Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Atheist excommunicated after rejecting transubstantiation


Grim Reaper 6

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Or a humble simple I truly don’t know. 
 

I know, but it doesn't make good copy.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

For the individual, "God" is a conceptual entity and only exists at sufferance of the individual.

In other words, on the individual's side of the concept ... 

~

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

There is a point one hits a wall and all that is left is an I don’t know. We don’t have a way to hypothesize the inquiry as far as is there or isn’t a god. 
 

 

I'd say that's a crossroads. I took the athiests path and haven't looked back.

At that point I find one can reject all and wrap belief like a security blanket ever tighter about oneself.

One can decide the path to real information is too hard, or is shaping up to something they didn't want to find.

On can decide god might or not exist via a philosophical outlook that they find appealing

Or one can immerse in knowledge and wonder how the concept stays afloat.

There's many paths to take at that crossroads. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I'd say that's a crossroads. I took the athiests path and haven't looked back.

At that point I find one can reject all and wrap belief like a security blanket ever tighter about oneself.

One can decide the path to real information is too hard, or is shaping up to something they didn't want to find.

On can decide god might or not exist via a philosophical outlook that they find appealing

Or one can immerse in knowledge and wonder how the concept stays afloat.

There's many paths to take at that crossroads. 

Well said. :wub:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, joc said:

It's fine if you disagree...I would gather that most do.  My assessment of reality is a bit different than the status quo:

Time only exists in the human mind.  There is no 'time passing by'.  We measure everything.  We are obsessed with measuring things...how fast, how slow, how large, how small, how near, how far, how new,  how old.   But the reality is that everything in the entire universe is constantly changing.  Nothing is static.  There is no 'non-change' event.  Therefore, if there is no static point from which to measure...then 'time' is an illusion.  Time can only exist inside the mind of the perceiver.  Show me 'time'.  Point to it...it's like 'fear'...it is a mental concept and as far as we know, only a 'human' mental concept.

Hey you make an interesting point but there is a static point that all things started from including time. The Big Bang was the beginning everything started with singularity, all true measurements of time started with explosion. Now, like I said your theory is very cool, and only science discounts it. To further prove my point, I agree completely that change is constantly occurring, but with a unit of measure ( Time ) how would we ever be certainly that was true. 

Hey, it's a cool idea and I am personally unable to dispute it, but science doesn't agree with. 

Below is a paper from 1908 that certainly agrees with you, thought you may enjoy it. 

The Unreality of Time: https://philarchive.org/archive/MCTTUO

The paper below from 2002 disputes the paper above directly

Time, Reality & Experience https://personal.lse.ac.uk/ROBERT49/teaching/ph103/pdf/Dyke2002.pdf

Take Care my friend :tu:

Edited by Manwon Lender
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2021 at 2:54 PM, Sherapy said:

Getting this is enlightenment as far as I’m concerned. We really are not as important as we think we are in our heads. No one has to like us, it is that simple. 

If there was ONE single lesson we could teach youth these days, it would be the freeing nature of coexistence without surrender of one's principles, and the sure knowledge that EVERYONE has an absolute right to be themselves.  Lord, if I could have grasped this in my teens, I could have ruled the world :D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, third_eye said:

In other words, on the individual's side of the concept ... 

~

God is either a creation or a realization of human consciousness. Faith and belief are perceived nowhere else. Either spirit manifests flesh, or flesh manifest spirit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, and then said:

If there was ONE single lesson we could teach youth these days, it would be the freeing nature of coexistence without surrender of one's principles, and the sure knowledge that EVERYONE has an absolute right to be themselves.  Lord, if I could have grasped this in my teens, I could have ruled the world :D

Coexistence and individuality don't gel. One person's right is easily another's trespass. That's why you and I have many disagreements. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ThereWeAreThen said:

Don't really trust this "god", he killed off alot of people who p***ed him off. You sure he loves his enemies? Sure Lucifer wouldn't agree. :lol:

In Abrahamic faiths it is only Christianity that teaches that God is wholly good.

In the others God uses both good and evil to get you where you need to be. Meaning he uses both the carrot and stick technique on you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

God is either a creation or a realization of human consciousness. Faith and belief are perceived nowhere else. Either spirit manifests flesh, or flesh manifest spirit.

Or it is all just scratchings on cave walls... since " around 13,000 BCE "

Quote

breuilsorcerer2.jpg

...

Quote
12 Jun 2020 — The strange and controversial prehistoric 'sorcerer' of the Cave of the Trois Frères ... Very close to the French town ...
 
 
 
The Sorcerer (cave art) The Sorcerer is one name for an enigmatic cave painting found in the cavern known as 'The Sanctuary' at ...
 
 
 
27 May 2020 — The Sorcerer is one name for an enigmatic cave painting found in the cavern known as 'The Sanctuary' at Trois-Frères, ...

~

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Or it is all just scratchings on cave walls... since " around 13,000 BCE "

...

~

 

More like 1.5 million years or more. We have been human for a very long time. Spirit begat flesh and that is a wonder, but if flesh begat spirit, then that is a wonder of wonders. Of course, Buddha, Christ and Mohammed could all just be figments of our over fertile imaginations, prancing shapeshifter shaman, high on psychotropic mushrooms, not withstanding.

Edited by Hammerclaw
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

More like 1.5 million years or more. We have been human for a very long time. Spirit begat flesh and that is a wonder, but if flesh begat spirit, then that is a wonder of wonders. Of course, Buddha, Christ and Mohammed could all just be figments of our over fertile imaginations, prancing shapeshifter shaman, high psychotropic mushrooms, not withstanding.

Non sequitur of nom de plume... They're only useful as long as they're useable for the purpose they were created for... 

Quote

The Maid of Orléans

...

I am not afraid... I was born to do this.
 
If I am not, may God put me there; and if I am, may God so keep me.
 
Of the love or hatred God has for the English, I know nothing, but I do know that they will all be thrown out of France, except those who die there.
 
Children say that people are hung sometimes for speaking the truth.
 
I was in my thirteenth year when I heard a voice from God to help me govern my conduct. And the first time I was very much afraid.

~

Joan was barely seventeen when she started her divine military career, she spent about twenty months on her campaign, of which for seven she was imprisoned and in chains until it was deemed better for manknd to have her burned alive. 

Dear God indeed... 

~

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, third_eye said:

Non sequitur of nom de plume... They're only useful as long as they're useable for the purpose they were created for... 

~

Joan was barely seventeen when she started her divine military career, she spent about twenty months on her campaign, of which for seven she was imprisoned and in chains until it was deemed better for manknd to have her burned alive. 

Dear God indeed... 

~

She chose to be, according to the saga after being given the stark choice of denying God or immolation. She chose the former, out fear. The prison guards, no longer in fear of her holiness, raped her repeatedly. She then reaffirmed her Faith and accepted her fate and was burned at the stake.

Edited by Hammerclaw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

She chose to be, according to the saga after being given the stark choice of denying God or immolation. She chose the former, out fear. The prison guards, no longer in fear of her holiness, raped her repeatedly. She then reaffirmed her Faith and accepted her fate and was burned at the stake.

How convenient for the "holy" men doing "God's" work eh? 

Nonetheless, links would be appreciated...

~

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, third_eye said:

How convenient for the "holy" men doing "God's" work eh? 

Nonetheless, links would be appreciated...

~

 

Just Google Joan of Arc. There are hundreds of links with takes and sources on the topic. Many say she was terrified of rape, which is why she wore men's clothing. You can do your own sifting and weigh the evidence and accounts. She recanted her claims of being in contact with God spent a night or so back in her cell. Then she withdrew her recanting. The Lady of Lorraine's story is subject to what one gleans from the accounts or what one wants to believe. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Just Google Joan of Arc. There are hundreds of links with takes and sources on the topic. Many say she was terrified of rape, which is why she wore men's clothing. You can do your own sifting and weigh the evidence and accounts. She recanted her claims of being in contact with God spent a night or so back in her cell. Then she withdrew her recanting. The Lady of Lorraine's story is subject to what one gleans from the accounts or what one wants to believe. 

Yes, not quite "raped repeatedly" as you mentioned is it? 

Not sure if that's your over rife imagination or some reimagined account of her life you googled, that's why I asked. 

Better and reliable sources, if you're really interested... 

Quote
This publication of Mark Twain's book is packaged with Joan of Arc's trial transcripts. Joan of Arc's fascinating life ended.
 
 
 
 
"The American Historian of Joan of Arc Makes His Best Compliments," But Unable to Meet French ... See full images and transcript.
...
 

...

Just recently read Helen Castor's wonderful research... 

Quote
Acclaimed historian Helen Castor brings us afresh a gripping life of Joan of Arc. Instead of the icon, she gives us a living, breathing young woman; a roaring girl fighting the English, and taking sides in a bloody civil war that was tearing fifteenth century France apart. ... Google Books
Originally published: 2014
Author: Helen Castor
Genre: Biography

Highly recommend... 

~

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, third_eye said:

Yes, not quite "raped repeatedly" as you mentioned is it? 

Not sure if that's your over rife imagination or some reimagined account of her life you googled, that's why I asked. 

Better and reliable sources, if you're really interested... 

...

Just recently read Helen Castor's wonderful research... 

Highly recommend... 

~

 

Nice list, but since you doubt what I'm saying, you  obviously haven't read much about her, other than skim through your list of sanitized accounts. Can't have real history deprive the Church of one of it's "Sacred Virgins." Dig deeper.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Hey you make an interesting point but there is a static point that all things started from including time. The Big Bang was the beginning everything started with singularity, all true measurements of time started with explosion. Now, like I said your theory is very cool, and only science discounts it. To further prove my point, I agree completely that change is constantly occurring, but with a unit of measure ( Time ) how would we ever be certainly that was true. 

Hey, it's a cool idea and I am personally unable to dispute it, but science doesn't agree with. 

Below is a paper from 1908 that certainly agrees with you, thought you may enjoy it. 

The Unreality of Time: https://philarchive.org/archive/MCTTUO

The paper below from 2002 disputes the paper above directly

Time, Reality & Experience https://personal.lse.ac.uk/ROBERT49/teaching/ph103/pdf/Dyke2002.pdf

Take Care my friend :tu:

The problem I have with your 'singularity' is that it is an assumption.  "
Why does science conclude that something occurred from nothing?  We do not know the cause of the Big Bang.  We do know there are Black Holes but we don't know what happens to all that energy pulled into the black hole.  My assumption is that the energy is being released into a 'new' universe(s).  Singularity demands a beginning.  Our minds cannot compute that.  So...it is an illusion.  :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

Nice list, but since you doubt what I'm saying, you  obviously haven't read much about her, other than skim through your list of sanitized accounts. Can't have real history deprive the Church of one of it's "Sacred Virgins." Dig deeper.

You're drowning in the shallow end of your locked away ignorance... 

Quote
1) She claims that Friar Isambart de La Pierre had stated (at the postwar appellate trial) that Joan was subjected to rape rather than only ...

~

Quote
20 Jul 2020 — At a time when gender-based and sexual violence against women, in South Africa and elsewhere, is being described as a  ...

~

Joan was burned alive for insisting on wearing pants... 

~

I seriously doubt you even read in the first place... Look... Pretty pictures of the real Rome.... 

Quote

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTGK5BAJGcbMjNXNjudRvd

You'll never believe it would you? 

Try skimming, it works wonders... 

~

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, third_eye said:

You're drowning in the shallow end of your locked away ignorance... 

~

~

Joan was burned alive for insisting on wearing pants... 

~

I seriously doubt you even read in the first place... Look... Pretty pictures of the real Rome.... 

You'll never believe it would you? 

Try skimming, it works wonders... 

~

 

I knew Romans painted their buildings, columns and statuary half a century ago, long before you were even a twinkle in your father's eye. When Joan recanted, she couldn't be executed as she was under the protection of Holy Mother Church, much to the chagrin of the English who wanted her dead. After returning to prison, she repudiated her recanting. Her supposed virginity had 'till then protected her, as a virgin can not consort with the devil. After that night in jail and her renewed claims of divine mission, something changed and she was deemed executable. 

Edited by Hammerclaw
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Come on my friend we do certainly disagree that time is an illusion, or maybe I don't understand exactly what mean! :tu:

Peace my friend 

For me the proof that time isn't real is how we think.   We keep our minds in the past and the future, if time was real we would be in the present,   But we have to practice being in the present and even then any reaction we have is based on past or hope of future, which causes me to think that "practice presence and being in the now" is bull****, another new age way to manipulate people into feeling like they are less than because it is always unsustainable.  

What we call time is just a manufactured way of keeping everyone in synch with the powers that be (what ever era that is).  We are slaves to the clock and even though it is almost accurately keeping track, all clocks and calendars have to be adjusted periodically because we want to stay partially in tune with the earth's rotation and path around the sun.   If we just gave up  on the clocks and stayed in tune naturally we would probably find more peace and sleep better.  The important stuff would get done and the unimportant would fall into the dust.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Manwon Lender said:

Hey you make an interesting point but there is a static point that all things started from including time. The Big Bang was the beginning everything started with singularity, all true measurements of time started with explosion. Now, like I said your theory is very cool, and only science discounts it. To further prove my point, I agree completely that change is constantly occurring, but with a unit of measure ( Time ) how would we ever be certainly that was true. 

Hey, it's a cool idea and I am personally unable to dispute it, but science doesn't agree with. 

Below is a paper from 1908 that certainly agrees with you, thought you may enjoy it. 

The Unreality of Time: https://philarchive.org/archive/MCTTUO

The paper below from 2002 disputes the paper above directly

Time, Reality & Experience https://personal.lse.ac.uk/ROBERT49/teaching/ph103/pdf/Dyke2002.pdf

Take Care my friend :tu:

That's the problem, science is not a person to disagree or agree, and if you ask honest scientists you will find they will say the big bang is the best guess based on the information they currently have.  Best Guess, not fact.   We don't know how what is termed the "Big Bang" actually played out.  You can't use that phrase "science says" or "according to science" as it is untrue for two reasons, one science is not a person, and two what scientist state is always based on current understandings and those change.  You know things that were considered "scientific fact" in 1900 have been proven to be wrong, and things that are considered "scientific fact" today will be proven wrong in the future.  Scientists are human and sometimes (not all but a lot) prove things by throwing out the data that does not fit their model, or they are forced because they want to keep their funding to throw out data that does not fit the model of whomever is paying them for the research.   Money drives everything in the era.

Edited by Desertrat56
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hammerclaw said:

After that night in jail and her renewed claims of divine mission, something changed and she was deemed executable.

After all that and yet you're still obsessed over her "purity and chastity" or lack of thereof  ... 

She was sentenced as a heretic because she was a cross dresser... Not because somebody had sex with her without consent. And that's the verdict of the judges and court. Speculate all you want and fantasize with Hollywood based on real events historical dramas splattered with the stench of artistic license for entertainment and dramatic purposes, you are suggesting the rape of Joan just so the Lords and Bishops can have a reason to burn her, as if the repercussions from that which will renew the war wouldn't matter. 

Joan wearing men's pants was something even her patrons and backers couldn't argue against, because that's what the Lord, thy God says is an abomination. 

Amen. 

~

Almost forgot... Happy Bastille Day

Quote
Bastille Day is the common name given in English-speaking countries to the national day of France, which is celebrated on 14 July each year. In French, it is formally called Fête nationale and commonly and legally le 14 juillet. Wikipedia
Celebrations: Military parades, fireworks, concerts, balls
Date: Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Observed by: France

 

~

Edited by third_eye
Bastille Day
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but time is real. I'm not 8 years old watching Saturday morning cartoons, nor am I on my death bed. I am the nexus point of spatial awareness known as "now" yet now doesn't exist. Only the realized "future". 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, joc said:

The problem I have with your 'singularity' is that it is an assumption.  "
Why does science conclude that something occurred from nothing?  We do not know the cause of the Big Bang.  We do know there are Black Holes but we don't know what happens to all that energy pulled into the black hole.  My assumption is that the energy is being released into a 'new' universe(s).  Singularity demands a beginning.  Our minds cannot compute that.  So...it is an illusion.  :)

Are we even sure there was a big bang?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.