other nation states.
Finally the childish mind expands to understanding there is an earth world interconnected and a galactic universe at large.
A service to self mindset has not expanded into a greater connected consciousness outside of self and that is why I would classify this person's lack of awareness as childish or stunted if you will. This lack of consciousness is fashionable and culturally encouraged unfortunately.

Strange to imagine (for play) that the crib, the parents, the siblings, the schools, the nations, the tragedies, the details are all an illusion. A brainstorm or a thought from some satellite version of being. A god perhaps? Or that all beings on earth are part of some mass cloud of intelligence that utilizes matter as the perfect clay by which to play out all probable scenarios and thoughts to observe and experience. If that were true, we would all be one big Solopsist. lol

Thanks for the Live Science link. That was a good read.
My personal ideas on infinity would parallel infinite infinity because I define infinity as omnipresent and therefore Creator Source! Ta Da!

Win! if only everything was so quickly worked out.

a reply to: greyer

I apologize for the late response, Greyer, your posts encompass a proverbial cavalcade of pretext as far as the entire scope of your view. I deeply empathize with your sentiment about not talking to people outside this forum about these kinds of things. It doesn't matter what you believe, some other sub group of people will always label you a nutter. What I can appreciate about your worldview is your certainty. That is a feeling I almost deliberately abandoned in increments as my perception on any topic shifted.

For me to truly appreciate your stance on a personal level, I would need to have read and observed every bit of material that you have, or some equal portion of it at least. I incorrectly presumed you to be among one of the stereotypical Christians which you are definitely not. One interesting thing about the modern day Christian in comparison to all of the scrolls by which the bible is constructed, is that on average, most Christians have developed their view often proudly on one book; The Bible. The irony is that it is a collection of many "books".

I have always been troubled by the idea that they can all argue so much about interpretation when there isn't even one soul-source of information. It just seems like a lose-lose situation. Anyway, people like you are more interesting than given credit for because you have developed your own interpretation based on the Bible, the kabbalah, some Freudian elements, and even perhaps some imagination thrown in (not an insult). I can't speak for Christians as that would be ignorant but I would imagine that as Bible purists, they would consider you something of a heretic. (Mind you, Catholics, Protestants and Evangelicals often passively label one another the same way, so big deal lol.

Arguably, provided you have read the Bible through and through, not many people can argue with your interpretation of it. I'm personally less theologically minded in general. Call it a sickness if you will, for all I know the Devil may have perverted my mind with intellectual conundrums designed to occupy my time and wear away at my hope lol. Highly improbable, but you will rarely see the word impossible leave my mouth.

You seem like an intelligent individual, I'm sure you know on how many levels it would be impossible to reconcile your views with science, and yet the world we seem to live in seems so very dependent on the scientific stilts it sits upon. I find for me personally; trying to see the world through theological eyes is a test of repetitious turmoil. This thing we call faith, seems a substance all its own.

By chance, what is your take on Aliens, alien abductions etc.. do you think it's all hogwash, lies, delusions turned viral, or are they demonic entities, or both?

originally posted by: BS_Slayer
.... I would question any God or higher power that could 'design' nature to be so profoundly cruel. ....I guess what I'm getting at in this mercilessly long post is that life seems insane no matter how you look at it.

^^ Yeah, that. Life is cruel. Life is insane. It makes no sense. And it's maddening to try to figure out. Literally maddening.

a reply to: BS_Slayer
Howdy BS_Slayer! Hope you are having a good day today. I think your post are are way cool! LOL!
Thanks for those replys.

I re-read your original post and I kept thinking of this song by an artist probably before your time named Peggy Lee. The song is called, "Is that All There Is?"
Here's the lyrics as follows:

"Is That All There Is?"
(originally by Dan Daniels)

I remember when I was a very little girl, our house caught on fire.
I'll never forget the look on my father's face as he gathered me up
In his arms and raced through the burning building out to the pavement.
I stood there shivering in my pajamas and watched the whole world go up in flames.
And when it was all over I said to myself,
"Is that all there is to a fire?"

Is that all there is?
Is that all there is?
If that's all there is my friends
Then let's keep dancing
Let's break out the booze and have a ball
If that's all there is

And when I was 12 years old, my daddy took me to a circus.
"The Greatest Show On Earth."
There were clowns and elephants and dancing bears.
And a beautiful lady in pink tights flew high above our heads.
And as I sat there watching, I had the feeling that something was missing.
I don't know what, but when it was over,
I said to myself,
"Is that all there is to a circus?"

Is that all there is?
Is that all there is?
If that's all there is my friends
Then let's keep dancing
Let's break out the booze and have a ball
If that's all there is

And then I fell in love, with the most wonderful boy in the world.
We would take long walks by the river
Or just sit for hours gazing into each other's eyes.
We were so very much in love.
Then one day, he went away and I thought I'd die.
But I didn't.
And when I didn't I said to myself,
"Is that all there is to love?"

Is that all there is?
Is that all there is?
If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep-

I know what you must be saying to yourselves.
"If that's the way she feels about it why doesn't she just end it all?"
Oh, no, not me.
I'm in no hurry for that final disappointment.
'Cause I know just as well as I'm standing here talking to you,
That when that final moment comes and I'm breathing my last breath
I'll be saying to myself-

Is that all there is?
Is that all there is?
If that's all there is my friends
Then let's keep dancing
Let's break out the booze and have a ball
If that's all there is

B.S. Skayer : I think we give meaning or not to our own lives.
We are most likely here in this dimension (earth) for different reasons.
Each of us has to define our purpose for ourselves.
For myself I really like being happy and smiling a lot and thinking about
the beauty of God and creation. I love the vibrations of music and
the energy of our 3 cats. I love yarn, the feel of colors, and I
get fascinated with all the artistic expressions of things. I can stare
at a statue for hours and feel the energy of it, even seeing the aurora
Of it though it is inanimate I'm bringing meaning to what I see.

I think we bring the individual meaning to our lives.

My response to your statement about solipsism is if we are the dreamer or master illusionist about our world then we should be able to demonstrate mastery over everything.

We know if we threaten a man with a gun he can kill us. Maybe we are dreaming that he and his gun are real, but the bullets will be very real as we lay there grasping for breath and dying. We can't dismiss others as a dream and yet carefully avoid anyone dangerous and respect that which could harm us. This is disengeniuos behavior I think.

No criticism meant to you.

Just thinking out loud here!🌞

Take care & have a good evening!

a reply to: VeritasBlue

a reply to: BS_Slayer

That's Awesome!

Have a good evening BS_Slayer & take care!

✨💫✨🌟💫VeritasBlue