Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

The Personal experience claim of God. part 1

The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 7:17:42 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I like this argument, because I haven't been able to get an attempt of a defend againts it. Its pretty rock solid.

The Word spirit at the time of the bible, simply meant BREATH AIR!> From Greek, right? Byzantium.

This was because when people spoke, they blow air out so they thought that was the feeling of thier spirit. In Pythagorianism, in greek it was bad to eat beans. Because farting meant you were losing your spirits(I say, who wants those spirits anyways.)

Ghost Comes from "violent Air". Because of breath air they thought violent are was the spirits of dead people. Right? ...

Air was mystical to the Greeks because it was invisible and yet it makes sounds and move things. Its harder for us to grasp why they thought that because its common sense now. Kinda.(some people still get spoked by it.)

Those are the is the definitions in the BIBLE. Holy Ghost. aka SPECIAL AIR.
There is no definition for divine of Holy that is not circular.

As we learned more about the world the Definitions got lost, and its never really been substituted there is no real consistent definition of Spirit or Holy Ghost Whatsoever in the western sense. So there is no way to even know if your personal experience was God or not! So you should think twice about the personal claims.
What is that thing that you are claiming?????? (can you explain it with out those words. if so why is that God.?? did any body experience ecto plasm?? <(XD)

Here is some information to help you out.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2012 7:45:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Fool: you will avoid defending but you will recognize it.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2012 12:08:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
smack
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/16/2012 10:59:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Okay Final Q.E.D. round
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/20/2012 4:18:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
bump
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL