In case of emergency, do not even ask (pray already _)

[Gottservant]

Hi there,

So this is an interesting proposition I believe: atheistically it has been said "don't panic" explains almost everything in the end.

However, wisely I would say "in case of emergency, do not even ask (pray already _)" - meaning, you barely have enough time to do anything, let alone write, repent, retract or such as would give you only life from living death.

Simplistically, this means panic in any such context as was said - is the worst possible example of anything being advice, one way or the other (let the reader, stop and look back, at the most useful construction - that he may believe to have kept at least one ("prayer" (?))).

(short answers to "why does the title interest you?", being more often than not a ruse to impale you)

((impaling you being as nothing kingly, even to a king of every kingly what when or whyever))

 

[GrowingSmaller]

There a muslim saying "tie and rely" The question was should one tie ones camel, or rely on God?

Obviously things are better if they dont reach panic stations. Whether its red alert in national security, or walking home on a dark halloween night.

I trained in fighting arts for a while, and even there the "fight or flight" style panic fighting was not expected. Fighting, even, is an art or a craft which one has to learn. Self control and calculation are very much parts of warfare.

Yet, all the same, we have evolved a panic response, or so it seems. Probably theres a trade off. It is alerted in times when its counterproductive, and on the other hand sometimes we may really need it.

If you are wanting to deal with panic or ongoing anxiety then distraction is agood thing. Remove yourself from the suituation, or remove your heart (ie thought processes) from the matter of concern.

Flowers, trade winds, calm and peaceful heart...

Theres an aspect of planning: the time and importance (iirc) table.

Things can be important with low or high amounts of time, and unimportant with low or high amounts of time. The wise person deals with the important things which are pressing, and leaves (or delegates rsponsibility to others) the less important and less pressing.

Philosophicaially this reflects that the idea of fact and valuues are intermixed. Its like a currency, money has value because things have value for us as agents with needs.

The King? Well I am reminded of Kierkegaards "knight of infinity", the mention of which in a book of his was the starting point of where he began to be incomprehensible. IIRC he was a psychotic. Maybe thats why his remarks on subjective truth emerged. What was true for him, he knew, would not be accepted as "true" by mainstream society.

In his book in the divided self, R D LAing looked into psychosis existentially. The "self" was true for the person with delusions, and false for the rest of society. I am reminded of creationism. Scientific skeptics will argue that people have a "God delusion" etc, and are failing to adjust their beliefs to the objective truths believed by contemporary know its.

But yes the King, dawn of nighthood, the silver coats of mail and the monlit - they are romantic images we have all learned to love...

"When a knight won his spurs in the storied of old" the hymn we sung art school. A tale of the Crusades. Yet now we know much more, there has been progress in philosophny and science too. Can there be progress in religion though? Is "God" permanently veiled, or can the heart travel as a stranger to the world...

But maybe that takes the mind back to the --- wait, silicone chips and inter galactic communication. W have lift off, A okay?

How many billion stars was that again?

Look, a pale blue dot does not make life insignificant. That would be to saw off the branch on which we sit! Another saying, this time African: Pray, but sail away from the rocks.

 

[talitha]

I think Gottservant is actually e.e.cummings.

 

[Gottservant]

There is something brilliant about almost everything you said, Growingsmaller.

I had trouble grasping the structure of your response, but I doubt that diminishes the last quote, the allusions to motion (trade winds, calm, etc) with a finite definition further contextualized and so with.

I think you started to answer a question about astral travel at some point "can a heart travel" but I am not sure.

(as you can see from the strands he pulled together, there is little poetically missing at first blush, but by the second point no establishment of and then no definitive question or answer - I shared the quote with my mother regardless).

 

[Ana the Ist]

There a muslim saying "tie and rely" The question was should one tie ones camel, or rely on God?

Obviously things are better if they dont reach panic stations. Whether its red alert in national security, or walking home on a dark halloween night.

I trained in fighting arts for a while, and even there the "fight or flight" style panic fighting was not expected. Fighting, even, is an art or a craft which one has to learn. Self control and calculation are very much parts of warfare.

Yet, all the same, we have evolved a panic response, or so it seems. Probably theres a trade off. It is alerted in times when its counterproductive, and on the other hand sometimes we may really need it.

If you are wanting to deal with panic or ongoing anxiety then distraction is agood thing. Remove yourself from the suituation, or remove your heart (ie thought processes) from the matter of concern.

Flowers, trade winds, calm and peaceful heart...

Theres an aspect of planning: the time and importance (iirc) table.

Things can be important with low or high amounts of time, and unimportant with low or high amounts of time. The wise person deals with the important things which are pressing, and leaves (or delegates rsponsibility to others) the less important and less pressing.

Philosophicaially this reflects that the idea of fact and valuues are intermixed. Its like a currency, money has value because things have value for us as agents with needs.

The King? Well I am reminded of Kierkegaards "knight of infinity", the mention of which in a book of his was the starting point of where he began to be incomprehensible. IIRC he was a psychotic. Maybe thats why his remarks on subjective truth emerged. What was true for him, he knew, would not be accepted as "true" by mainstream society.

In his book in the divided self, R D LAing looked into psychosis existentially. The "self" was true for the person with delusions, and false for the rest of society. I am reminded of creationism. Scientific skeptics will argue that people have a "God delusion" etc, and are failing to adjust their beliefs to the objective truths believed by contemporary know its.

But yes the King, dawn of nighthood, the silver coats of mail and the monlit - they are romantic images we have all learned to love...

"When a knight won his spurs in the storied of old" the hymn we sung art school. A tale of the Crusades. Yet now we know much more, there has been progress in philosophny and science too. Can there be progress in religion though? Is "God" permanently veiled, or can the heart travel as a stranger to the world...

But maybe that takes the mind back to the --- wait, silicone chips and inter galactic communication. W have lift off, A okay?

How many billion stars was that again?

Look, a pale blue dot does not make life insignificant. That would be to saw off the branch on which we sit! Another saying, this time African: Pray, but sail away from the rocks.

There is something brilliant about almost everything you said, Growingsmaller.

I had trouble grasping the structure of your response, but I doubt that diminishes the last quote, the allusions to motion (trade winds, calm, etc) with a finite definition further contextualized and so with.

I think you started to answer a question about astral travel at some point "can a heart travel" but I am not sure.

(as you can see from the strands he pulled together, there is little poetically missing at first blush, but by the second point no establishment of and then no definitive question or answer - I shared the quote with my mother regardless).

Get a room you two lol.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

"The reason I said infinite was because the reason, so to speak, was not in the realm of spirit. Hence, because..."

shut up! Fools need attention. Otherise its cognitive detention.

The latest invention is not worth a mention. If its heartless, then its oblivious to any good ostention.

A room? Thats a slander and you know it Subhanna Allah!

Its just he helped me solve the issue of heaven. A month or two ago in another thread.

Atheists may be happy but theyre in a matrix. Or a lower version of paradise called " MMRPG" where a computer program analogue of their ideal self is in charge.

So they cant be in heaven, IMO.

Its only with a 'kinky' God (ie from the "Christian perspective, theyll be angelic castratos worshiping a lamb) that true bliss exists.

Convert now, befor the poles switch and the sun rises in the west!

Of course in the matrix the sun is an illusion. hence, also flowers, trees, eyes. Call that heaven? No, if real beauty is substantial, even if spirutually enfused. Not a CPU illusion or whatever. Or a glitch in hyperspace. Although, Allah can provide for that, if you so desire...

 

[GrowingSmaller]

When people are isolated from human contact, their mind can do some truly bizarre things, says Michael Bond. Why does this happen?

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140514-how-extreme-isolation-warps-minds

 

[GrowingSmaller]

"THE LAST DAY WILL NOT COME UNTIL THE SUN RISES FROM WHERE IT SETS. When people see it, people on earth have faith." (Sunan Ibn Majah, volume 9, p. 4362)

Muslims have many friends, hence, all else being equal, RAA (the opposite - to Islam - is absurd)!!!

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Now, if you want that in Aristotolean, you ll have to ask.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"The reason I said infinite was because the reason, so to speak, was not in the realm of spirit. Hence, because..."

shut up! Fools need attention. Otherise its cognitive detention.

The latest invention is not worth a mention. If its heartless, then its oblivious to any good ostention.

A room? Thats a slander and you know it.

Its just he helped me solve the issue of heaven. A month or two ago in another thread.

Atheists may be happy but theyre in a matrix. Or a lower version where a computer program analogue of their ideal self is in charge.

So they cant be in heaven, IMO.

Its only with a 'kinky' God (ie from the "Christian perspective, theyll be angelic castratos worshiping a lamb) that true bliss exists.

Convert now, befor the poles switch and the sun rises in the west!

Relax...it was a joke. You seem to be the only person who understands Gott, and he's the only one who understands you. I literally can't make sense of 95% of what you posted here. For example...

"Atheists may be happy but theyre in a matrix. Or a lower version where a computer program analogue of their ideal self is in charge."

I'm guessing you're referring to The Matrix? With Keanu Reeves? A "computer program analogue of my ideal self is in charge"? In charge of what?

Maybe you could reword that whole statement so it makes sense to someone who hasn't seen The Matrix. That way, you'll be using words to directly explain whatever it is that you mean instead of a series of disconnected metaphors that only you understand.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Ok good atheists go to heaven, otherwise God is evil. God is good, so that cant be the case. Hence they go to "a heaven".

But as atheists, they dont believe in God.

They would have their "self and world" concept wrong...

They wouln't understand where they were, and hence would probably believe the afterlife to be a computer glitch, or some kind of simulated environment etc.

As in the film the Matrix, or as in the thought experiment "the briain in a vat" etc.

Their world concept would be a "skeptical alternative" (to use a technical term from epistemology) - not to scientific realism (as it is usually applied) - but to the truth of God, judgement, heaven and hell etc.

If you dont know where you are, you cant really "be there" in a full sense of the word. You would live in a false cognitive world, a "alternative" to the true beauty of reality.

So, even if in "a heaven" being atheists their eschatological cosmology etc would be wrong. ie their conception of end times and heaven etc would be all scientific, or philosopic and miss out on the essential religious element required for accurate awareness.

They would think "this seems like judgement etc" but wouldnt believe in it. No. They'd think, nice, ie this is pleasing, indeed theyd probably think the master of this sumulation (ie a skeptical alternative to the reality of their true position in the state of affairs) must be like me (ie their ideal self). Or they would think, "I am in x y z an alternative to the truth of theistic judgement and reward" etc.

yet, pause for thought... (the meaning of the term "selah" is paus efor thought, it is generally agreed).

Who would you trust, the *real God* (benign, all capable of meeting and surpassing every desire) or an illusory phantom based on freudian psychoanalysis and computer age philosophical technicalities?

The concept and the object wouldnt not be aligned fully. Unless they believed.

Hence their witness to truth would be errant. because God far transcends ideal self. The ideal sef is a Freudian term for who we would be in an ideal world.

And heaven far transcends the "matrix" as an ideal. because the creator and contoller wuold be percieved accurately, we would be there "in spirit" if you see what I mean....


...because God far transcends an ideal self that is, his workings are superior to those of any would be computer programmer image based on our brief temporal existence and acquaintance with morally fallible self and others.

Ie God is beyond what we can conceive of, in terms of "super scientists" or "master programmers" etc.

If you have an errant witnes to truth youre not really there in toto. Hence as atheists, they would by definition miss the mark (if faith is in fact veridical, true, indicitave of reality as it is). Their "heaven" would be a counterfit. It would in fact be plagues by illuusion, even though they did not know it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

"THE LAST DAY WILL NOT COME UNTIL THE SUN RISES FROM WHERE IT SETS. When people see it, people on earth have faith." (Sunan Ibn Majah, volume 9, p. 4362)

Muslims have many friends, hence, all else being equal, RAA (the opposite - to Islam - is absurd)!!!

What's "the opposite to Islam"?

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ok good atheists go to heaven, otherwise God is evil. God is good, so that cant be the case. Hence they go to "a heaven".

But as atheists, they dont believe in God.

They would have their "self and world" concept wrong...

They wouln't understand where they were, and hence would probably believe the afterlife to be a computer glitch, or some kind of simulated environment etc.

As in the film the Matrix, or as in the thought experiment "the briain in a vat" etc.

Their world concept would be a "skeptical alternative" (to use a technical term from epistemology) - not to scientific realism (as it is usually applied) - but to the truth of God, judgement, heaven and hell etc.

If you dont know where you are, you cant really "be there" in a full sense of the word. You would live in a false cognitive world, a "alternative" to the true beauty of reality.

So, even if in "a heaven" being atheists their eschatological cosmology etc would be wrong.

They would think "this seems like judgement etc" but wouldnt believe in it. No. They'd think, nice, the master of this sumulation (ie a skeptical alternative to the reality of thir true position in the state of affairs) must be like me (ie their ideal self). Or theysd think, x y z an alternative to the truth of theistic judgement and reward etc.

The concept and the object wouldnt not be aligned fully. Hence their witness to truth would be errant. because God far transcends ideal self.

If you have an errant witnes to truth youre not really there in toto. Hence as atheists, they would by definition miss the mark (if faith is in fact veridical, true, indicitave of reality as it is).

Don't you think an atheist, upon reaching the afterlife, would probably no longer be an atheist?

For me at least, the existence of a "heaven" would qualify as pretty good evidence of god's existence. I'm just guessing...but I think a majority of atheists that post here on C.F. feel the same way.

Or do you think that we're all atheists because of some reasons that have nothing to do with evidence?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Thanks ana!!!

 

[Ana the Ist]

Thanks ana!!!

Were you seriously trying to figure out how that would work?

I've got problems with understanding heaven too...

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Don't you think an atheist, upon reaching the afterlife, would probably no longer be an atheist?

Well that would be a logical impossibility, A and not A.

For me at least, the existence of a "heaven" would qualify as pretty good evidence of god's existence. I'm just guessing...but I think a majority of atheists that post here on C.F. feel the same way.

Or do you think that we're all atheists because of some reasons that have nothing to do with evidence?

An atheist is an atheist, just as a triangle is a triangle. An atheist cannot believe in God. So, if there is a heaven for actual atheists, it would by definition not be a "theistic heaven" for them.

As God transcends evidence (i.e. it is claimed facts of faith are not falsifiable or verifiable) then why would atheists treat disbelief as defeasible (IIRC a technical term meaning able to be overcome by evidences). Atheism cannot be "defeated by evidence" if it is an a priori attitude.

Ad all this talk of "untestability" and "unfalsifiability" indicates just that, athism is (or can be) an attitude come what may.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people. Koran 62:6

How could he, for that would be to equate God with the devil...?

"Allah does not guide the Unbelieving people" etc etc etc

 

[Ana the Ist]

Well that would be a logical impossibility, A and not A.An atheist is an atheist, just as a triangle is a triangle. An atheist cannot believe in God. So, if there is a heaven for actual atheists, it would by definition not be a "theistic heaven" for them.

As God transcends evidence (i.e. it is claimed facts of faith are not falsifiable or verifiable) then why would atheists treat disbelief as defeasible (IIRC a technical term meaning able to be overcome by evidences). Atheism cannot be "defeated by evidence" if it is an a priori attitude.

Ad all this talk of "untestability" and "unfalsifiability" indicates just that, athism is (or can be) an attitude come what may.

You're making this harder for yourself than necessary. You're right, an atheist cannot be an atheist and not an atheist at the same time. However, an atheist can change their mind and no longer be an atheist...that's the situation I'm describing.

If you think there's no evidence for god...that's fine. You're not the only person with a view on this though. There are plenty of people who believe that not only is there evidence....but there's lots of evidence.

In the OT and the NT god practically hands out evidence of his existence on every other page. If those stories are true...then there's really no reason he cannot do the same right now for every atheist around the world. The fact that he does not give an atheist any evidence doesn't mean he can not give an atheist evidence.

The overwhelming majority of atheists that I know are simply atheists because there's no evidence of a god.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people. Koran 62:6

How could he, for that would be to equate God with the devil...?

"Allah does not guide the Unbelieving people" etc etc etc

I don't see what that has to do with my post.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Ok, sounds good. I was mainly aiming at people who regard religious ideas as "nonsense" and "unfalsifiable". I think that ultimateluy theres no proof, and no absolute test for an "unseen God", but as you say there can be indications. But whether that would be God is down to faith. We live in a "plural world" in that it is open to dozens of such interpretations as brain in a vat etc. We have no objective test so in a sense we are free to choose no matter what happens. I am interested in Koran and this says that the universe has its "signs" (ayat).