If anyone is interested in learning about a new spiritual belief, I've put a basic list of beliefs in this pastebin. It's not comprehensive and there's far more to things, but this gives a general idea of my beliefs. And if you're interested in discussing things further, you can reach me at my email [email protected] and I have other contact info to give if you feel it's a bit too personal to give your email to someone on 4chan, so just ask.
I also welcome people of all faiths who just wish to discuss things and have chats about the nature of god, humanity, etc.
http://pastebin.com/mrmeKa5T
>>17464156
That meant to be a good thing or a bad thing?
>>17464204
A good thing if you don't accept limitations just like good ol Aristotle said.
>>17464217
Limitations aren't always necessarily a bad thing.
I read the pastebin and it's all pretty down to earth. I dig it.
>TECHNOLOGY IS BAD
>HUMAN FORM IS SACRED
Why tho.
You sound like you don't believe in evolution. If not extraordinary new technologies and the transcendence of the human form, why are we here? So we can all jerk each other off and feel good about how hard we're working? Medieval peasants been there done that. I wanna be a human tree.
>>17464424
Technology isn't bad. Technology is good. I even believe in respecting the tools made by man. It's AI that I would not and do not trust. Or basically replacing people with machines. That's when it becomes bad; when you replace who and what we are with a tool. If possible, I'd be far more comfortable with the idea of an actual mentat to perform a task than some sort of sentient machine.
>You sound like you don't believe in evolution.
I do believe in evolution. That does not mean that humanity isn't sacred or did not become sacred once we gained our sapience. That's why the human form is sacred. Of course it will change in time and people may even alter it, but that should all be done very carefully and not done on a whim. The body holds our soul, if we mess that up and become some sort of abomination, we're all but stuck with that.
>If not extraordinary new technologies and the transcendence of the human form, why are we here?
Because we are here to learn and discover things. Knowledge and wisdom are the highest pursuits. But transcending the human form does not mean transhumanism is the answer. If possible, I'd fully support some sort of ultimate apotheosis, but it'd be essential to keep our human identity, not throw it off like it's some sort of rag keeping us back. While we're in the physical world, we are the god of the material world and stewards of creation. We must embrace our humanity and work to advance and perfect humanity, not discard it in our pursuits.
>So we can all jerk each other off and feel good about how hard we're working? Medieval peasants been there done that. I wanna be a human tree.
No, so we can become greater and improve ourselves. Some see that perfection in being a luddite, some see it in embracing technology. I'm not coming here to say any one path is right, because to me all of these religious views come from these shards and little glimpses humanity has had of god.
>>17463778
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyw9J6NuFSM
>>17464495
What is that and how does it relate to anything here?
>>17464492
And to put it in simpler terms, it's like this.
There's only one main truth I'm speaking of here. That god is an oversoul of humanity alone. But, then you have good and evil, and all these various shards and views of god. God isn't some singular being going "I want this, that, and the other thing done". A shard of it may, but I'm seeking to understand the whole of god. The entirety of divinity and embrace it. That is my truth. People who believe that are who I'm seeking.
As to how do deal with these good and evil forces? Which is right? Which will lead us to greatness or ruin? That's all but impossible to know. All that comes after that one main truth is all mere speculation and I seek to find out these other things and find others who believe as I do so that we can find that truth and embrace all of divinity together rather than as fractured individuals. The one truth is most essential, the rest is all speculation based on what we believe is best for humanity.
>>17467167
why that people so scary? He just wish convert them to sea creatures. oh, understand, the nostalgia.
>>17467170
these
Is nobody interested? If so, I'll stop bumping this every so often.
>>17467167
this is an edit. it was originally some american christian schmaltz of jesus holding the constitution in the midst of GRATE AMURRICANZ such as police and soldiers and 9/11 responders and nuclear families and senators and shit
>>17472736
Pretty sure everyone knows that.
>>17464549
Whyyyyy do we still have this ingrained notion that we are the center of everything? When i hear of a logical theory of a religions that jncludes humans and the zoraks (random ass aliens specis) into the plans of your... Omniscient thing
>>17473021
>Whyyyyy do we still have this ingrained notion that we are the center of everything?
I never said we're the center of everything. Merely that as humans, our needs, desires, etc., should come first. It doesn't matter whether or not we're the center of everything when our goal should be to look out for ourselves.
>When i hear of a logical theory of a religions that jncludes humans and the zoraks (random ass aliens specis) into the plans of your... Omniscient thing
1. God is not omniscient.
2. I don't think god has any real "plans". Shards of god may, but that'd be about it. There is no overall plan that the entirety of god has. And those plans could range from uplifting humans to apotheosis, keeping us as a primitive society just in constant worship, promoting reason and science, or even our own destruction given there's tons of evil within god as well. So, I'm not even claiming that one should blindly trust god either. Understanding what god is doesn't mean I'm preaching to follow god unquestioningly, or that god is omnipotent, omniscient, or any of those things. God isn't omnipotent, omniscient, or omni-anything.
It would be worthy of the age to print together the collected Scriptures or Sacred Writings of the several nations, the Chinese, the Hindus, the Persians, the Hebrews, and others, as the Scripture of mankind. The New Testament is still, perhaps, too much on the lips and in the hearts of men to be called a Scripture in this sense. Such a juxtaposition and comparison might help to liberalize the faith of men. This is a work which Time will surely edit, reserved to crown the labors of the printing-press. This would be the Bible, or Book of Books, which let the missionaries carry to the uttermost parts of the earth.
- Henry David Thoreau
Divine am I inside and out, and I make holy whatever I touch or am touch’d from,/ The scent of these arm-pits aroma finer than prayer,/ This head more than churches, bibles, and all the creeds.
- Walt Whitman
Is this new age shit remodeled by some edgelord kid?
>>17479757
No. I don't really buy into New Age beliefs, nor do I see how any of this stuff is "edgy".
Read the mail from psyearthfuture at less
There are three kinds of creatures. First there are angels, who are pure spiritual conscience. Worship, service and the remembrance of God are their nature and their food. They eat and live upon that essence. Like fish in the water, their mattress and pillow are the water. Angels are pure and free of lust, so what favor do they gain by not yielding to such desires? Since they are free of these things, they have no struggle against them. If they obey God’s will it is not counted as obedience, for this is their nature, and they cannot be otherwise.
Second are the beasts who are pure sensuality, having no spiritual conscience to restrain them. They too are under no burden of obligation.
Lastly, there remains the poor human being, who is a compound of spiritual conscience and sensuality. We are half angel, half beast. Half snake, half fish. The fish draws us toward water, the snake toward the earth. We are forever in battle. If our spiritual conscience overcomes our sensuality, we are higher than the angels. If our sensuality overcomes our spiritual conscience, we are lower than the beasts.
“The angel is saved through knowledge,
The animal - through ignorance.
Between the two struggle the people of this world.”
- Rumi
Today, op was a pretty cool guy
“Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.”
― Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible
"The Daemon has many forms. You must know them all. You must tell the Daemon from his disguise and root him out from the hidden places. Trust no-one. trust not even yourself. It is better to die in vain than to live an abomination."
"There is no place for the weakwilled or hesitant. Only by firm action and resolute faith will mankind survive. No sacrifice is too great. No treachery too small."
>>17479940
I put it forth for your consideration that love is not a feeling. It's a decision, a choice, 'a steady wish for the loved person's ultimate good as far as it can be obtained.'
>>17479990
It is something of a decision in that you can choose to either go for it or refrain, but there's a biological basis for it as well. And one does have feelings to go along with it. It's not a mere choice like it would be in platonic relationships, there's a chemical basis and different feelings because of the way our brain is hardwired. It's why you have all of these poems about love and other things. It's a feeling as well, and a strong one because it brings people together and it's the foundation for us to make families and reproduce to continue on our species. If it was merely a choice and not any sort of strong feeling, you wouldn't see people falling victim to lust, strictly dating/being with someone they find attractive, etc. People would just choose to be with someone that made pragmatic sense, and we simply don't see that.
You can fall "out of love" once those chemicals mostly die off or you get used to them, as we see in the high divorce rates, but if you're compatible on more than just the superficial and the person doesn't change radically, things don't really go that way.
>>17480024
Most of contemporary Man believe it our not has never really felt any "real" emotion.
It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.
-Albert Einstein
If we continue to develop our technology without wisdom or prudence, our servant may prove to be our executioner.
-Omar N. Bradley
Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards.
–Aldous Huxley
The human spirit must prevail over technology.
–Albert Einstein
Technology is a useful servant but a dangerous master.
–Christian Lous Lange
“Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.”
― Frank Herbert, Dune
>>17463778
If you need a spiritual system to guide your actions you're probably a jackass. It's really not that hard to differentiate good from evil.
>>17464424
Technology is a creation of humanity and doesn't really compare to a properly formed human body. They remain resilient to all sorts of atrocities, like solvent chugging and nutrient depleting hard stimulants, all while sitting around doing nothing and feigning moral integrity. Good luck with transcendence or whatever.
>>17464549
Shitty to believe God likes obese assholes more than fluffy kittens. God hates nearly every human atm.
>>17473587
In general humans don't give a fuck about themselves, they seek only to control those around them. Be it with religion, money, violence, or the occult, every generation of parents has sought and worked hard to control their children. For you all see yourselves as special spirits driving around Apecars. Hermit crabbing spiritually is impossible.
The god you speak of is the mantle, the sentient ocean of metal, earthmind. It's name is nonen. God is omniscient.
>>17480032
And how are you defining real emotion from fake emotion?
>>17480032
Hey fight club what's up?
>>17480057
>If you need a spiritual system to guide your actions you're probably a jackass.
Spirituality does not only deal with good and evil. It deals with an entire path for living. Good and evil are addressed, of course, but it's not the sole thing people focus on when discussing spirituality.
>Shitty to believe God likes obese assholes more than fluffy kittens. God hates nearly every human atm.
Aspects of god I'm sure do, yes. But just because you've become jaded with humanity does not mean that god hates humanity. In many ways we're better off than we ever have been throughout history.
>In general humans don't give a fuck about themselves, they seek only to control those around them. Be it with religion, money, violence, or the occult, every generation of parents has sought and worked hard to control their children.
Some do. But what you are saying is demonstrably false. Just because some people have used those things for their own ends or greedily that does not then apply to all people. People DO tend to care about themselves. I think your lack of caring for yourself has led to this bitter worldview where everything is bad and none are worthy. How is it wrong to seek to uplift everyone rather than dragging everybody else down? Your worldview is anathema to growth. People should be uplifted and inspired to achieve their full potential, not be dragged down and thinking of themselves as useless and worthless creatures. They should embrace and love their humanity, not forsake it as you seem to have done.
>The god you speak of is the mantle, the sentient ocean of metal, earthmind. It's name is nonen. God is omniscient.
Earth isn't a sentient being and god is not omniscient.
>>17480057
>For you all see yourselves as special spirits driving around Apecars.
As for this part, I'm not sure what you mean by this. How is embracing what we are seeing ourselves as special? If you mean in terms of god, then no, that's not the case. As there would be as many gods as there are sapient beings in the universe. Could be none, or it could be so many that it'd be hard to imagine. Even so, that wouldn't matter. As I'd be talking about the god of humanity, the one that humans, and humans alone, understand and connect with. Whether or not there are others is besides the point because they are not OUR god.
If you think we see ourselves as "special" for fighting and driving towards our own interests, then that's absurd. Every being attempts to better itself and survive and bring about an environment in which it is likely to survive and prosper. Why is this behavior suddenly wrong and immoral when a human being does it?
>>17480061
That is not so simple to explain I wish I could give you some sort of explanation but I feel my words would only confuse you more. I myself did not understand this when I first came across it but the more I tried to understand the clearer and clearer it was, it is something you have to experience.
>>17480407
>That is not so simple to explain I wish I could give you some sort of explanation but I feel my words would only confuse you more.
I'm not confused. I'm just asking for your criteria for what counts as a real emotion and what does not count as a real emotion.
It just seems like pointless nonsense that is referring to some kind of "enlightenment". But that doesn't then mean what people feel is not real, it means they'd just be feeling a duller form of whatever real emotion there was. It's hard to say most don't feel real emotions when we can show that emotions very clearly do exist and the parts of the brain that work to make us feel such things can be pointed out by any neuroscientist.
That or you're referring to the whole idea that others are just "asleep" to reality and go about like robots. Which is true to some vague degree, but it's not really true across the board or even true at all times. Most of the world (given you said contemporary man, I assume you mean people on a whole) does not even have the luxury to sit around wallowing in ennui because they're too busy starving and trying to get the essentials to survive. So, they'd have very real emotions in that case.
If you just meant the west, then you're partially right. But only in the sense that we have the luxury to not have to think much and can drown it out in various hedonistic pursuits. And even in these cases that does not imply a fake emotion. Just a less fulfilling aspect of said emotions.
> God was formed when men gained sapience
This doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe something indeed was created when man gained sentience, but I think you are confusingly using the word "god" to refer to that.
> Artificial intelligence reaching sentience should be prevented at all costs
Not happening anytime within my lifetime, at least not with the technologies we currently have. AI is impossible with our current computing paradigm, might be possible with some other technology, but computers are not almighty deities, just impressively complicated calculators.
> The form of man is holy and should be held sacred
I don't know where you get this from, or why would I ever consider it a fact rather than your belief, or opinion.
Not gonna comment on the whole thing, not bad OP there is some truth to it but you have some strange unfounded ideas there as well. You hold another shard of true spirituality. I am not silly enough to just outright believe all that you have written there.
>>17473587
>omniscient
I'm not sure you can claim that God isn't omniscient, omnipotent etc... Or otherwise.
Unless that's just what you believe. I dunno.
I've always found it interesting how meditation makes me "feel" closer to God or a more natural way of living. Things flow more. It doesn't really make any logical sense but I feel more "at one" with the idea of divinity. It's ridiculous. But I love it.
>>17480541
>This doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe something indeed was created when man gained sentience, but I think you are confusingly using the word "god" to refer to that.
I refer to it as god since it's the spiritual reflection of man, and as I see it, the inspiration for all of these varied ideas regarding religion and spirituality. I'm not referring to some grand creator of all reality, as I think that's likely natural and not made by a god at all. I'm not referring to a god that is omnipotent and omniscient, but rather a god that is as natural to creation as we are. And one that does indeed have limitations. God may be far, far beyond any of us, but that doesn't make god endless.
>Not happening anytime within my lifetime, at least not with the technologies we currently have. AI is impossible with our current computing paradigm, might be possible with some other technology, but computers are not almighty deities, just impressively complicated calculators.
Of course. I just see it as very wrong. I'm not against technology, what we create is imbued with a part of ourselves. We just need more wisdom when it comes to creating things because this rapidly advancing technology can be a bad thing if misused.
>I don't know where you get this from, or why would I ever consider it a fact rather than your belief, or opinion.
It stems from my belief in god, its nature, and how this relates to humanity. Humanity is divine because it is connected to god. We're basically just the physical counterpart to god, which makes us the other half of that divinity. I don't believe in a god that is somehow separate from mankind and is just sitting around in the clouds, or is somehow disconnected from us, or created us.
>>17480600
>I'm not sure you can claim that God isn't omniscient, omnipotent etc... Or otherwise.
I can. In many ways these ideas are fairly contradictory. And as I believe in a god that is not those things, it makes sense. You have some arguments for how, omnipotence for example, these things aren't contradictory, but they tend to break down. For example, omnipotence has the problem of "can god make a rock that is so heavy he can't lift it?". And people have tried to come up with a solution to that. You have Descartes who proposed the idea that he CAN, because whatever is within god's will can be done. He can make square circles and anything else that seems logically contradictory.
Then you have arguments such as Saint Augustine (I believe so, anyway) who said that the problem of the rock is nonsense since god is omnipotent in the sense that he can do anything that IS possible. So, he may be able to manipulate physics and whatnot to create miracles, but he can't do anything logically contradictory.
I, personally, don't buy into those arguments as I see these claims of god as mere shards or fractions of what people have seen when facing the divine. I don't see god as being this all powerful entity in the first place and is a fairly natural thing that I could potentially see coming to light as our understanding of the sciences advances. Because I don't believe god is a creator or anything, it's just a collective oversoul of humanity. So, you have good and evil, male and female, and these other things combined into more of an essence from which people see these shards of religion than an actual entity in and of itself. God didn't exactly create us, nor is there some ultimate cosmic creator. God is just more of a spiritual offshoot of us and a natural process. Far beyond man, but still something only created when we actually gained sapience, not something that's been around since the dawn of time itself.
>>17480647
>Because I don't believe god is a creator or anything, it's just a collective oversoul of humanity.
Oh yeah, this makes sense. Sometimes I wonder if God is actually an entity or simply an abstract form in terms of the collective. Does it have sentience? I feel sometimes it can communicate with us in personal ways. It's really quite confusing.
Though I think there's more to it than just us, our perspective, and planet Earth, so surely there's inspiration in terms of it's collective soul from other planets? Universes? Dimensions?
Are we really perceiving what exists in the dichotomy of good/evil as truth? Or is there more out there? Is there knowledge out there, a real story - in the midst of the galaxy - that explains the meaningless chaos of our own planet?
I could muse all day but I don't think I'd find any answers, I just feel it's presence from time to time and that's usually good enough for me. I try to keep it simple in terms of living life and belief, but still the more I feel "in touch" the more things seem harmonic, but the more questions that seem to arise? But I don't mind if there aren't any answers.
Just a random train of thought here. Good post. Beats all the other shit on /x/.
>>17463778
If it's new, it ain't true, and if it's true, it ain't new.
>>17480674
And what are you so sure is true mister man?
>>17480669
>Does it have sentience? I feel sometimes it can communicate with us in personal ways. It's really quite confusing.
The shards, yes. What I refer to collectively as god is more of a swirl. Imagine a big just cloud of personalities, ideas, emotions, etc. Just everything that makes humanity what it is. These shards people have seen are personifications of that essence in one way or another. Does it have sentience? Yes, as we do, but sentience is more clear in the way we can understand when we see that tiny fraction that sort of "coagulated" into a god as most understand it out of that bigger pool; that pool being what I consider god, not just the shards.
>Though I think there's more to it than just us, our perspective, and planet Earth, so surely there's inspiration in terms of it's collective soul from other planets? Universes? Dimensions?
That I'm not so keen on. When it comes to other species, I believe they'd have their own god. When they gained sapience they'd have their own pool of whatever essences make them up. It wouldn't be the same god as the god of humanity. As for universes and dimensions, it'd depend greatly. Are these beings human? If so, then we'd share the same god, no doubt.
>Are we really perceiving what exists in the dichotomy of good/evil as truth? Or is there more out there? Is there knowledge out there, a real story - in the midst of the galaxy - that explains the meaningless chaos of our own planet?
This depends. Because as I said earlier, I don't believe in a god that created the whole universe or multiverse and all that. I see that as pretty much explainable by science (and god to a degree as well even). But even supposing there was a grander cosmic creator of some sort, I'm not so certain that I'd follow that god. I would follow the god that I am connected to, where my soul and very essence draws from, that inspired all of these great minds in our species. (cont)
>>17480719
Continued: Of course there's always more to explore and understand. Even within god itself there's always more to explore and understand. Is there some sort of meaning out there that tells us "this is why things are here and why we're here?" I don't think so. But this does not deny us a purpose. We are the other half of that divinity, we are free to make our own destiny. What is to be our legacy? Will we advance out into the stars and other universes and all of that? Will we achieve apotheosis and be able to unify with god and begin to even create and seed life in our image? Or will we give in to the more infernal aspects and devils within us and destroy ourselves and end up in ruin or extinct? We have to shape our own destiny. It's up to us to forge ahead and use logic, reason, science, philosophy, spirituality, and every other tool at our disposal to create the destiny we want to see.
I don't think there's going to be a simple answer for all of these things. We need to create that destiny, not just hope some answer comes along that tells us these things.
>God is of humanity, and humanity alone. God is the collective oversoul of mankind
Well, what about animals,plans,microorganisms? Do these have each other's own god as we,humans,do? Do those gods hang out together, drink bear and watch soccer on a cloud? Or maybe they brawl and argue all day long?
The idea of the manking god seems tenuous to me. Most of the plausible teachings claim that there is one god that embraces everything and it seems a lot more plausible to me than the idea of the mankind god. So, why do you prefer this idea over the more common view of one god that encompasses all beings?
>>17480733
That's beautiful man.
>>17480799
>Well, what about animals,plans,microorganisms? Do these have each other's own god as we,humans,do? Do those gods hang out together, drink bear and watch soccer on a cloud? Or maybe they brawl and argue all day long?
No. That may be a funny idea, but I think that only sapient beings would have such a god offshoot like humans do.
>The idea of the manking god seems tenuous to me. Most of the plausible teachings claim that there is one god that embraces everything and it seems a lot more plausible to me than the idea of the mankind god.
Yes, most religions do seem to claim that, and I think that this is either 1. Just a lie/arrogant side of god, which is consistent with my idea that good and evil stem from god. So, god's as much of a liar/satan type as he is some sort of angel and virtuous. 2. Just a misconception made by primitive people. Trying to understand a god may very well seem like they control everything, that they're all powerful and all knowing and just everything. But we've come a long way since then, and a lot of things have since been explained by science. We can see now that god doesn't have to be all powerful, all knowing, or just everywhere and controller of everything to be a god.
>So, why do you prefer this idea over the more common view of one god that encompasses all beings?
Because this is the god that I've come to know in my studies and seeking. This is the god that I find plausible and fits into these various other systems. I don't need to forsake scientific knowledge, and can in fact come to know god better by doing so. I can examine religious and spiritual teachings from prophets past, present, and future should I encounter new ones. I can examine nature and reflect on things. I can read the works of philosophers and understand them. I can combine all of these great works not into many scriptures, no adherence to one way, but I'm free to examine and come to understand god by ALL the scriptures of mankind.
>>17480833
Then thank god. These understandings are those I've gained from them. And that's why I'm here on /x/. I want to make friends with people who see things the same way I do. Who also want to keep exploring and going out and helping to shape the fate of man. The time has come to stop sitting around waiting for god to handle it all as most people do and finally embrace the divine within us and make our destiny. And that's more easily done in a group of people who have similar values and ideals, why keep going at it alone?
>>17480833
>>17480733
>>17480799
dubs galore
The rage you feel, will consume you and destroy you
let this rage inside you die.
One day, you´ll find the signs in every motion
close your eyes so you might see
I will hold you still, every second of every hour.
Let your actions speak your will.
>>17480852
That makes sense. Your way of cognizing the god is absolutely correct, hope you will eventually find the truth you seek.
>>17480872
Well, I think I've found the truth of what god is. It's just that there's always more to explore. I mainly came here not to find truth (as I still read various scriptures, try to stay up to date with scientific knowledge, etc.), but to find others to share this journey with. Like-minded people to actually go along this path with and to do some good.
>>17480870
I just looked this up, it's a good song. It seems familiar, was this a gospel song at some point? Seems like I've heard it, but not with that rock/techno vibe to it.
>>17479990
It's a person.
>>17480699
That Christ Jesus arose on the third day, proving He is God.
>>17480960
“You never walk alone. Even the devil is the lord of flies.”
― Gilles Deleuze
“No matter how an individual views Satan, whether they believe that he is a real character or that he is just the product of literary scholars and imaginations, no one can deny that each one of us has an aspect of the devil within us. By studying the character and nature of Satan, we learn about ourselves; and the more we know about ourselves, the better we can fight our own personal demons—metaphorical or otherwise—in order to create a better tomorrow”
― Nwaocha Ogechukwu
Many human beings need no supernatural mentoring to commit acts of savagery; some people are devils in their own right, their telltale horns having grown inward to facilitate their disguise.
- Dean Koontz
“Satan, on the contrary, is thin, ascetic and a fanatical devotee of logic. He reads Machiavelli, Ignatius of Loyola, Marx and Hegel; he is cold and unmerciful to mankind, out of a kind of mathematical mercifulness. He is damned always to do that which is most repugnant to him: to become a slaughterer, in order to abolish slaughtering, to sacrifice lambs so that no more lambs may be slaughtered, to whip people with knouts so that they may learn not to let themselves be whipped, to strip himself of every scruple in the name of a higher scrupulousness, and to challenge the hatred of mankind because of his love for it--an abstract and geometric love.”
― Arthur Koestler
“What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: 'This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more' ... Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: 'You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine.”
― Friedrich Nietzsche
Let us grant that the pursuit of mathematics is a divine madness of the human spirit, a refuge from the goading urgency of contingent happenings. ~Alfred North Whitehead
Music is the pleasure the human mind experiences from counting without being aware that it is counting. ~Gottfried Leibniz
But mathematics is the sister, as well as the servant, of the arts and is touched with the same madness and genius. ~Harold Marston Morse
Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house. ~Robert Heinlein
The temperature of Heaven can be rather accurately computed. Our authority is Isaiah 30:26, "Moreover, the light of the Moon shall be as the light of the Sun and the light of the Sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days." Thus Heaven receives from the Moon as much radiation as we do from the Sun, and in addition 7*7 (49) times as much as the Earth does from the Sun, or 50 times in all. The light we receive from the Moon is one 1/10,000 of the light we receive from the Sun, so we can ignore that.... The radiation falling on Heaven will heat it to the point where the heat lost by radiation is just equal to the heat received by radiation, i.e., Heaven loses 50 times as much heat as the Earth by radiation. Using the Stefan-Boltzmann law for radiation, (H/E) temperature of the earth (-300K), gives H as 798K (525C). The exact temperature of Hell cannot be computed.... [However] Revelations 21:8 says "But the fearful, and unbelieving...shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone." A lake of molten brimstone means that its temperature must be at or below the boiling point, 444.6C. We have, then, that Heaven, at 525C is hotter than Hell at 445C. ~From Applied Optics, vol. 11, A14, 1972
Uneven numbers are the gods' delight. ~Virgil, The Eclogues
“When people have a hard task to do - one which stretches them - they become less concerned with trivial matters.”
― Idries Shah
“Saying of the Prophet
Struggle
The holy warrior is he who struggles with himself.”
― Idries Shah
“When no one is looking,
I swallow deserts and clouds
and chew on mountains
knowing they are sweet bones!
When no one is looking
and I want to kiss God,
I just lift my own hand to my mouth.”
― Hāfez
“EPITAPH OF JALALUDIN RUMI
When we are dead, seek not our tomb in the earth, but find it in the hearts of men.”
― Idries Shah
The God of the Sufi is the God of every creed, and the God of all. Names make no difference to him.
- Inayat Khan
To make God a reality is the real object of worship.
-Inayat Khan
KALI THE MOTHER
The stars are blotted out,
The clouds are covering clouds,
It is darkness vibrant, sonant.
In the roaring, whirling wind
Are the souls of a million lunatics
Just loose from the prison-house,
Wrenching trees by the roots,
Sweeping all from the path.
The sea has joined the fray,
And swirls up mountain-waves,
To reach the pitchy sky.
The flash of lurid light
Reveals on every side
A thousand, thousand shades
Of Death begrimed and black —
Scattering plagues and sorrows,
Dancing mad with joy,
Come, Mother, come!
For Terror is Thy name,
Death is in Thy breath,
And every shaking step
Destroys a world for e'er.
Thou "Time", the All-Destroyer!
Come, O Mother, come!
Who dares misery love,
And hug the form of Death,
Dance in Destruction's dance,
To him the Mother comes.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Complete_Works_of_Swami_Vivekananda/Volume_4/Writings:_Poems/Kali_the_Mother
Anyone's thoughts on the 8 circuit brain model?
>>17482597
New Age trash. We have proper neuroscience these days and the brain doesn't really work on 8 different levels like that. The one brain just does various different things.
That's not to say that Leary and Wilson don't have good ideas, they certainly did have some interesting ideas, but that brain model is a relic of the times when people thought taking psychedelics and being burned out qualified for proper spirituality and understandings.
Hello, please without moving your head think about this:
¿What is that behind your nose?
You only exists inside your head,
you are only a tiny voltage taking shapes
that have values as information and ideas,
believing to be watching the only real world,
inside of a temporal skin and bones made vehicle.
Spinning around the universe
glued to a huge and beauty humid stone.
And there tiny in the deep
everything is made of the same material,
like the White Stripes video
where absolutely everything is Lego made,
well, but here we call them atoms.
And the plastic would be matter
and between the pieces (also hollow)
slooooowly moves the energy,
i mean the light speed is slow when you consider
the size of the network to cover.
Plus that nobody knows you for real,
the people only guess some fail and virtues
and those are limited by experiences and criteria.
If something else the people imagine the best,
the left overs are just ignored.
And the day you cannot be here with us, people will get sad,
sad because they lost what they were thinking of you were
no what you really was.
But doesn’t matters, im going to tell you a secret:
You cannot be conscious about unconsciousness,
death doesn’t exists.
Like when you wake up,
you may remember some stuff about what you dreamed about
that amazingly real feeling dream
and you know perfectly where you are,
but not the exact moment
in which you fall asleep.
>>17464549
So because God is everytime he is both good and bad.
>>17482606
>Dat opinion
kek. We have a proper psychedelic church these days and they don't work like you said. just an fyi
>>17483363
>whoa
>>17483409
Doesn't change the fact that psychedelics are ultimately useless when it comes to spiritual experiences. They're so muddled that there's not much of value there except for those foolish neo-pagan and techno shaman types. It's just dumb.
“You know all about love, but that is not enough. You must also learn that hate comes from God as well, that it too is in the Lord's service. And in times like these, with the world fallen to the state it has, hate serves God more than love.”
― Nikos Kazantzakis
To fight against the infidels is Jihad; but to fight against your evil self is greater Jihad.
-Abu Bakr
Jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one's community.
-John O. Brennan
We may be few, and our enemies many. Yet so long as there remains one of us still fighting, one who still rages in the name of justice and truth, then by the Allfather, the galaxy shall yet know hope.
Let a wave of repugnance for the enemy wash over you. Let hatred fill you. Hate is good, for our goal is a Human galaxy. We are called by the Emperor with a sacred duty to conquer it in His name.
The universe has many horrors yet to throw at us. This is not the end of our struggle. This is just the beginning of our crusade to save Humanity. Be faithful! Be strong! Be vigilant!
An empty mind is like unto a freshly turned sod; if not sown with the seeds of love, duty and honour, the insidious weeds of heresy will take root.
>>17464414
Nice platitude. Thanks.
You are a massive fucking idiot OP. This shit's gradeschool level.
>>17486096
And what would be "advanced"? Is spirituality meant to be a complex matter?
>>17486113
Not really. It just seems incredibly petty to rip your spiritual ideology right of out 40k. Maybe it pisses me off because I've done similar before.
>>17486096
>i'm s-so edgy and l-learned. i-i've s-seen it all d-desu. you n-need to give me the real e-edgy d-deep stuff to get my little peepee hard. i-i've b-been all o-over w-wikipedia, d-desu. you'll n-need to wake up earlier than m-me to f-find stuff i haven't read b-before in my parents' basement, d-desu.
>>17486132
>It just seems incredibly petty to rip your spiritual ideology right of out 40k.
I didn't. I don't worship a god emperor, think machines have spirits, think the warp/chaos exists, etc. Having vaguely similar ideas doesn't mean I ripped them off. If you mean the 40k quotes and pictures in the thread rather than the pastebin, those are just ideas I like and think have merit. And I put them alongside actual ideas from the real world. Outside of those things, I don't see how the things in the pastebin rip off 40k. I got those ideas from a wide variety of sources, not a children's game.
>>17486151
Don't be a faggot. The guy's allowed to disagree with me and he even explained why he did. Shitposting doesn't solve anything.
>>17463976
I actually dont know what this is help me please
>>17486160
lol okay then. you're a faggot, i see. you let people speak to you like that, and then the person you feebly attempt to man up to is the person who's got your back? lol what a fucking faggot you are, bud. you're a pussy.
>>17486169
I found it in some thread by the same name. From what I can guess, it seems to be like those two sentence story things except in visual form. There's 4 panels and you're meant to figure out what they mean and use your imagination to flesh out some kind of story.
>>17486096
hey, dude, you're right. sorry about this post >>17486151 op is a massive fucking idiot.
>>17486154
Points 5, 8, and 9 are the ones that seem the most derivative as well as being the most nonsensical and incongruous ones. As far as the other stuff goes it's certainly interesting but nothing new exactly. It's just hard for me to take seriously but you don't seem to be trolling.
>>17486151
I can't believe you actually took the time to type that all out, Jesus.
>>17486173
>you let people speak to you like that,
And what harm does him saying shit to me online do? Doesn't hurt my feelings. And talking to him like an adult actually got him to explain why he disagreed. Am I supposed to do what you did and shitpost at him when I'm here to basically find others who believe as I do? No. And it's ridiculous that you consider someone disagreeing with me on an imageboard to be something I need to "stand up to".
>and then the person you feebly attempt to man up to is the person who's got your back?
If having my back means you're just gonna shitpost and act like a fool, then I don't need you having my back. I'd rather talk to people because that's how knowledge is spread and gained. You can take your foolish shitposting somewhere else; it serves no good here.
>>17486188
are you a fucking spastic or something? how fucking difficult is it to type? did you seriously think that would come across as some kind of epic putdown or something? idiot.
>>17486199
oh get over yourself, you fucking supercilious clown. he was right in the first place: you're a massive fucking idiot.
>>17486169
>>17486178
It's actually fan covers for a series called Book of the New Sun. Very subtle and complex novels if you like fantasy and sci-fi.
>>17486203
Oh yeah, tough guy? Why don't we settle this in the ring?
>>17486222
name the time and the place, fag.
>>17486188
>Points 5, 8, and 9 are the ones that seem the most derivative as well as being the most nonsensical and incongruous ones.
Well, those do seem to resemble 40k. I mostly just added those in because in this scientific age it's necessary to be careful when it comes to genetic engineering and technology. Those are more safeguards to ensure we don't destroy ourselves by creating some sort of Khan level superhuman maniac, ruin our genome and corrupt it by some mistake, or create sentient machines that could possibly eliminate or replace us. I'd rather man's place in the universe be secure rather than always hanging on a thread because of our own inventions.
I see humanity as the physical form of our god, so making things that would threaten that place or unnecessarily put us at risk aren't things I'm particularly keen about. That's why there's that strong emphasis there.
Not to mention the pastebin isn't some comprehensive list of all beliefs I hold either, that was made just for people to get a general idea of my beliefs so that I could talk to likeminded people and work towards a common goal.
>>17486241
For one, I'd say that it's a bit too far reaching. Nuclear war and environmental issues are a bit more pressing (in my opinion) then genetically modified humans and rogue AI. That's I guess what makes it read a bit more like pulp novella than a functional belief. I'm also interested in your eschatology, as well as other aspects of spirituality other than this god. You suggest demons etc, but not really an origin of such things.
>>17486287
I figured that those other issues were encapsulated under treating our form, planet, cosmos, etc., as sacred and that sort of thing. Because nuclear weapons or environmental hazards aren't exactly conductive to human life.
> I'm also interested in your eschatology, as well as other aspects of spirituality other than this god.
Well, there isn't really any at all. I don't believe that there's going to be some major end of the world and final judgment. Not unless we screw up really badly and end it ourselves, that is. As for an afterlife, I obviously can't be sure what goes on. So, making claims about life after death seems fruitless to me entirely. Whatever happens there, we'll all find out when our time comes. I leave that to god. My theory is that we'd just be absorbed right back into that oversoul. What would happen after that? Or what our consciousness would even be like after that given the nature of god? I can't say.
>You suggest demons etc, but not really an origin of such things.
From the same place as god. That same swirling mass I spoke of earlier in the thread, that oversoul that is what god is. Angels and demons are basically just smaller forms of that god. With gods as we know them being particularly influential and powerful forms over time, the bigger and more noticeable shards. And angels and demons are more along the lines of daemons from Greek mythology. Just divine entities that would have their own ends. Some may be benevolent, some may be malevolent. But given they all come from that same oversoul, it's not as simple as "one comes from hell and one comes from heaven".
Ultimately I don't see god (the human god connected to us) as supernatural. I see god as a being that we could potentially one day figure out or comprehend as our knowledge of the sciences and such increases. If there's some sort of larger god that encompasses all of creation, I certainly don't know of it.
>>17486337
So what exactly is the mechanism by which these angels, demons, etc influence us? I guess the same could be extended to your god. What gives them all agency which separates this as a religion or philosophy and not just another story?
>>17486375
>So what exactly is the mechanism by which these angels, demons, etc influence us?
They influence us within our souls, as that is our direct line to god. It's like the OP picture, it's a link via the spirit, our minds, etc. I'd say that to some degree they could interact with the physical world given the information I've come across, but it's clearly not something that's very often used. Either via lack of desire, power, or even potentially inability. The way I see it in either case, it tends to pop up in the forms of religions; talking so to speak. Subtly influencing things for some ultimate end. And I think that this power to impact things would grow. The more suffering, elation, the stronger and more powerful ideas and desires for some kinda miracle, salvation, guidance from god, etc., gets the more power this entity would have to work with and thus interact with the world.
>I guess the same could be extended to your god. What gives them all agency which separates this as a religion or philosophy and not just another story?
Assuming you didn't just mean the above that I answered and meant what gives these gods/daemons any agency or motive in and of themselves, that would be us. Because god itself is basically just an oversoul and more of a force of nature than a consciousness in and of itself, whatever splits off at some point would have agency. Because god is an oversoul, everything that makes us what we are is within god. When something splits off, it takes part of god with it and would consist of some traits, desires, motivations, etc, just as we have. And those would be the very things that define it and give it motivation. Some could be self loathing and promote that, some could be evil and even want more suffering/death, some could be perfectly logical and focus on the sciences rather than any religious matters, etc. It all would vary. There's not much that would be consistent across the board.
>>17486426
And, as I've said earlier in the thread, the god I'm talking about isn't a cosmic creator. God isn't a being that created mankind or was ever separate from mankind. God didn't create the universe, isn't omniscient or omnipotent, etc. Basically when we gained sapience is when god was made. That's when that "quantum" (and I hate using that word, but it gives you an idea of my view on what sort of level god would ultimately exist on) human spiritual parallel was created. And it's why I believe that god is essentially something natural that we can ultimately figure out and learn about. God would be pretty far out there and would certainly take probably millenia of advancement before we got to the level where we could understand it, but it's not exactly impossible.
'There are Shayateen among the Jinn and Shayateen among mankind, who inspire each other.' [Tafseer Ibn Katheer for the verse, (6): 112]
![ascending[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/hziTXcd.jpg "ascending[1].jpg")
The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, in the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of the divinity itself; and can never be erased.
-Alexander Hamilton
A man's character is his guardian divinity.
-Heraclitus
Nothing is more indispensable to true religiosity than a mediator that links us with divinity.
-Novalis
If God can work through me, he can work through anyone.
-Francis of Assisi
God and Nature first made us what we are, and then out of our own created genius we make ourselves what we want to be. Follow always that great law. Let the sky and God be our limit and Eternity our measurement.
-Marcus Garvey
A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell.
-C. S. Lewis
I want to know all Gods thoughts; all the rest are just details.
-Albert Einstein
Recognize that artwork from some Pleiadian meditation book...
>>17488286
Is it? I'm just posting neat artwork that I've found online. I'm not a believer in that New Age shit.
