|
|
#81
10-12-2007, 10:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Here\'s exactly why that article was stupid
[ QUOTE ]
Vhawk, A thought is energy, measuring something takes energy. The words you just typed are energy... I could go on and on. [/ QUOTE ] Do you understand the difference between "measuring something takes enegy" and "inches are energy?" |
|
#83
10-12-2007, 11:59 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here\'s exactly why that article was stupid
This is the inexorable miasma of scientific materialistic thinking. Instead of saying we are made up of atoms(exactly it is WE ARE ATOMS) then the next level is WE ARE SUBATOMIC PARTICLES. Since we have the conservation of matter/energy this implies that if we aren't matter we must be energy. Ergo at death we become energy(another level of course). The thinking is clear and can't be denied. For those of you who are "hard wired" this should be considered carefully for it is the natural consequence of your enchanted thinking of which you probably haven't really considered.
The difficulty with this matter/energy thingy is that the corpse of the human being exists after death so there must be some matter/energy left and the "good energy(good for who?)-read us" goes on while the bad stuff becomes earth(ashes to ashes, dust to dust). So we(the good energy) go on to higher (lower?) levels of existence. All this proves is that Man, even with the most difficult thinking, demands substance to his belief in immortality. In this negative sense he comes to a vague understanding of the "soul".He doesn't know it but he knows it's there. The materialistic scientific concepts of our age can never come to an understanding of the human being for the illusion of atomistic thinking is in itself an illusory approach to "matter" and life itself. Science in its periodic table, atoms, subatomic particles, etc. studies the corpse of Man and earthly death but definitely not the living. |
|
#84
10-12-2007, 03:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here\'s exactly why that article was stupid
It's been stated right here in this thread, but some people seem not to be able to comprehend it.
I am not matter and energy. I am a process. The process takes place in a medium of matter and energy. When the process stops, I die. Matter and energy still exist, unaffected, but my existence is no more. Edit: I can't believe I broke down and actually made a serious response to this thread. |
|
#85
10-12-2007, 03:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here\'s exactly why that article was stupid
Carlo,
You explained what I was thinking better then I could have. Great post. |
|
#87
10-12-2007, 03:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here\'s exactly why that article was stupid
[ QUOTE ]
This is the inexorable miasma of scientific materialistic thinking. Instead of saying we are made up of atoms(exactly it is WE ARE ATOMS) then the next level is WE ARE SUBATOMIC PARTICLES. Since we have the conservation of matter/energy this implies that if we aren't matter we must be energy. Ergo at death we become energy(another level of course). The thinking is clear and can't be denied. [/ QUOTE ] If you grind a house to dust and scatter the dust with the winds it isn't a house anymore. The end. |
|
#88
10-12-2007, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Here\'s exactly why that article was stupid
[ QUOTE ]
It's been stated right here in this thread, but some people seem not to be able to comprehend it. I am not matter and energy. I am a process. The process takes place in a medium of matter and energy. When the process stops, I die. Matter and energy still exist, unaffected, BUT MY EXISTENCE IS NO MORE. Edit: I can't believe I broke down and actually made a serious response to this thread. [/ QUOTE ] Not to worry, you can have it on good authority that you'll be back and will not enter into "nonexistance" for "ye are as gods". The other part is the concept of 'unbornness" which clarifies that you were "in existance" before you were born. As a lecture, considering the need/desire for the afterlife as considered by modern man this concept appeals to his egocentric nature and the religious denominations appeal to this egocentricity. Its the "whats in it for me" variety of thought. Appeal only to the self and in extreme we have selfishness personified. What the religious denominations have lost(yes it was predominant throughout the pre Aristotelian world) was the sense of 'unbornness' or the fact that oneself existed prior to birth.This is the world of the "selfless". Nowdays, a person can consider each concept and will certainly have different "feeling experiences"; that of egocentricity(focused inwardly) and that of unbornness(expansive outwardly). Suck on that one,vHawk. |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
