Total Posts:50|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The inherent nature of the soul

Clovis
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 4:25:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:19:52 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

http://youtu.be...

As a nihilist even if you do have a soul it is inherently meaningless.

(:
Words are wind.

A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 4:35:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:25:30 PM, Clovis wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:19:52 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

http://youtu.be...

As a nihilist even if you do have a soul it is inherently meaningless.

(:

If souls existed, then I would like to suck them out of my waiting victims along with their essence.
Clovis
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 4:36:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:35:41 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:25:30 PM, Clovis wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:19:52 PM, Envisage wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

http://youtu.be...

As a nihilist even if you do have a soul it is inherently meaningless.

(:

If souls existed, then I would like to suck them out of my waiting victims along with their essence.

You should collect them in jars... or dolls, dolls would be good.
Words are wind.

A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies. The man who never reads lives only one.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 7:41:10 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Love is the most beautiful purpose that I can think of for living. Every philosophy I have begins with that standard. However, love is purely an emotion. Just like every other emotion we have. Love is not a catalyst for God. It is in its simplest form chemical reactions in our brains to external and internal stimuli. Love can be and is usually the catalyst for generosity, goodwill, charity and kindness. Even in the absence of God, that simple emotion prevails. It does not come from God. It comes from within.

It is impossible to prove that God, the soul, or anything in the spiritual realm is reality. But the "philosophy" presented in the video is lovely.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 9:01:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.

Exactly the answer I was expecting. It is what it is.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 9:17:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 9:01:18 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.

Exactly the answer I was expecting. It is what it is.

As opposed to the theistic view; "It is what it isn't... because I want it to be".
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/9/2015 9:59:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

The love of God is invisible vibrations, which is His creation. We are living His love but during this first age, only a few of us understand our real existence in Him and learn that what we observe in this universe isn't real at all.

I've been testifying to the love of God ( knowledge ) for the past 6 1/2 years and learned exactly how we were created. Only a few chosen believers will listen and learn what I know.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.


Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is trancendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy, Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.

But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God,
God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 3:02:42 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.



Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is transcendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy, Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.
If God transcends that of the tangible world, how have you arrived at the conclusion that God is transcendental utilizing your senses? The same senses that are tangible and demonstrable. If you are unable, then the concept of God remains precisely that, an intangible and useless concept.
But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God,
God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 3:08:56 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 7:41:10 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Love is the most beautiful purpose that I can think of for living. Every philosophy I have begins with that standard. However, love is purely an emotion. Just like every other emotion we have. Love is not a catalyst for God. It is in its simplest form chemical reactions in our brains to external and internal stimuli. Love can be and is usually the catalyst for generosity, goodwill, charity and kindness. Even in the absence of God, that simple emotion prevails. It does not come from God. It comes from within.

It is impossible to prove that God, the soul, or anything in the spiritual realm is reality. But the "philosophy" presented in the video is lovely.

Love is our inherent nature, it is not simply chemical reactions of the brain, if so then why can we not combine chemicals to increase the love we have for each other, This would solve most problems our planet faces, Instead rather, it is a yearning which lies dormant in our hearts until it is activated, which is naturally our purpose, to love and be loved, Without love thier is no development of life for the better, we must love if we are to progress, almost as if we are forced, but forced for our better development.

You say, it is impossible to prove God or the soul, but your conviction has allowed you to disregard any possibilites that may be there, There are many good arguments that point to either, But understanding the delicate nature of such a philsophy mgith be the key.

God and the soul are both subtle subjects,

but when we ask what is the NATURE of the absolute TRUTH we come to the understanding that its two things..
1. Material energy.
2 Spiritual energy.

just like this table is matter or material energy

We living entities, Spirit souls
We are the spiritual energy

THIS BODY IS MY COVERING.

We are all simply just dressed differently.
one has the dress of a dog
one has the dress of a bird
one has the dress of a king
and so on
this body is my covering,
we are covered by two types of dress, the gross covering and the subtle covering

Subtle means there is this thing but i dont see this thing there is.

Just like i know you have got mind,
you know i have got mind
but i dont see your mind, and you dont see my mind.
But mind is there

I know you have got intelligence
And you know I have got intelligence
but I dont see your intelligence, and you dont see my intelligence.
but intelligence is there.

Similarily Identity and consciousness
I know you have consciousness, you know I have consciousness
but I dont see you consciousness, and you dont see my consciousness...

So thats what subtle means and the Spirit soul is even more subtle..

So the human form of life is meant for understanding the spirit soul and the supreme soul.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 3:42:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 3:02:42 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.



Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is transcendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy, Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.

If God transcends that of the tangible world, how have you arrived at the conclusion that God is transcendental utilizing your senses? The same senses that are tangible and demonstrable. If you are unable, then the concept of God remains precisely that, an intangible and useless concept.

God in His personal form ( Spirit ) is trancendent to the creation, but in His impersonal form, by way of material energy is the entire cosmic material manifetsation. Knowledge is revealed by authoritive sources who have an in-depth knowledge of God bu studying the Vedas. God being intangible does not make God useless. God exists on the eternal spiritual platform rather the mutable material platform where everything is temporary.

But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God,
God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 3:53:07 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 3:42:35 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/10/2015 3:02:42 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.



Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is transcendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy, Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.

If God transcends that of the tangible world, how have you arrived at the conclusion that God is transcendental utilizing your senses? The same senses that are tangible and demonstrable. If you are unable, then the concept of God remains precisely that, an intangible and useless concept.


God in His personal form ( Spirit ) is trancendent to the creation, but in His impersonal form, by way of material energy is the entire cosmic material manifetsation.
Again, how have you ascertained this information?
Knowledge is revealed by authoritive sources who have an in-depth knowledge of God bu studying the Vedas. God being intangible does not make God useless.
Appeal to authority this appears to be, which by the way does not validate an argument. How so is God useful? Abstracts such as the numerical value, chemistry, etc.. are useful and practical models. God, on the other hand, offers no value to contemporary society. Perhaps on a personal basis God may offer a superficial means of utility, but to derive such use of the concept requires the profound subscription to faith.
God exists on the eternal spiritual platform rather the mutable material platform where everything is temporary.
This is merely an assertion. Moreover, how would you ascertain this information?
But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God,
God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 4:22:24 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 3:53:07 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 1/10/2015 3:42:35 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/10/2015 3:02:42 AM, intellectuallyprimitive wrote:
At 1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.



Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is transcendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy, Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.

If God transcends that of the tangible world, how have you arrived at the conclusion that God is transcendental utilizing your senses? The same senses that are tangible and demonstrable. If you are unable, then the concept of God remains precisely that, an intangible and useless concept.


God in His personal form ( Spirit ) is trancendent to the creation, but in His impersonal form, by way of material energy is the entire cosmic material manifetsation.
Again, how have you ascertained this information?
Knowledge is revealed by authoritive sources who have an in-depth knowledge of God bu studying the Vedas. God being intangible does not make God useless.

Appeal to authority this appears to be, which by the way does not validate an argument.

Yes, appeal to the authoritive scriptures of the Vedas who have a wealth of Information on God, I like studying them as the philosophy is so rich in knowledge. Maybe you should try it. You have to connect the dots.

How so is God useful? Abstracts such as the numerical value, chemistry, etc.. are useful and practical models. God, on the other hand, offers no value to contemporary society.

You are forgetting all the charitable work done in Gods name

Perhaps on a personal basis God may offer a superficial means of utility,

According to you they are superficial but to others they are very real.

but to derive such use of the concept requires the profound subscription to faith.

Faith is the ultimate arrival, It is always a question of faith, If you remove faith from your life, then you are living without hope, which in-itself is evidently not in the make-up of the philosophical journey of the human race. Hope drives us forward in every conquest, there is so much that has been revealed to us as a speices, And without hope nothing is achieved. The journey is not over. I have hope.

God exists on the eternal spiritual platform rather the mutable material platform where everything is temporary.
This is merely an assertion. Moreover, how would you ascertain this information?

You have to earnestly study the Veda, It explains this clearly and you can then reach your own conclusion, Also all the authortive religions proclaim the same information regarding God, that He is trancendental to creation, It is an assertion where a conclusion is reached by analysis of the true nature of God, which is spirit.

But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God,
God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 10:50:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 3:08:56 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 7:41:10 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Love is the most beautiful purpose that I can think of for living. Every philosophy I have begins with that standard. However, love is purely an emotion. Just like every other emotion we have. Love is not a catalyst for God. It is in its simplest form chemical reactions in our brains to external and internal stimuli. Love can be and is usually the catalyst for generosity, goodwill, charity and kindness. Even in the absence of God, that simple emotion prevails. It does not come from God. It comes from within.

It is impossible to prove that God, the soul, or anything in the spiritual realm is reality. But the "philosophy" presented in the video is lovely.


Love is our inherent nature, it is not simply chemical reactions of the brain, if so then why can we not combine chemicals to increase the love we have for each other, This would solve most problems our planet faces, Instead rather, it is a yearning which lies dormant in our hearts until it is activated, which is naturally our purpose, to love and be loved, Without love thier is no development of life for the better, we must love if we are to progress, almost as if we are forced, but forced for our better development.

You say, it is impossible to prove God or the soul, but your conviction has allowed you to disregard any possibilites that may be there, There are many good arguments that point to either, But understanding the delicate nature of such a philsophy mgith be the key.

God and the soul are both subtle subjects,


but when we ask what is the NATURE of the absolute TRUTH we come to the understanding that its two things..
1. Material energy.
2 Spiritual energy.

just like this table is matter or material energy

We living entities, Spirit souls
We are the spiritual energy

THIS BODY IS MY COVERING.

We are all simply just dressed differently.
one has the dress of a dog
one has the dress of a bird
one has the dress of a king
and so on
this body is my covering,
we are covered by two types of dress, the gross covering and the subtle covering

Subtle means there is this thing but i dont see this thing there is.

Just like i know you have got mind,
you know i have got mind
but i dont see your mind, and you dont see my mind.
But mind is there

I know you have got intelligence
And you know I have got intelligence
but I dont see your intelligence, and you dont see my intelligence.
but intelligence is there.

Similarily Identity and consciousness
I know you have consciousness, you know I have consciousness
but I dont see you consciousness, and you dont see my consciousness...

So thats what subtle means and the Spirit soul is even more subtle..

So the human form of life is meant for understanding the spirit soul and the supreme soul.

Thank you for explaining this. I have nothing to say against this philosophy. To me, love is the highest language. I see it everywhere. Even in the way the animals in my life communicate with me. They understand love because it's a universal thing. It's why I'm a vegetarian. I can't eat sentient and loving creatures. It feels like cannibalism to me. Anyway, stay awesome. You have my respect.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 11:43:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/9/2015 9:17:12 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:01:18 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.

Exactly the answer I was expecting. It is what it is.

As opposed to the theistic view; "It is what it isn't... because I want it to be".

Perhaps love is just a series of chemical reactions, but it's certainly worth living for. Whether you call it the "inherent nature of the soul" or simply a satisfying way of life, it's all the same. It's worth while when it's give and take. It's worth my attention.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 11:48:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 10:57:58 AM, LifeMeansGodIsGood wrote:
The inherent nature of the soul is sinfullness, evil, turned away from and against God.

Those are the words of a tormented individual. Maybe you should reassess your "soul" and learn how to love people again.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
bulproof
Posts: 25,203
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 11:56:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 11:43:11 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:17:12 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:01:18 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.

Exactly the answer I was expecting. It is what it is.

As opposed to the theistic view; "It is what it isn't... because I want it to be".

Perhaps love is just a series of chemical reactions, but it's certainly worth living for. Whether you call it the "inherent nature of the soul" or simply a satisfying way of life, it's all the same. It's worth while when it's give and take. It's worth my attention.

Love is all there is.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 11:58:35 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 11:56:38 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 1/10/2015 11:43:11 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:17:12 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:01:18 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.

Exactly the answer I was expecting. It is what it is.

As opposed to the theistic view; "It is what it isn't... because I want it to be".

Perhaps love is just a series of chemical reactions, but it's certainly worth living for. Whether you call it the "inherent nature of the soul" or simply a satisfying way of life, it's all the same. It's worth while when it's give and take. It's worth my attention.

Love is all there is.

I love you, bulproof :)
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 4:13:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 11:43:11 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:17:12 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 9:01:18 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:50:43 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:44:11 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:36:20 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 8:32:47 PM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Evidence for souls?

Evidence for Heaven?

Evidence for God?

And where does love fit into it? I agree that the OP should present the burden of proof regarding the existence of a soul, however the video is presenting the argument that love is the inherent nature of the soul and that love is our highest thought which is connected to God. What do you think about love being a spiritual thing? Shouldn't the OP also hold the burden to prove that love exists outside of a state of mind dictated by chemicals? I would like to see that argument. It would be interesting.

Love is an emotion, and like other emotions, is based in the physical. It develops based on stimuli and is consistent with activation of certain brain regions and neurotransmitter chemicals.

Agreed. I guess that settles that. But i have another question for you. Love is a state of mind, so that means we should be able to overcome all of the other emotions that are are result of love simply by changing our thought processes? Jealousy, rejection, loss?

I don't know that I'd agree with that. The stimulus for love (anger, hatred, etc.), can be experiential rather than physical, but that doesn't mean that the stimulus doesn't cause the neurotransmitter release. I don't see why would should be able to control love anymore than we can control pain. We can alter our focus, but that doesn't stop the neurotransmitters.

Exactly the answer I was expecting. It is what it is.

As opposed to the theistic view; "It is what it isn't... because I want it to be".

Perhaps love is just a series of chemical reactions, but it's certainly worth living for. Whether you call it the "inherent nature of the soul" or simply a satisfying way of life, it's all the same. It's worth while when it's give and take. It's worth my attention.

Absolutely! When you get right down to it, every experience in our lives is a matter of chemical reactions - the physical reacting to the physical, resulting in our experiences. And this is what many theists don't understand - it doesn't belittle those experiences one little bit! An orgasm is a complex series of chemical reactions, leading to an experience of extreme pleasure (followed by self-deprecation, shame, self-loathing, and feelings of regret... FOR THEISTS). Having flesh-eating acid poured over one's face and eyes is also a chemical reaction. Why theists think that chemistry is a belittling of experiences simply befuddles me. Their images of Heaven and Hell are nothing more than extensions of their chemical experiences in the real world.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 4:35:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.
Philosophy - asking what might be and not caring enough about the answers to accept the failures when they are tested. If you care enough to ask the questions and imagine answers, then care enough to test those answers, and accept it when they're wrong. That's called "science".

Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.
There are experiences and circumstances which can be rationally explained via secular means, or irrationally explained via the rejection of reality. Your "circumstantial evidence", could be claimed as evidence of fairies, or one's own supernatural powers, or the Peanut Butter Curse.

Evidence for Heaven?
NONE

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is trancendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy,
So here again, we see the theist claim that there should be physical evidence of God, for if God possesses material energy, he is part of the material. And if God can affect the physical, there would be physical evidence of that manipulation. There isn't. Therefore, either God does not exist, or God does not affect the physical, meaning he is inconsequential to us, and unworthy of the title "particle", let alone "God".

A God which is devoid of physical evidence is little difference from my magical pocket fairy who can do amazing and wondrous things, but never does anything which can be detected in an valid way. You can't detect that pocket fairy so you can't claim it doesn't exist. More importantly, that pocket fairy can't do anything detectable, making it the equivalent of non-existent.

Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.
Studying "what ifs" is for those of such fragile constitution that they can't allow themselves to consider "what is".

But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,
If God can't be detected, then there is nothing to forget, and nothing to be considered.

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God
No, no... that's assertive bullcrap. Knowledge comes from hard work and intellectual honesty. God comes from ignorance and mental laziness.

God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.
Horse-twaddle. In one breath you claim God doesn't affect the material (physically undetectable), and in the next breath you contradict that claim by saying he gives me what I desire. Name something you desire which doesn't ultimately come back to the physical. Peace and tranquility, perhaps? Those are just chemical reactions in your body. That's one of the reasons illicit drugs are so popular on battlefields. It can provide peace and tranquility in the middle of a bombing raid.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
I'm ready to accept reality for what it is, rather than speaking about it in self-refuting contradictions as theists continue to do. An "all-powerful", "loving" God who provides you with everything you desire... through manipulation of the physical, yet leaves no physical evidence. I can lift entire mountain ranges by thought, transport them thousands of miles, set them atop massive cities, and leave no evidence. Think about it.

NO... actually THINK about it.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
johnlubba
Posts: 2,892
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/11/2015 12:57:38 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/10/2015 4:35:18 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/10/2015 2:40:10 AM, johnlubba wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:58:05 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 1/9/2015 4:02:22 PM, johnlubba wrote:
https://soundcloud.com...

Talking about souls, God and Heaven seems highly dishonest. These are all on the opposite side of an extreme gap which most theists tend to pretend doesn't exist. If they believe, they not only see no point in examining all that should come before that, but pretend there is no need to examine further.

Really,If this what you believe then you have already given up,There is plenty of examination going on in Vedic philosophy,which is arguably the oldest philosophy on the planet and the opposite of what you declare, is the outcome.
Philosophy - asking what might be and not caring enough about the answers to accept the failures when they are tested. If you care enough to ask the questions and imagine answers, then care enough to test those answers, and accept it when they're wrong. That's called "science".

Evidence for souls?

There is circumstantial evidence for the soul which if studied can be either accepted or rejected, I accept it. Your reqest is not answered cheaply, it can not be bought in the market place, but if you seek it earnestly, it will be revealed to you, just likeit has to many others.
There are experiences and circumstances which can be rationally explained via secular means, or irrationally explained via the rejection of reality. Your "circumstantial evidence", could be claimed as evidence of fairies, or one's own supernatural powers, or the Peanut Butter Curse.

Evidence for Heaven?
NONE

Evidence for God?

Asking for empirical evidence for God, is in my opinion a sub form of atheism, there is no empirical evidence of God, And to keep requesting it isn't going to change that, as He is not a matieral object, He is trancendental to the creation, He is aloof from the creation in His personal form but is also a part of the creation in His impersonal form of material energy,
So here again, we see the theist claim that there should be physical evidence of God, for if God possesses material energy, he is part of the material. And if God can affect the physical, there would be physical evidence of that manipulation. There isn't. Therefore, either God does not exist, or God does not affect the physical, meaning he is inconsequential to us, and unworthy of the title "particle", let alone "God".

A God which is devoid of physical evidence is little difference from my magical pocket fairy who can do amazing and wondrous things, but never does anything which can be detected in an valid way. You can't detect that pocket fairy so you can't claim it doesn't exist. More importantly, that pocket fairy can't do anything detectable, making it the equivalent of non-existent.

Again, not something that is easily understood unless you are willing to study theVedic philosophy earnestly.
Studying "what ifs" is for those of such fragile constitution that they can't allow themselves to consider "what is".

But to be honest I don't think you want that, You want to forget God, as if he isn't there, you want to forget Him, and you even go as far as convincing others that He isn't there so they should forget Him also,
If God can't be detected, then there is nothing to forget, and nothing to be considered.

Knowledge, remembrance, and forgettfulness come from God
No, no... that's assertive bullcrap. Knowledge comes from hard work and intellectual honesty. God comes from ignorance and mental laziness.

God is kind, and gives you what you desire, First desire to know God and he will reveal himself to you, He will give you the knowledge by which you can know Him, Or if you want to forget God, then God in his kindness will alsogive you the knowledge on how to forget him, He will give you the knowledge on how to be a first class atheist.
Horse-twaddle. In one breath you claim God doesn't affect the material (physically undetectable), and in the next breath you contradict that claim by saying he gives me what I desire. Name something you desire which doesn't ultimately come back to the physical. Peace and tranquility, perhaps? Those are just chemical reactions in your body. That's one of the reasons illicit drugs are so popular on battlefields. It can provide peace and tranquility in the middle of a bombing raid.

As it stands, in my opinion, you fit into the latter catergory, therefore you are not ready until you decide you are ready.
I'm ready to accept reality for what it is, rather than speaking about it in self-refuting contradictions as theists continue to do. An "all-powerful", "loving" God who provides you with everything you desire... through manipulation of the physical, yet leaves no physical evidence. I can lift entire mountain ranges by thought, transport them thousands of miles, set them atop massive cities, and leave no evidence. Think about it.


NO... actually THINK about it.

Apart from your tone being so condescending,
Your response is so convoluted that it would be a waste my time unravelling all the twists and turns you have including into the topic.

I have no interest in interacting with you, until of course you change your approach and show a civil and mature attitude towards me, as it is now, you have become a hater with a black heart, and I would prefer not to contaminate myself with such discussion.

And for the record I could answer your queries quite easily, but I see no point when your attitude is nothing more than abrasive.