A Question Of Meaning

quick

Traveler
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
32
Reaction score
68
Awards
9
Only if you're a subservient little bootlicker to Jehova Yahweh "can't handle his own creations even with omnipotence" God
There is only one infinite creator, and Jesus, or the commands attributed to Jesus, spoke of that creator. Misinterpretations of the bible and even outright distortions present in the bible will only be taken seriously (or literally, depending on what it is) by those who lack the wisdom to understand, and their misunderstanding is a necessary part of their journey to understand. But there is no lesser/weaker/secondary creator that is possible to follow, because it would not be the Creator/God
 

Chao Tse-Tung

Chairman of the Deep-State Cabal, KEC
Gold
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
281
Reaction score
1,048
Awards
108
Website
aoaed-official.neocities.org
There is only one infinite creator, and Jesus, or the commands attributed to Jesus, spoke of that creator. Misinterpretations of the bible and even outright distortions present in the bible will only be taken seriously (or literally, depending on what it is) by those who lack the wisdom to understand, and their misunderstanding is a necessary part of their journey to understand. But there is no lesser/weaker/secondary creator that is possible to follow, because it would not be the Creator/God
It'd be really neat if you weren't hilariously wrong.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Caspar

Active Traveler
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
179
Reaction score
235
Awards
70
Oh I didn't realize you were a girl
I would ask you to respond to the idea of you being wrong and its implication, but it's not about 'you' per se. After all, these ideas come on faith in something higher, but it's convenient that while you would never be so hubristic as to admit that you can't be wrong; you can admit to having faith in a god who can't be wrong. It's almost like post-Christian religion is just an offshoring of your hubris to the word 'god' and then going around with a righteous stick to cajole people into line. Fascinating stuff. At least the Greeks had the decency to admit that their gods had positive and negative aspects, noble and base deeds. Well... until Socrates undermined that religion and was rightfully executed.
 

quick

Traveler
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
32
Reaction score
68
Awards
9
I would ask you to respond to the idea of you being wrong and its implication, but it's not about 'you' per se. After all, these ideas come on faith in something higher, but it's convenient that while you would never be so hubristic as to admit that you can't be wrong; you can admit to having faith in a god who can't be wrong. It's almost like post-Christian religion is just an offshoring of your hubris to the word 'god' and then going around with a righteous stick to cajole people into line. Fascinating stuff. At least the Greeks had the decency to admit that their gods had positive and negative aspects, noble and base deeds. Well... until Socrates undermined that religion and was rightfully executed.
There was nothing to respond to beyond "you're hilariously wrong", which I don't consider as an invitation to start a good discussion - I was responding to a hollow & useless response with one equally hollow & useless. I don't really know what you're talking about either, do you think I am post-Christian, and are you saying that I believe that I am getting around some accusation that I "can't be wrong" because I believe in a god who "can't be wrong"? If so, you have some idea of an opponent in your head which you have constructed to respond to in place of responding to me directly, perhaps because you are bothered and want something solid to accuse me of without actually knowing much about me

In very short & simple words what I call the creator/god is all the energy that makes up everything that is. I don't "worship" this creator or believe it to be "right" or "wrong" any more than a body of water can be right or wrong. You can drink from a lake or you can drown in it. But I believe that positive things (love) are the best reflection of that energy so I do my best to increasingly move through life with love for others and strong avoidance of negativity/anger as these are only harmful to myself and others. Sometimes I lapse and write a rude comment on a forum in response to other rude comments, HAHAHAHA!

That is a very brief explanation from a specific practical angle. I don't really care what you might think it sounds like, or that because I don't align with your beliefs (not even sure if I do or don't, though I don't celebrate the deaths of others, so probably not) it means I must be your oppressor with a righteous stick or something. Victim mindset, sad!
 

ZinRicky

Vapor Number & Data Guy
Joined
Jun 18, 2019
Messages
297
Reaction score
837
Awards
87
Website
zinricky.tilde.team
In very short & simple words what I call the creator/god is all the energy that makes up everything that is. I don't "worship" this creator or believe it to be "right" or "wrong" any more than a body of water can be right or wrong.
I like when people actually live according to the watchmaker analogy
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Caspar

Active Traveler
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
179
Reaction score
235
Awards
70
There was nothing to respond to beyond "you're hilariously wrong", which I don't consider as an invitation to start a good discussion - I was responding to a hollow & useless response with one equally hollow & useless. I don't really know what you're talking about either, do you think I am post-Christian, and are you saying that I believe that I am getting around some accusation that I "can't be wrong" because I believe in a god who "can't be wrong"? If so, you have some idea of an opponent in your head which you have constructed to respond to in place of responding to me directly, perhaps because you are bothered and want something solid to accuse me of without actually knowing much about me

In very short & simple words what I call the creator/god is all the energy that makes up everything that is. I don't "worship" this creator or believe it to be "right" or "wrong" any more than a body of water can be right or wrong. You can drink from a lake or you can drown in it. But I believe that positive things (love) are the best reflection of that energy so I do my best to increasingly move through life with love for others and strong avoidance of negativity/anger as these are only harmful to myself and others. Sometimes I lapse and write a rude comment on a forum in response to other rude comments, HAHAHAHA!

That is a very brief explanation from a specific practical angle. I don't really care what you might think it sounds like, or that because I don't align with your beliefs (not even sure if I do or don't, though I don't celebrate the deaths of others, so probably not) it means I must be your oppressor with a righteous stick or something. Victim mindset, sad!
Yeah, I do definitely have some presuppositions about someone when they fire off the anti-demiurge, anti-dualism angle on god and throw in some Jesus for good measure. You're right about that. But I suppose that by attacking the fact that it gives me an immediate impression of you, you're one layer more meta than me, so I guess I better back off, scary stuff. :JahySmug:

Just call it the forces of nature if you don't intend to spiritualize or moralize the concept; elsewise you'll get people like me to misunderstand you. But I don't see why you would contest your being a post-christian given that you argue in the exact manner as Christians do against Gnosticism.
 

quick

Traveler
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
32
Reaction score
68
Awards
9
Yeah, I do definitely have some presuppositions about someone when they fire off the anti-demiurge, anti-dualism angle on god and throw in some Jesus for good measure. You're right about that.

Just call it the forces of nature if you don't intend to spiritualize or moralize the concept; elsewise you'll get people like me to misunderstand you. But I don't see why you would contest your being a post-christian given that you argue in the exact manner as Christians do against Gnosticism.
Don't know if I would align with anti-dualism, because I see an inherent polarity in God, I just don't see it as a "personality trait" of an embodied god if that's what you're into. I added stuff about Jesus to infer that the path to what you might call gnosis if you're a gnostic is available in very simple language through Jesus' direct commands. I say this only because very recently I took an interest in this from a somewhat perennialist perspective, so it is on my mind. It seems to me that following and understanding his commands is one of the most accessible keys to the "divine lock", and if there is a demiurge, I don't think following the wisdom in Jesus' commands would lead you to it by default. Though people can be led astray by the many distortions of massively-organized religion (among other things), they too will eventually find the right path. All "negativities" in this world serve a purpose like a force that squeezes a tube of toothpaste. The toothpaste will all come out the end eventually, but some of it will need to undergo more unpleasant squeezing before it makes its way out

The entire thing is spiritual and moral so I don't follow your logic that I'm not allowed to use that language or else you will misunderstand me. Maybe stop pointing your finger around and point it at yourself instead, I know I do. I don't really know enough about what "post-christianity" is to follow what you mean when you say that that is also what christians are when they argue against gnosticism. Am I to gather that you are a gnostic and you took my post as a personal attack against gnosticism? It wasn't really. But Chao's language like "Only if you're a subservient little bootlicker to Jehova Yahweh "can't handle his own creations even with omnipotence" God" is vengeful and twisted finger-pointing (self-destructive) I think. No surprise her profile photo is a representation of immense suffering - people who hold that stuff in their mind inflict it upon themselves

But I suppose that by attacking the fact that it gives me an immediate impression of you, you're one layer more meta than me, so I guess I better back off, scary stuff. :JahySmug:

Cringe, don't think I've talked like this since 2008. Were you born after 9/11 by any chance? HAHAHAHAHAHA
 

Caspar

Active Traveler
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
179
Reaction score
235
Awards
70
Don't know if I would align with anti-dualism, because I see an inherent polarity in God, I just don't see it as a "personality trait" of an embodied god if that's what you're into. I added stuff about Jesus to infer that the path to what you might call gnosis if you're a gnostic is available in very simple language through Jesus' direct commands. I say this only because very recently I took an interest in this from a somewhat perennialist perspective, so it is on my mind. It seems to me that following and understanding his commands is one of the most accessible keys to the "divine lock", and if there is a demiurge, I don't think following the wisdom in Jesus' commands would lead you to it by default.

All "negativities" in this world serve a purpose like a force that squeezes a tube of toothpaste. The toothpaste will all come out the end eventually, but some of it will need to undergo more unpleasant squeezing before it makes its way out

The entire thing is spiritual and moral so I don't follow your logic that I'm not allowed to use that language or else you will misunderstand me. Maybe stop pointing your finger around and point it at yourself instead, I know I do. I don't really know enough about what "post-christianity" is to follow what you mean when you say that that is also what christians are when they argue against gnosticism. Am I to gather that you are a gnostic and you took my post as a personal attack against gnosticism? It wasn't really. But Chao's language like "Only if you're a subservient little bootlicker to Jehova Yahweh "can't handle his own creations even with omnipotence" God" is vengeful and twisted finger-pointing (self-destructive) I think. No surprise her profile photo is a representation of immense suffering - people who hold that stuff in their mind inflict it upon themselves



Cringe, don't think I've talked like this since 2008. Were you born after 9/11 by any chance? HAHAHAHAHAHA
Really a challenge, you start the post interesting then strike down my poor heart with "ad cringinum", but notwithstanding! Starting from the top, when I say anti-dualism I'm referring to:
But there is no lesser/weaker/secondary creator that is possible to follow, because it would not be the Creator/God
A basic idea of a dualistic doctrine is that there are two opposite forces at play - sometimes they are not associated with good or evil per se as in Taoism, sometimes they are directly associated with good and evil as in Manicheanism. Basically, when you say that there isn't a secondary 'god' or 'force' separate from an 'original creator', you're de facto denying dualism by this formulation.

When you're talking about perennialism, I'd say I enjoy the works of Evola and Guenon, but I question whether or not perennialism is starting from a solid foundation philosophically. I won't try to get into my critiques here, because I'd need to think about it, but that school of thought has some interesting ideas I'll say.

Your opinion that people will "eventually find the right path" and "All "negativities" in this world serve a purpose" are ideas reminiscent of the Holy Spirit, the world after redemption, and Divine Providence - ergo the belief that god doesn't permit any infernal forces to confound human reason. I personally don't agree on the simple basis that people are obviously continuously confounded, our reason and perception are, from a logical position alone, very suspect (ala Hume and the Problem of Induction) and religions seem to come and go like the tide as society's rise and decay away.

Why did I oppose the spiritualization of your phrasing?
I like when people actually live according to the watchmaker analogy
Because just like how this guys put it, it feels like you're putting out a 'Jeffersonian God' vibe and not a 'perennial truth manifested in exoteric and esoteric forms', or at least, it didn't until this most recent post. The fact that I didn't see that doesn't necessarily indicate my reading comprehension is at fault here, doubly so since two people didn't see it that way.
I don't really know enough about what "post-christianity" is
I'm talking about a few things with this, but the most basic idea is that religion centers around worshipping a god who actually is all goodness, all truth, all justice, and in whose image man is made and the universe was formed (Divine Simplicity & Thomistic theology).
what christians are when they argue against gnosticism
Aside from your addition of perennialism, what you've said thus far is basically consonant with their arguments, that's why I drew the comparison. Just look at what I'm quoting above and that's what I'm saying is comparable, a lot of those things were denied by Gnostics, who believed that knowledge attained on Earth was fundamentally suspect and so even knowledge of the divine was suspect as it was acquired on Earth. A lot of Gnostics were dualistic and formulated that the Earth was itself evil or was made by a fundamental force of evil - but they shared a general distrust in human reason and the possibility for true knowledge.
Am I to gather that you are a gnostic and you took my post as a personal attack against gnosticism?
I'm not really, but if you'd like to, sure. I would more align with an epistemology best called 'phenomenalism', but say what you will. I share their distrust of the ability of humanity to acquire fundamental truths, but a lot of their other doctrines and their reaction to this distrust I don't share at all.
But Chao's language like "Only if you're a subservient little bootlicker to Jehova Yahweh "can't handle his own creations even with omnipotence" God" is vengeful and twisted finger-pointing (self-destructive) I think.
Modernity makes a lot of people vengeful and twisted. Generally shuffling them into cities, making it impossible to see the stars at night, and wiping out their gods and sense of purpose will do that. But I can understand not being particularly favorable to the Christian god, since Christianity has had two-thousand years to make its mark - and it created a civilization that undid itself and threatens to utterly ruin the natural state of human existence... soo.... Oh, and it doesn't accept responsibility for this: just like communists, the problem is that true Christianity hasn't been tried, and it's all these fake-communists (er... Christians) who ruined the whole thing. Those two millenia didn't really exist.
No surprise her profile photo is a representation of immense suffering - people who hold that stuff in their mind inflict it upon themselves
Suffering isn't an indication of being wrong or even of being unhealthy necessarily. A lot of people who were deeply right suffered.
Cringe, don't think I've talked like this since 2008. Were you born after 9/11 by any chance? HAHAHAHAHAHA
You know, you got me. I'm actually 12, and I wanted to impress you with my knowledge, so I tried really hard to show you my efforts. Will you please pat me on the head and say 'good boy'? :JahyStare:
 
Last edited:

quick

Traveler
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
32
Reaction score
68
Awards
9
Suffering isn't an indication of being wrong or even of being unhealthy necessarily. A lot of people who were deeply right suffered.
I think you misunderstood my point, I meant that people who hold suffering in their mind, in any frame, inflict it upon themselves & people around them, not that suffering in itself is an indication of being wrong. So it's a joke that I'm not surprised someone with a profile photo like that would be pointing their finger so hard at others

The rest of your post was an interesting read
 

Caspar

Active Traveler
Joined
Sep 6, 2022
Messages
179
Reaction score
235
Awards
70
I think you misunderstood my point, I meant that people who hold suffering in their mind, in any frame, inflict it upon themselves & people around them, not that suffering in itself is an indication of being wrong. So it's a joke that I'm not surprised someone with a profile photo like that would be pointing their finger so hard at others

The rest of your post was an interesting read
I don't disagree - like begets like. Thanks, I was hoping it would be somewhat clearer.
 

xesxss

Traveler
Joined
Aug 20, 2021
Messages
67
Reaction score
83
Awards
39
To be the eyes, the ears, and the consciousness of the creator of the universe, you fool.
This, but also to find out what is meaningfull to you. There is this psychologist, viktor frankl, and he survived through the nazi concentration camps. He went on to say that identifying a purpose to feel positive about was what its about. You can read more about it in his book Man's search for meaning.
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Chao Tse-Tung

Chairman of the Deep-State Cabal, KEC
Gold
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
281
Reaction score
1,048
Awards
108
Website
aoaed-official.neocities.org
This, but also to find out what is meaningfull to you. There is this psychologist, viktor frankl, and he survived through the nazi concentration camps. He went on to say that identifying a purpose to feel positive about was what its about. You can read more about it in his book Man's search for meaning.
Whoa, forgot about this thread. That sounds like a good read, I'll definitely look into picking that up
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Chao Tse-Tung

Chairman of the Deep-State Cabal, KEC
Gold
Joined
Jan 1, 2022
Messages
281
Reaction score
1,048
Awards
108
Website
aoaed-official.neocities.org
^Also lol at the argument I started up there by making dumb remarks that lead to an armchair psychologist deciding that I was both holding immense suffering in myself and also a girl, top tier
 
Virtual Cafe Awards
Purpose might be a function of perspective, and "should" is by it's nature subjective. Perhaps you could say there's a subjectively valid purpose for everyone, but you'll need to discover that for yourself.

Alternately, if you hold that purpose is objective, it narrows your question down substantially. What is objective? Objectivity is limited to the qualitative nature of the Real. In that case, the only type of purpose you could have is what you inherently are, and the implications/ consequences of that existence. You are what you are, and that is your purpose. Is what you do what you are? Does action fulfil purpose?
and the craftsman replied: "Everything in this room is as it should be". At this, the student was enlightened.

Perhaps the purpose of life is to do what is uniquely human. That response would be a happy medium between the two extremes, but requires you told hold both positions in concert. "what we should do, is what only we can do."
That leads us to Chao's point: we are the sensory organs of the universe.

What is a human? A featherless biped? Human means person. What is a person? A self-identified self. What is the self?
Experience is all we know, all we can know. Then is the purpose of life to experience?

The meaning of life is an entirely different question, that can't be answered using the same logic. You'd need to define meaning first, and do so thoroughly. Is meaning what things mean? Is meaning value? Is meaning external, or internally generated? In each case, what does internal and external mean? Where does that meaning reside, what are it's prerequisites and constituents?
Maybe we, then, have to unite. To just be. Talk. End shit and start real deal, solve real problems, no wannabe-problem-of-week...
For ourselves, together. If you are on one planet, why to make it hard for everyone else?
 
Virtual Cafe Awards

Taleisin

Lab-coat Illuminatus
Bronze
Joined
Nov 8, 2021
Messages
636
Reaction score
3,316
Awards
213
Virtual Cafe Awards

Similar threads