you say “realized” but that is an equally invalid assumption, is it not? You do not know for sure if Yah is “real” or not, do you?

@p-nullifidian well i gotta wonder if wisdom is hidden from the wise maybe doesn’t splain that, or iow we tend to read extremely literally what was meant to be read symbolically, esp the OT Conquest Genre stuff, but I guess id want some examples to give a better reply.

Any “description” of Yah i would be suspicious of though, myself, as that would almost invariably include some person’s interpretation, as an example might show

@bbyrd009 Hidden wisdom? It was the divine hiddenness of God that sealed the deal for me. That along with the infinite caprice of inconsistent action (interventions), both in the present and as described in the book I was taught to accept as truth. Finally, the cop out alibi of any occurrence we are unable to understand is simply an example of God’s mysterious ways, does not satisfy.

@p-nullifidian well, the wisdom is hidden from the wise, and revealed to little children, so i don’t think that’s the same as “esoteric knowledge.” And although we aren’t taught this, i suspect that any “Divine hiddenness” expressed is really just a way to say that “God” should maybe not be taken so literally, prolly should not be defined at all; you were taught to accept those as truth, just like you say, but note how I said “you are Elohim” was surely fallen by the wayside, in the teaching?

The wind is used for a comparo in the Bible, but that doesn’t work for us since we know what “wind” is made of now, right. However, it only takes a little imagination to hear that like they did imo, and come to understand that Yah does not “exist,” meaning there is no “objective evidence,” the holy-of-holies was an empty room even, and we are even assured-in code-not to go looking for any “hidden knowledge” that might save us

As to the last, im not sure in this day and age that there are very many examples of occurrences we are unable to understand? At least on some level i mean; we still don’t know what gravity is maybe, but we do calculate its effects, etc.

Anyway i wonder if ones approach can’t help but be tied to their biases and beliefs? We are invariably first shown the Bible by a “believer,” right? Iow someone who has accepted the tenets of the Cult of Sol Invictus, and has applied them to the Bible? Hey, i reject that myself. Paul purposely avoided the other apostles for the first three years, for that reason.

So, im not trying to get you to actually read the Bible ok, i understand that isn’t for everyone, but i would suggest that you keep an open mind there, and avoid becoming too gnostic, since atheists are just as much believers as any fundamental is, and both are, generally speaking, wise in their own eyes. Manna is not called “what is it?” for nothing, as can be demonstrated in other vv imo.

You might even contemplate tree of knowledge of good and evil, what does that mean to you? I tell you that the Bible prolly does not mean to say anything that you have been told it does, especially if those telling say that eve ate a piece of fruit off a literal tree—that is just willful blindness, imo

@bbyrd009 I've read the Bible, cover to cover, and was raised in a faith where memorizing significant portions was a rite of passage. We were first taught to revere that book, to treat it as holy and to never physically stack another book of any kind on top of it. But it's all noise and bunk to me now. A re-reading of it as an adult led me to the conclusion that the Bible is a book that should be relegated to the cheap fantasy section of any bookstore or library.

In addition to being a nullfidian, I'm a positivist. So in my world view, if there are facts to be learned or knowledge gained from any book or source of any kind, they would be scientifically verifiable and universal. Mysticism, metaphysics and religious allegory are all 'woo' to me.

@p-nullifidian "I've read the Bible, cover to cover, and was raised in a faith where memorizing significant portions was a rite of passage."
so iow you have not really even started reading the bible with ears to hear yet, having been led by believers who are surely in the cult of sol, the blind leading the blind

"We were first taught to revere that book, to treat it as holy"
despite the fact that the bible itself does not claim to be holy? See how you might have been put on the wrong path from jump st? How many of them told you that "you should be ignoring us, like Paul specifically said/did, and be reading for yourself for the first three years?"

"if there are facts to be learned or knowledge gained from any book or source of any kind, they would be scientifically verifiable and universal"
well, so you say anyway, but i suggest that there are many valid concepts that are not verifiable, although you are certainly allowed to become gnostic on any subject you care to, p
test everything, and keep what is good

"Mysticism, metaphysics and religious allegory are all 'woo' to me"
then imo stop reading that into the Bible (or don't), and maybe understand that everyone, jews included, were cult of sol invictus back then, ergo any serious writings would not be refuting that belief on the surface (or they would be killed, basically), hence why your relatives (and mine) still believe that they might attain heaven after death, to become immortals, and etc, all shit that the bible directly contradicts, many times

and my apologies if i am not so patient with ppl who tell me the bible is crap bc their guided reading was crap, which it surely was, but my solution would be to cut out the believers, be they fundamental or atheist, and read for yourself, or find an agnostic even, plenty of them around now, even if you gotta search a little for them

i say this not simply bc there are likely keys to a sort of kingdom, but also bc i can make your believer friends shit their pants and cry, only i do it with their own book, see; Christians are, bar none, the very worst ppl to get an interp of the bible from, imo

@bbyrd009 Thank you for your patient and articulate reply. Don’t you find it ironic that a book that was compiled and interpolated by Christians for Christians would be so uninterpretable to them?

@p-nullifidian well, i'm not sure it's uninterpretable, so much as picking and choosing?
No son of man may die for another's sins
No one has ever gone up to heaven
There is only One Immortal
All go to the same place
No one knows where they go when they die
He who seeks to save his soul shall lose it

etc, on and on, and it's only that i am a stupid-voracious reader that i discovered these vv, since of course no believer will ever repeat them, or prolly even see them. Plus, ppl want to have the hope that they might become immortals i guess?

so yeh, good point, highly ironic too
it’s actually a perfect setup, imo
narcissists who need to believe that they might become immortals have some check on their behavior, while the heir inherits by getting out from under the servants

the story of Jacob making “red stew” for Esau is the same; Jacob ain’t eatin that shit lol, and Esau needs it “or he will die” i mean cmon

@p-nullifidian also, i would argue that that’s how accomplished the authors were; they anticipate their audience, who were—then and now—cult of sol, not meaning “bad” people at all, basically sheep going along with the state religion, trying to get along

but i mean if anything the irony is how can anyone imagine that a book where the main character does nothing but dis the religious, while giving the highest praise to atheists (samaritans) and pagans (Roman centurions) be about religion?

Paul, particularly, makes some amazing misdirectional pieces of literature, pure art imo; has everyone quoting “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord,” which trust me cannot be quoted, and the point of the passage is below that anyway
Pure gold

Keep the noise down! I'm trying to sleep! Some of us have to go to work in the morning.

I’m much partial to the Monty python version myself yeh

well, outside of the parameters of “believer” or non, then, just in your heart of hearts; is it possible that you, yourself, agree that their might be some quasi-conscious Creative Force or whatever, and you’re not very pleased with It?

@bbyrd009 When I shucked off faith in the existence of a God, it had nothing to do with being displeased with it. The question you posed to me, though, is different from the "God" question, and I need to break it down into parts:
(1) Is it possible there's a creative force?
(2) Is it possible this creative force is conscious?
(3) Is it possible to be quasi-conscious?
(4) Is it possible that I'm displeased with such a force?

(1) I suppose this depends on what you mean by "creative." There's scientific speculation that the universe is a zero-sum entity, and that all matter and energy cancels out — literally having come from nothing — so whatever mechanism (e.g., quantum fluctuations) that may have given rise to the universe could be considered a creative force in the purest sense. I wouldn't consider the forces that followed that convert matter and energy from one form to another to be creative in the same way or to the same degree, so I don't think of geological processes that form mountains or biological evolutionary processes that adapt and advance life to be creative.
(2) Is consciousness possible in which way? There are two types of possibility: one based on whether something actually could happen (e.g., could a sasquatch have actually developed) and the other based on our ignorance of events (e.g., could a sasquatch be responsible for the damage to my shed last night). In the first sense, I don't know whether it's possible because that's outside my field of experience and understanding; nobody knows what consciousness is or how it arises, so I don't believe anyone knows whether a fundamental creative force could be conscious. But, because I'm ignorant of those things, the possibility shifts to whether I can say definitively that it couldn't exist. Clearly, I can't disprove the claim so in terms of logical argument it's still a possibility — which has nothing to do with the physical reality, but only my limited understanding. The question I'd send back, though, is what value is added to the question of creation by making the creative force conscious. Why multiply complexities? Generally, in the absence of evidence, I avoid that sort of thinking because the more complexity we needlessly add to a proposition the less likely the proposition is. Regardless, this is a thought experiment, so for the sake of argument I'll say it's possible from the position of my own lack of understanding.
(3) I don't know what "quasi-conscious" is. I don't know what would resemble consciousness but fall short of actual consciousness. For that matter, "consciousness" isn't exceptionally well defined or understood, so using that comparison doesn't provide me with a solid anchor. Regardless, I'd speculate that quasi-consciousness lacks some awareness of self and/or awareness of the universe at large. Because we're talking about a creative force, my inclination is to think of quasi-consciousness as a conscious desire to create but perhaps not much beyond that particular drive. I think this would put the creative force, as discussed thus far, as more akin to the deist view — where creation was kicked off by an architect but allowed to progress unimpeded after set in motion. I'll grant that, in terms of my own ignorance, as another possibility — with the caveat again that this seems to be complexity without any reason to assume it's true.
(4) And this brings us to the heart of your question: is it possible I'm displeased with such a quasi-conscious, creative force? No. Why would I be? If it existed, it isn't aware of me, it might not exist anymore, there's no reason to think it acted with malice or even considered the consequences of its action, and on and on. The creative force you've asked about, and I've done my best to flesh out, is no more worthy of my disdain than the gravitational force if we were to assume a similar degree of quasi-consciousness, where it's intentionally asserting a gravitational field based on the relative mass of bodies; for example, when I injured my leg after rolling my ankle, crashing to the sidewalk pavement, I wasn't angry with gravity, not was I angry with a creative force. Admittedly, I was a little upset with myself for being careless where I stepped, but I took responsibility for my own situation. I never even approached the business who hadn't maintained their driveway properly for recompense for my medical bills — though, in retrospect, I probably should have inquired, even though I had no intention of taking them to small claims court.

Anyway, after all that, it seems clear as mud. I'm not sure I accomplished anything in breaking down the question and working through it systematically. My view remains that I don't accept claims for any God (or gods), and that my rationale has nothing to do with being angry or otherwise displeased with its performance.

@resserts ok, there are a couple points i might ask for some clarification or comment on, “ I don't know what would resemble consciousness but fall short of actual consciousness” my reply would be that “i don’t know” is our current best reply to “where is the overwhelming majority of the universe, and why can’t we find it?” but for now i would ask you how you think order comes from chaos?

@bbyrd009 Order from chaos? How does that relate to being displeased with a potential quasi-conscious creative force? Or have we moved a goal post or two as we play a spirited game of theism talking points?

@resserts so then a "no" for the first, and an "i don't know" for the second?

@bbyrd009 I'm unsure what you're driving at. I'm not interested in being an apologist and speculating on a string of theistic talking point challenges. But, I'll toss a bone here and just say that you're assuming there's chaos from which order arises. That's not a given. Order may be necessary for any system to sustain itself.

@resserts ah well good point, i guess; i had assumed it was a given

I have always found them both to be epic disappointments - all of that cheap waxy chocolate and the drunk fucker with the fake beard and the polyester red suit trying to do a reach around. Yeah, epic disappointments. lol

and what was your reply, if i may ask? I have abandoned their god, too, but they sure don't like my answers much!

@bbyrd009 Since she was my boss at the time I told her that it was none of her damn business. I would have sued her for that, but I had no witnesses.

Very touching. Thanks for sharing.

@Redheadedgammy It makes me aware of how sad it must be to be an elderly person neglected. I would do some volunteer myself but, a random stranger just going in there? They'd think I'm a conman. And some probably would give away their life savings. Why? They want companionship that bad of any type. I know my reason for not doing so is a selfish one. I cannot take any more ridicule. I've reached critical mass.

you got jokes lol, yeh

right?

proselytizing will get you jailed in Israel, and many other countries...if you arent killed first, that is

@bbyrd009 In Arab countries like Saudi Arabia most definitely [insider.com] Your statement about Israel is apparently incorrect [lawoffice.org.il]

@barjoe ok so Christians proselytizing in Israel will get deported at least, if they are not killed first, and this is from experience on the ground ok

from your link “This is because Christian proselytizing is illegal...”

@bbyrd009 I know otherwise. Show me references to prove what you're saying regarding deportation is true.

@barjoe from your article,
“ EXPULSION OF TOURISTS FROM ISRAEL DUE TO MISSIONARY ACTIVITY

Visitors who enter Israel with a B-2 tourist visa usually receive an approval to stay in Israel for 3 months. However, in certain circumstances, even after entry to Israel, a tourist may find himself arrested by the Israel immigration police. Following the detention the visitor is brought before an immigration tribunal and handed an expulsion order out of Israel. Thereafter the immigration authority workers will proceed to fly this person back to their country as fast as possible. It has happened in the past that tourists visiting Israel have been expelled from Israel due to allegations regarding missionary activity. These cases usually involve the tourist participating in a public missionary campaign with a high profile organization. This activity may attract resistance from the local public and complaints to the police. Even though the allegations may be false, it’s extremely difficult to stop the expulsion process once it starts”

@barjoe but don't get me wrong joe, i understand that laws are enforced selectively, or we might be operating under diff definitions of "proselytizing" even...what was your experience?

Well at least that makes sense.

i notice that we deem many things horrible that end up serving a purpose; forest fires and viruses spring to mind...of course that doesnt really mean much for an individual in the moment i guess.

ha you, as it turns out
I said “you are elohim”

ah, existence, yeh.
Dont be too sure though, at least imo; just bc you believe that a Supreme Being does not "exist" does not mean they dont, right

@bbyrd009 True, a god could exist. But, why does god play hide and seek? If there is a god, then why doesn't it come out of hiding?

@xenoview my guess there would be that we are in the trees, and don’t see the forest, maybe? So a pertinent q might be “how does order come from chaos?” to answer that, or there are some others

@bbyrd009 I quit looking at the tree when I stopped being religious, I started seeing the forest when I became an atheist.

@xenoview ah well wadr self-assessments are...what they are, and rarely more, lol. I mean, why does an “atheist” come to an agnostic site? Etc. Even why do you choose an owl as an avatar. So maybe a reply to the order coming from chaos thing would be more productive

not sure if you’re laughing at part 1or part 2

ya, that one is a toughie i guess. Persons in Yah i dunno, but i guess ppl tend to personify their deities, ya. I suspect that 5 year olds with cancer are just paying for their parents choices, but i don't know that that is true in every case. Anyway thx for the input

@bbyrd009 Did you make it past the third grade? I don’t want to be overly critical, but fuck man. Spellcheck dings all of us every once in a while, but not every third word. Damn.

@CourtJester i find it to be a great litmus test

the gnostic position has already been made clear i guess, ty

ah well im not really a believer, like in the sense of how we define "Christian" now anyway, but i am maybe Yahwist or something. I thought it was a fair q myself

Why does agnostic.com appeal to you if you are gnostic atheist? If i may ask

@bbyrd009 you best grab a napkin, you have more shit drooling out of your mouth, it's never a good look, no matter how much you try and convince yourself that it's chocolate.

@SnowyOwl well im just asking questions here owl, and you come here of your own free will, right. How does order come from chaos? Is how i might have put it to you

hmm. i dislike the "who" thing bc ppl tend to literally look for a person-type being, being so literal-minded and all...so i might ask that differently, something like "are you just mad at the way things are," or "mad at reality" maybe, dunno.

@bbyrd009 replace the "o" with "at".

@oldFloyd maybe, but the q doesn’t basically change?