But that wasn't your question. You can't ask "how", and then judge the "how" as baseless assertions as if to disqualify the "how", only to ask "how" again (as if to conclude that such isn't good enough as an adequate method). What exactly is the goal here: To prove that there isn't a "how", or to prove that the "how" is ridiculous? Your judgement against "how" lends itself to the fact you accept that there IS a "how", you just don't agree with it, right?
Joshua, you gave me the how. I am not asking how anymore. I am moving forward with the conversation here and saying that I acknowledge your claims for "how". Now I am saying the "how" that you describe is nothing more than baseless assertions. Move forward with me here and simply prove me wrong. That's all you have to do.
For now, I reserve my final judgement on whether or not your "how" actually works. I am extremely skeptical as to whether or not you are actually speaking to your Yah. I admit that, yes. But if you can prove it, using reasonable evidence (again, enough that would satisfy you that I could talk to Zeus) I will acknowledge that your "how" really does work.
No. I’m claiming that “prayer” is a communication tool to WHOMEVER you choose to communicate, and then I provided the means by which you communicate “to Yah”…and if you don’t “dial the right number” (stipulations) you can’t call to the person you desire, no matter how badly you want to (or think you are), right?
Alright, that's fine. Then I will rephrase my question. I will agree with the idea that you, Joshua, define prayer as a communication tool to whomever you choose to communicate. Now you say here that if you do not "dial the right number" then you can't talk to whomever you choose to communicate. I will grant you that this is one possible reason why so few people (I would claim no one) can speak with your Yah. Perhaps only you, yourself can talk to Yah. I don't know if anyone else has ever been able to speak with it, because like I said, this is not a version of God that everyone has been exposed to.
But trade positions with me for a second. Using your definition, if I prayed to Spegmorph the Lizard Dishwasher, then I am, in effect, attempting to communicate with Spegmorph. There are lots of possible reasons that I can not actually communicate with Her, including the idea that I am not "dialing the right number". Another, equally explanatory option for why I can't talk to Spegmorph could be that Spegmorph isn't real. Do you disagree with that? That would also fully explain why I can't talk to Spegmorph.
Now, let's say I came to you and told you that I could
communicate with Spegmorph if I met certain nebulous, vague and unprovable criteria first. Does that claim deserve anyone's attention? Hell yes it does, and I am not being sarcastic. I should explore that option and ask questions about it, don't you think? It is very possible that I know something you don't. That's exactly what I am trying to do here with you and your claims about communicating with Yah. The problem arises when trying to meet your criteria, however. You've made it perfectly clear that I can't meet your criteria. If I maintain a skeptical mind, then I have no hope, no chance. So what is my next logical step? If I can't meet it, tell me who can, and have them prove it. Yet, you seem unwilling to do that. What are you leaving me with here? I have nothing to go on. It's a dead end. I am asking for proof, you aren't giving it, why would I conclude that Yah is anything more than a figment of your imagination? Isn't that the most likely scenario? I mean, SURE you could be right and I just can't meet your criteria. But you aren't willing to provide proof, you aren't willing to show me who CAN talk to Yah, and you say I can't meet your criteria to do it myself. What do you expect me to do here?
I remember my aunts letting my little cousins play with their real landline phones (this is before mobile phones replaced them as the main means of comms.); and the child would pretend as if they were really talking to someone on the other line...of course, my aunt's would have a finger on the hook so that it wasn't in REAL use. But to the child, this REAL phone didn't - and wouldn't - seem like much more than a toy phone, right? That's not to say that the phone wasn't real, but it was improperly used, correct?
Nice story. I already said you could be right and that we aren't dialing the right number (as I said, this seems a bit loony that the most powerful being in the universe will only talk to us if we jump up, spin around, do a backflip and stand on our heads). But you seem to discount that it could also be a toy phone. Or there really could be nobody on the other end of the line. Logically speaking, why would you do that?
A. Because He promised to meet with you if you do it right...
If the bible is a work of fiction, which I fully believe it is, then a fictional character in a book promised to meet with you if you do it right.
C. What's the specific question: "correct in an answered prayer", or "correct in reaching Yah's presence" (because the two are not the same)?
Sorry for the lack of specificity. Let me rephrase. The specific question is... What evidence can you present that shows that you A. meet all the criteria you have outlined, and B. that you are actually communicating in any way, shape, or form with Yah?
D. Yah explains how to get to him (specifically) in the first 5 books of the Torah...not the bible per say; the Torah. And it is readily available to ANYONE who wants to know. The question is, 'will people take the time to read it to know?'
And again, you say this stuff as if it's true. I have read the bible. Front to back. Including all of the Pentateuch. I see no evidence for anything you say, and I really have no reason to believe that any of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy or Numbers are anything more than fictional tales and ancient religious laws that no longer fit our times. And it's not just me here. It seems that the vast majority of the world is also not seeing this Yah that you are seeing. Given that information, is it more likely that you alone have found the secret meaning and the secret way to communicate with Yah, or that you are just another in a very long line of people who thought they had found the secret meaning, and are just as full of bull as the next guy?
Nobody seems to agree with you Joshua. And for good reason.
E. It's not difficult. It's a way of humbling us. Would you agree that this generation is a prideful, self-centered generation (on the whole); so full of ourselves and what we possess (from physical to mental), that even in our daily relationships with EACH OTHER (those we CAN see), we have this attitude of "what have you done for me to warrant ['my respect for you, reciprocation, etc']". Yah's method is not grievous, but it does contend with our selfishness, and in that we find difficulty. "Can one let go of self?"
No, I would not agree with you that this generation is a prideful and self-centered generation on the whole. No I do NOT. Now I am going to get a little personal, because I get so sick of you religious people coming in with all your "oh the world is so awful" bull shit. It's very tiresome. It must be terrible to go through your life thinking about how awful things are all the time. You watch too much TV if you think the world is so bad. Try turning it off once in a while and NOT listening to ANY of the media outlets that feed you ONLY bad stuff all day. Of course you will think the world is bad if ALL YOU GET is negative news about the world. OPEN your eyes. Look around you. There are good people EVERYWHERE. The world is FULL of them. This is an AWESOME time to be alive. The future is wide open. We have the power to make it what we want. If you don't want to help, stay the hell out of our way.
Some people are selfish. There is nothing AT ALL wrong with being a little selfish once in a while. If I work hard for something that I want, then I feel I am entitled to get it. What's so bad about that? I wanted a hybrid car. I got one. Is that so terrible? I wanted a new laptop. I got one. Call the selfish police! I also give blood, I recycle in a state that doesn't require it, when people call out sick at my wifes job I volunteer to help her (AT A FREAKING CHURCH) because I love her and she needs me. This world is loaded with good people. If only we could get rid of all the people like you who just think the world is going to hell in a handbasket, maybe we could make this place a better one to live in.
This method determines humility; who we set as "high" and who's "low"; who's master and who's servant; who's father and who's child; who's creator and who's creation. If it didn't matter "how" one came into Yah's presence, Yah would be no different than any other man-made deity (which only serve man's glory)...which is why I'm a lot frustrated at uneducated, supposed believers (called "christians") who've taken Yah's name [i.e. who say they represent Yah] in vain; spreading a false image without knowing or explaining the truth to others. This leads those like you to logically conclusion that Yah is yet another man-made deity.
Yah is yet another man made diety. All of them are. He's just your man made diety. Your invisible friend, if you will. Everything you say here is just the stuff you have come up with in your mind.
Honestly, the reason that I engaged you when I did (after the first post you made that talked about criteria) was because in that post. you said if you do A,B,C,D, and E, you will be able to communicate with Yah. I thought, "YAY That's darn near a falsifiable statement." That's worthy of consideration. Let's see if he can do it! The problem is, you haven't proven anything. Nothing at all. Your criteria are super vague. Nothing you say has any basis in the reality that we see around us. It's just another failure.
Long story short, if Yah is not real.... then everything you said about masters, servants, fathers, coming in to Yah's presence etc.... is all just words with no meaning whatsoever.
We are meant to come to Yah in the way HE says to come to him BEFORE he makes his presence known. Only then can we ask for anything (within the rules he's established) so that HE and He alone is glorified.
That's a very interesting way to explain why so few people (none that you can prove) can come before Yah in the first place. Just prove what you say for Christ sake. My explanation is that there is no Yah at all, and that's why so few people (none) can come before Yah. If you want to see exactly how I view these 2 sentences of yours... just substitute the word "Spegmorph" in place of "Yah", and you will see how ridiculous I viewed what you wrote here.
But wait a minute here... here you say we CAN ask for anything (again surprise, surprise with specific rules) once we've met the rules? Again, here is another semi-falsifiable statement. If you can find someone, anyone at all, who meets ALL of your criteria, and plays by ALL the right rules, and they ask for something improbable 50 times and they get it all 50 times, then I will be well on my way to believing in your Yah. Stop making it seem like the evidence I would require is unreasonable. That is not unreasonable at all.
F. The spirit cries out for the father. The spirit knows the truth. It's this dang flesh (carnal knowledge) that fights against and prevents it. The spirit - without words - says in truth and desperation, "Father. Please help me"...But the flesh says, "I'm going to pray to you only so you can prove to me that you exist, because otherwise..." Which prayer do you think he'll hear?
Useless words. There is no such thing as a "spirit". My brain fires neurons and I think, act, move, breath, eat, sleep... all of that. You have set up some sort of duality that doesn't exist in reality. Your body is all that you are. There is no "spirit", no "soul". They are nebulous concepts that are defined more by what they are not, than by what they are.
To answer which prayer Yah will hear, the truth is neither one because Yah isn't real... But I will play along and take a guess, although I really have no idea. It's not my invisible sky man, it's yours. You seem to be making this up as you go, so I will pick.... "Father please help me?" Am I right?
If one is desperately seeking his face, he will send someone to teach them the right way ( "hi!" wink, wink, ). BTW - there's no reason for me to join this forum and put myself through all of this unless there was someone here who's spirit is - indeed - asking that very question. I'm under no delusion that my words are going to affect even 1/4 of the readers here.
Your words will affect anyone who reads them. So will mine. I can't speak for everyone here, but to me your words are nothing more than the usual stuff wrapped in a different package.
But do you see what you did here? You said "if one is desperately seeking his face, he will send someone to teach them the right way". It's as if regular seeking isn't good enough. That just doesn't make any sense at all coming from an omnipotent, omniscient being (I assume Yah is both, but I don't know for sure).
I am desperately seeking the truth. If Yah is the truth, then I am seeking that. But I think truth should be sought with skepticism, not gullibility, else the real truth might pass by. I see you coming here and your words are not even remotely convincing at all. In fact, if it weren't so sad, it might be comical. That's just being honest. Now you may sit there and say "well, he's not really desperately
seeking Yah, and he is just denying the obvious", but that's totally not it. I am denying Yah because you have presented your argument with nothing more than assertions and claims. I'm not gullible Joshua. At least I don't think I am. Certainly not with religions.
Part of me can understand your viewpoint (as I still battle with selfishness), but another part of me truly understand why such would be so. Just think about it for a second as a concept: The most powerful, perfect being, who's the "hub of the wheel", "Root of all branches", the source of all forms of creation, the one who's said to be "constant and unchanging" does not need to pursue us, because he's the center-piece. As a concept or perspective or equation...
Q. Which element is in motion; in flux; in the state of change? A.The Wheel...Branches...Variables...Creation.
Q. Which is at rest? A. The Hub...Root...The Constant...The Source.
/sigh. The bottom line is this. You aren't proving that you can communicate with Yah (at least you haven't yet. I'm still waiting but not holding my breath). You aren't proving that Yah exists. All you are doing here is spewing stuff in an attempt to explain why Yah doesn't do this or that, when another, more obvious and better explanatory theory exists and is staring you right in the face. Yah isn't real. That could explain very well why Yah won't communicate easily with us, right? The reason you are forced to say stuff like this is because there is no evidence at all that Yah is real... and you have to cover that up with something in order to maintain your delusion... so this is what you cover it up with. Wheels, branches, hubs and crap.
It is our place to seek first, not his...such is humility.
Either that or it's not real.
lol, now I'm disqualified? This is not my doctrine...and you'd be amazed at how similar your response is with religious members I've talked to. I've been banned from other religious forums for the same accusation; for supposedly making up my own stuff, when it's there for all to read. No problem. But its interesting that you've been engaging me with discussion about "Yah". Through several of your posts, you obviously knew who I was talking about; who Christians incorrectly name, using some of the same defenses you use against them (I suppose). Remember you initially engaged with ME. Even still, if NO deity exists from your perspective, the discussion we've been having is still valid isn't it, even for "my" deity?
I am discussing "Yah" with you because that is what you've decided to name this god of yours. It's simply being polite and not wanting to create a strawman argument that has forced me to use the term "Yah" in the first place. The only reason I know who you're talking about is because that's what you keep saying.
Did you ever think the Christians kicked you out for the same reasons the atheists are saying you're wrong (probably more respectfully and in a nicer way than the Christians)? Because you're simply wrong? You believe you are right. I am just as adamant that you aren't. When that happens, what do you do? Look to the evidence
. I respect your right to think you are correct here. You should respect mine, not dismiss it. That's why I ask for evidence. It's on you to provide it.
And yes, this discussion is valid, even if it is "your" diety. But the reason I am using some of the same defenses I use against Christians is because your god and the Christian versions (all of them) all suffer from the exact same problem. An unbelievable lack of verifiable evidence. You think yours is so different, but it's not.
hehe, you ask as if your belief truly hinges on me, which both you and I know that it doesn't. Your belief hinges on you, not on another... "Prove to me..." Again, who's trying to move forward and who's trying to remain inert? Regardless, I doubt you'd believe me. BTW - I just talked to Bono over the phone...you say, "no you didn't"...I say, "yes I did"...you say, "prove it"...Then I say, "ok one sec.....[on phone for a while talking, hangs up].......see". Obviously I haven't PROVEN anything to you. What is the next logical step for YOU? What would YOU say next? You'd probably say, "Give me His number and I'LL CALL MYSELF!"
I've given you the number to dial exactly as given...but just before you call you say, "this is stupid. Why should I have to call him. He should come to me. You call him and prove that you've talked with him...while you're at it have him visit me to prove to me that he exists, and that you've talked to him."
If you gave me his number, I would call him myself. Why wouldn't I? The same goes for Yah.
My point is, needing a way out, before you're in, is not exactly wanting a way in. Who exactly are you trying to fool? You can't fool the spirit (as in "your OWN spirit"). This isn't a game. Faith is baptism. Baptism is "full immersion"; full committment.
What position are we in to give a timeframe to Yah (back to the whole humility thing)...and even if I give a time frame....let's say a year...would you be willing to stop if it doesn't work?
Another possible reason that I can't talk to Yah is because Yah doesn't exist. You can say it's because I am not fully immersing myself, or that I'm looking for a way out, or I can't give Yah a timeframe... but all of those just cover up for the possibility (no, extremely high probability) that Yah just isn't real.
I don't think people reading my words feel particularly good. You admitted it yourself. The things I'm saying are foreign to even the religions you're used to hearing. But again as far as proof, what say you about my scenario above?
I assume you are talking about the Bono thing? I told you I would call Bono myself. You're saying I can't do that. So I'm saying "who can?" and you are throwing a fit about that too. What other options do I have?
... meh...we'll see which seeds take hold. I'd be interested to be a fly on some member's walls.
I think that would be a very traumatic experience for you.
...but the methods we use (reason and logic) are, themselves, intangible things and yet we believe - without a doubt - that they exist...and not because you have empirical evidence of them, but because of what is affected by them or through them. Can you prove to me that reason or logic exists?
It's not about whether they exist or not. We both know they do. It's about how we apply them to our lives. What I am saying to you is that you aren't applying the same reason and logical standards to your religion that you do to every other aspect of your life. And when you do that, you aren't really looking for what's true. But it's what you have to do in order to maintain your belief. If you started looking at religion through the same reasoning and logic that you used in the rest of your life, you wouldn't believe in Yah anymore.
Honestly...I don't believe you believe this at all (but I can't to prove otherwise).
Why, because you don't understand it? Ah wait, I think I see why you don't believe me..... below.
There is always a cause.
We are just mixing terms up is all. Yes there is always a cause. I thought you were posing the "why" in terms of a "reason" that the universe exists... as if it was put here for a purpose.
You can backtrack any "why" question ever asked, all the way back to the beginning of the universe, but once you reach that spot, the thing that's different between you and I is that I don't claim to know why the universe came to be (although I believe it to be natural). I can say "I don't know" because we have no evidence for what happened before the universe came to be. It is you who put your foot down here and say "Yahdidit". No evidence, no proof, just an assertion. The reason I think it was most likely natural is because everything in our universe that we currently know, has a natural explanation.
The question "why" is as limited as the universe itself (at least by that much), and to say otherwise is to place yourself right smack in the middle of those "stupid" (your word) people of the past who you say couldn't explain anything. Even to say "natural universe" implies a cause and effect relationship. This is what I mean by "most people stop at the 'how'" so that they don't face the question "why". In other words, it's a cop out.
Oh, I do believe in a cause / effect relationship. I just think that's ALL there is. So "why does the universe exist?" is a question that I answer with "I don't know". "How did the universe start?" The evidence points to the big bang. "Why the big bang?" Hell if I know, but I'm pretty sure it was natural.
...The body is (supposed to be) full of (good) bacteria, so such an invasion is by a specifically unwanted bacteria, which leads to the question, "why" was that bacterial allowed to invade the body when other bacteria (and antibodies) should be present to defend against it.
Because the skin (which normally prevents such an invasion by hostile bacteria) has been damaged, and may not have been fully exposed to that particular bacteria (and thus the proper antibodies were never developed by the immune system). Or it might simply be that so many of the bacteria invaded that the body wasn't capable of making antibodies fast enough to keep up with the spread of bacterial growth.
The invading bacteria can not invade if there's no room in the cell, or if the cell is inhospitable to it (alkiline vs acidic).
What are you getting at here?
Your antibiotics TEMPORARILY solved the SIMPTOM of INVASION - by doing what the body was originally supposed to do on its own
No, the symptoms are heat, swelling, redness, pain, etc. The problem is the bacterial invasion that your body can't stop. (please stop writing simptom. It's not funny anymore). Much more often than not, the body does fight off bacterial infections. That's why we don't need medicine for every cut we get.
but the PROBLEM is the lack of good bacteria and "friendly cellular environment", which leads to "why" is the body acidic rather than alkiline. Solve the REAL problem, doctor. Stop treating simptoms.
What the hell are you talking about? This doesn't make any sense at all. What good bacteria is missing? What do you mean the friendly cellular environment is the problem?
"Why" don't you want to go there? lol! This isn't a "setup" for a dead end, Jeff. "Why"? Specifically what's the proof that you and I (and Larissa) exists?
I didn't say it you were setting me up for a dead end. I said it IS a dead end. Philosophy, in this case, leads nowhere. Getting into conversations about proving we all exist is far outside of what we need to do here.
Will you agree that "there is proof that we exist because we affect other things and other people in our world"? In other words, the proof is "The things we affect REFLECT our existence." You NEVER need to personally see me - and I, you - to understand that you and I (and Larissa) exist.
I've seen too many of these Joshua. Maybe you haven't but I have. Maybe you would understand how many times I have seen the philosophy arguments go all over the place and end right where they started from. I'm not going there. I believe most of philosophy is a fools errand. I usually back out of any discussion that goes in the direction of "How do you know I exist?" Take it up with someone else.
Either that or we can simply fast forward to where you want to go with it anyway. You might say something like "just because you can't see Yah, doesn't mean Yah doesn't exist" and then you might follow that little number up with a "creation is the evidence that Yah exists, because His existence is reflected on the world". To that I would argue "creation is only evidence of creation, it says nothing about how the creation came to be or who created it (presumptuous question again)", and you might come back with "if we see a watch on a beach", and I will roll my eyes about the fucking watch again. No thanks.
Just prove you talk to Yah, will you? If not, stop trying, because it's just not cool.