I Converted A Catholic To Atheism

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

No, its 'M' for Monkey. My favorite show is a kid.

Just to remind people of the greatest show on earth ever Monkey!!

reply to post by boymonkey74


That's not the show I was talking about. I was referring to a popular cartoons of the 90's

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Heck I was boozing in the 90s Must of missed it

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

If collecting stamps were a very significant part of our culture, I would imagine that not collecting stamps would also be proportionally more significant.

If you equated them as to collecting human souls Id be more inclined to beliieve your motives.

I've converted or persuaded maybe a thousand would-be atheists to at least consider things from a new perspective, mostly as a result of my participation here over the last few years. Cookie please.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by charles1952

 

You just answered your own question. If such actions don't make sense to you maybe you should try them more often. With my help my friend has initiated a drastic change in perception. I feel such a development warrants recognition and celebration. It's a rather large leap from what he's used to, after all.

edit on 20-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

You speak of others 'DI-RAS-TICK' changes in belief systems, how comes YOUR TURN ABOUT; as in YOUR formidible education in all forms of belief and reliGIOUSITY. You seem to be EXPERT. Wherein how did you come to believe a DISS- INFranchisement Happened? Your separation from God, was it similar to a Constitutional Church/State division?

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by vethumanbeing

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by Serdgiam

 

You do realize I'm on my phone right? Do you have any idea how difficult it is to sort through the pages and quote and type?

Let me guess, dialing and redialing God and getting no answer, voicemail not full AfterInfinity has been blocked

For an atheist, would his number be "0?"

Ha!

I think its time for bed..

edit: I think we can all agree AI is to blame for my seeming delusional behavior. After slaving over a hot keyboard for MINUTES (MINUTES I TELL YOU!!!) to copy and paste questions I am genuinely curious about, I find out it was all a ruse to.. do.. something. Probably convert me, somehow.

And what would that might be, something much more fun, its called unlimited potencial and the joy in exponencial expression. As an Athiest its number would be "IT JUST CAME UP". No solution no evolution no anything (as that was its DNR).

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

Nah taking part is what counts

So, everyone gets a trophy?!Thank God

They do; someone has to die first, to get the thrift store honorary, salvation army store or Vincent St DePauls; all of the trophies for the 'man of the hour' 50 cents appiece. They make great table 'ornament' centerpieces as in its so random "1962 BO BLACKSMITH SHOTPUT" 72 feet."

Originally posted by Serdgiam

Originally posted by vethumanbeing
Come on the RCC is an easy target

I would have to agree with that actually. Though, I have to admit, the new pope is bringing it in a direction that I never really expected.Regardless, like I said earlier, I would LOVE to see all of the artifacts they have hidden away. I seriously would, there has to be some pretty amazing stuff that contradicts their "right to power" that they have accumulated over the years.I do hold the opinion though, that even the RCC cant inhibit the results of a true personal search for the Truth. They may try, but anyone who honestly seeks it will find it. If an individuals starting point just so happens to be the RCC (such as the friend this entire thread refers to), and they continue to seek and knock, grow and learn, then it is hard to say what path is wrong and which is correct. I believe they all lead to the same place if walked with honesty and love.

.

They are thieves and hoarders of artifacts. Without the objects; they as materialists (imagine that concept) would not exist. They do not own the Alexandrian Library that was burned; but they come close to hiding (from the world) the oldest manuscripts (other than existing in the British Museum) in existance. Are they sharing NOOOO. To much information that could reveal truths that we as humans are too ignorant or may misinterpret as TRUTHS. Why hidden? because it could topple the world as we know it, Miles and Miles of bound books under the Vatican in its hermetically sealed library off limits to natural man. The inquistion was not as much about stealing land, but ancient libraries that existed within these estates.

reply to post by vethumanbeing

Dear vethumanbeing,

Sorry to disagree a little here, but the Secret Archives have been open to scholars for years. The material in it is frequently used for reference work. Granted, you have to be a scholar in a field somewhat related to the material, and you need a recommendation from a University, but it's open for viewing.

With respect,
Charles1952

P.s. Sure we can say that the Vatican has "Secret" Secret Archives with world shaking material in it, but there's no way to prove or disprove that. If every square inch of Vatican City were to be examined, and nothing was found, people could still say "They hid it in Sweden with the Nazi gold." - C -

reply to post by Serdgiam

It is too bad you are not willing to pursue it further..

Not sure, again, what you mean by this.

I've been pursuing it as a 'primary objective' in several episodes of my life. As a youth, then as a young parent, and have not lost my 'interest' in the subject at all. Most recently, my father died, and I was there alongside him as I watched him decline, and eventually move on from his physical body.

Religiosity is a fascinating subject. ENDLESSLY fascinating. So is "madness" ("insanity".)

I do tend to forget that not everyone has read my posts, or knows me well enough or has been listening to me for long enough to see how much I've evolved in my OWN THINKING over the last 3 years. This is a common problem with 'learning curves.' Often the people 'further down the path' become impatient that those just starting out don't have the same experience and knowledge that they (those further along) acquired over years and years of investigation, deconstruction, analysis, and careful thought.

I've asked you to clarify the things that I did not understand. It is incumbent, then, on YOU to make yourself clear, not on ME to 'learn your language'. If I tell you I don't get what you mean, I need you to state it in a way that I do, no matter how many 'tries' it takes.

Likewise, I have tried to clarify MY THOUGHTS in a way that others can understand, which is my obligation if I want to be understood.

I am far more comfortable with "personal disclosure" than many, many people are. I'm really quite transparent, both in writing and in my demeanor and personal behaviors. THAT MUCH I know about myself. I know that I am DISSATISFIED with the Abrahamic explanations of the higher elements of the cosmos, and that much of Eastern thought - such as the aforementioned Tao and Buddhist philosophies, including Reincarnation - fills in the gaping holes in the Abrahamic 'offering' - I also follow science and psychology.

Anyone who claims to have "THE ANSWERS!" is deluding themselves and becomes a danger to those wanting those easy "THE ANSWERS!" - because none of us really do. That is the one thing humanity has in common.

reply to post by boymonkey74

reply to post by Serdgiam

I think we all realize that there are some serious issues with our educational system, but what solutions are there?

I hope you'll understand when I say this is off topic. Make a thread and I'll answer this question.

Do you feel this is relevant beyond the physical universe? Do you believe the physical universe is all that exists?

I believe everything is physical to some extent. If by 'beyond the physical universe' you mean 'beyond the human senses', then yes, there is scientific proof that our perception accounts for about 1% of everything that exists in this world. Not to mention the observable universe. Not to mention the rest of the universe.

Obviously, we have the one core change, but did it change anything else?

The approach. His approach to life will change as he begins to take responsibility for everything he would have otherwise trusted in a deity to take care of.

Is that what power is universally, or just your concept of it?

I've never left America, let alone Earth. How can I possibly answer that question? Yes, it is my concept of it. Let me note here that there's many kinds of power, and the power you are questioning me about is the power of a leader, of a revolutionary, of someone trying to make a difference. It is the power we all possess.

Could it be that if God does exist, he does so outside of the confines of any attempt to define such a being?

I have already answered this question. Remember the ufrack?

Is power about change in every context imaginable, even if we are limited to the human context?

If power does not evoke change, then what makes it powerful?

So, is there anything that encompasses those attributes that we know to materially exist? (omnipotent/omniscient)

Is there anything omnipotent or omniscient? Time. Time is omnipotent. Omniscient? Not that I'm aware of. And if anyone were to claim to be aware of such an object or being, they would, of course, be expected to provide credible sources and professional analysis confirming such a nature.

How do we define what the evidence means without extrapolation?

By using more evidence.

What evidence do you want that would not require your own extrapolation/interpretation as to whether or not it is satisfactory to your requirements? And what are those requirements?

Any and all evidence that is available. My only requirement is that it conclusively prove the point being made.

What makes you say that about "everyone?" What do you believe my intentions to be?

Have you understood the points I have raised, or what I am trying to explore with them?

I only do this out of curiosity, to be honest. I am interested to see if you actually carry through in answering them.

As you can see, I kept my word. I've answered almost all of your questions. And yes, I do understand why you are asking them.

reply to post by charles1952


Out of curiosity, what about the third prophecy of Fatima? Has anyone been allowed to publish the full and unedited contents?

reply to post by wildtimes


In that case, are you satisfied with my answers regarding this thread? Or are there some uncertainties nagging at you still? Anything I can help to clarify or at least settle somewhat?

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by vethumanbeing

 

Dear vethumanbeing,

Sorry to disagree a little here, but the Secret Archives have been open to scholars for years. The material in it is frequently used for reference work. Granted, you have to be a scholar in a field somewhat related to the material, and you need a recommendation from a University, but it's open for viewing.

With respect,
Charles1952

P.s. Sure we can say that the Vatican has "Secret" Secret Archives with world shaking material in it, but there's no way to prove or disprove that. If every square inch of Vatican City were to be examined, and nothing was found, people could still say "They hid it in Sweden with the Nazi gold." - C -

I would rather have unlimited access to the Smithsonian archives! Like this warehouse!

reply to post by AfterInfinity

In that case, are you satisfied with my answers regarding this thread? Or are there some uncertainties nagging at you still? Anything I can help to clarify or at least settle somewhat?

No, Aft, you're fine. I already "get you." My responses and frustrations were directed at vet and Serdg, not at you.

I don't have any more questions. I think I know your stance pretty well - and I have no issue with you, or mr cooper.

It's just I don't have anything more to add or offer. GOOD THREAD, though!

reply to post by vethumanbeing


I dont know what it means that I am beginning to understand your posts... Im a little scared vet...

I do think that they have given some access recently, however, I highly doubt they have given access to *everything* (we are both probably on the same page there).

It does start to veer a bit OT, and while incredibly interesting, I feel we need to refrain out of respect to AI. Whether or not you have that respect is not up to me, but I do. At least a little.

Originally posted by wildtimes
Not sure, again, what you mean by this.

Very simple, you said you were done here. I said it was too bad you were done here.

Religiosity is a fascinating subject. ENDLESSLY fascinating. So is "madness" ("insanity".)

I agree. I think the part where we disagree is that the conscious choice to pursue the exact opposite path to religion (atheism) creates the same tendencies and behavior that those of religion exhibit. It would be an interesting study to see if the same pattern of neural pathways are sustained or created with the thinking. I would also be interested in the results of someone who blindly believes that science has all of the answers right here and now, if you know what im talking about with that.

I do tend to forget that not everyone has read my posts, or knows me well enough or has been listening to me for long enough to see how much I've evolved in my OWN THINKING over the last 3 years. This is a common problem with 'learning curves.' Often the people 'further down the path' become impatient that those just starting out don't have the same experience and knowledge that they (those further along) acquired over years and years of investigation, deconstruction, analysis, and careful thought.

It is good that you have realized that not everyone is enamoured with you So, do you feel you are "further down the path" than me? It is good that you have evolved your thinking over the last 3 years, and even better if that continues for the rest of your life!

I've asked you to clarify the things that I did not understand. It is incumbent, then, on YOU to make yourself clear, not on ME to 'learn your language'. If I tell you I don't get what you mean, I need you to state it in a way that I do, no matter how many 'tries' it takes.

I would agree with that, but I havent seen any questions towards my perspective really. I even went through the thread again. When I answered, I was met with less than desirable results in you getting offended. Can we try again? Would you mind asking specific questions as I have of you?

I am far more comfortable with "personal disclosure" than many, many people are. I'm really quite transparent, both in writing and in my demeanor and personal behaviors. THAT MUCH I know about myself. I know that I am DISSATISFIED with the Abrahamic explanations of the higher elements of the cosmos, and that much of Eastern thought - such as the aforementioned Tao and Buddhist philosophies, including Reincarnation - fills in the gaping holes in the Abrahamic 'offering' - I also follow science and psychology.

It is good that you are transparent in that way, but it also opens you up (naturally). Just realize that when someone says they cant talk about it, it may have different reasons than they are just "not comfortable" with the discussion.

Anyone who claims to have "THE ANSWERS!" is deluding themselves and becomes a danger to those wanting those easy "THE ANSWERS!" - because none of us really do. That is the one thing humanity has in common.

Agreed to an extent. We all find our own answers, and I think those answers constantly change. When we listen to the current answers that others have, we are able to learn more about the universe as a whole and how it manifests through human kind. We all have these pieces, but so rarely do we actually put them together.

First, thanks for answering.

I hope you'll understand when I say this is off topic. Make a thread and I'll answer this question.

I actually think its relevant to the discussion at hand, but its your thread.

I believe everything is physical to some extent. If by 'beyond the physical universe' you mean 'beyond the human senses', then yes, there is scientific proof that our perception accounts for about 1% of everything that exists in this world. Not to mention the observable universe. Not to mention the rest of the universe.

No, I didnt just mean beyond the human senses. I think most know that we can only perceive a percentage of the entire spectrum. Heck, that is why we have to create scientific devices like microscopes!

I meant, do you think there is anything beyond this physical universe, the material universe that we can explain with physics? It could be anything from a multi-verse type theory to the one that I have, which is where we are essentially a bubble in a bigger block of cheese. I can go into this, if you want, but it is OT.

The approach. His approach to life will change as he begins to take responsibility for everything he would have otherwise trusted in a deity to take care of.

Do you think someone who believes in a deity is incapable of taking personal responsibility?

I've never left America, let alone Earth. How can I possibly answer that question? Yes, it is my concept of it. Let me note here that there's many kinds of power, and the power you are questioning me about is the power of a leader, of a revolutionary, of someone trying to make a difference. It is the power we all possess.

You should travel. And the power I had in mind was more in the e=mc^2 kind. As I said, I am more of a science type!

If power does not evoke change, then what makes it powerful?

I view power itself to change. Meaning, that "power" or "energy" is absolute and that it can change form many, many times. The process that change it may be included in that, but are not power exclusively. But, I think we are taking a vastly different approach to this. It seems you are looking at it from a human perspective, and I am looking at it from a "numbers" perspective.

Is there anything omnipotent or omniscient? Time. Time is omnipotent. Omniscient? Not that I'm aware of. And if anyone were to claim to be aware of such an object or being, they would, of course, be expected to provide credible sources and professional analysis confirming such a nature.

Interesting response Does time lose its power in what we view in the quantum realm? Meaning, if the same particle is able to be in two places at once, does space-time still have power over it? Do realize I come from the understanding the space and time are as entertwined as electricity and magnetism.

As far as omniscience, you would view it to be something that is whittled down to one specific system, that applies to all other systems? And isnt all of the systems collective awareness of themselves?

By using more evidence.

Any and all evidence that is available. My only requirement is that it conclusively prove the point being made.

How do you determine if it conclusively makes any point without extrapolation? Before we go too much further into this, do you practice any form of science? That will make it much, much easier to relate what I am talking about here. We NEED to subjectively interpret the data to see if it meets our demands, but sometimes we are not even asking the right questions.

And yes, I do understand why you are asking them.

How interesting! How did you obtain this knowledge?