deranger said:

---

And don't forget the acid.

Soren Kierkegaard said:

"If there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything great or inconsequential; if an unfathomable, insatiable emptiness lay hid beneath everything, what would life be but despair?" Soren Kierkegaard

---

deranger said:

you must be referring to another poster

---

Icelander said:

Yes IMO, You're missing my suggestion or at least the reason

behind it. It doesn't matter if he knows the difference and you know the difference and I know the difference. Most of humanity does not. Most of humanity is invested in a certain concept of god, one that mostly resembles their individual religion. And the battle over who's god is the "true" one has caused untold misery in the word. My suggestion to him is to drop that word to avoid feeding that shit. I don't disagree with most of his points and think they are good ones.

---

Icelander said:

Psychonot2329 said:

Icelander said:

the, "boundless void containing all, Where all is light: No start, no end,

For this to be true no "god" is needed.

But you really didn't get what I was saying, WE DON'T NEED NO FUCKING GOD.

---

I dont think you read or comprehended anything I wrote. When I wrote of "God" I mean it in the sense of Tao. Its not in the sense of the Christian fundamentalists; its transcendent. Its not something we can pray to, its not something that thinks and acts in the sense we know of.

---

I completely understood what you wrote. I suggested we get rid of that abused word god. If you like Tao then use that. Anything but god. If you don't know that the word god is abused all over the place then you just haven't been paying attention.

---

Icelander said:

Yes IMO, You're missing my suggestion or at least the reason behind it. It doesn't matter if he knows the difference and you know the difference and I know the difference. Most of humanity does not. Most of humanity is invested in a certain concept of god, one that mostly resembles their individual religion. And the battle over who's god is the "true" one has caused untold misery in the word. My suggestion to him is to drop that word to avoid feeding that shit. I don't disagree with most of his points and think they are good ones.

---

Psychonot2329 said:

Icelander said:

Psychonot2329 said:

Icelander said:

the, "boundless void containing all, Where all is light: No start, no end,

For this to be true no "god" is needed.

But you really didn't get what I was saying, WE DON'T NEED NO FUCKING GOD.

---

I dont think you read or comprehended anything I wrote. When I wrote of "God" I mean it in the sense of Tao. Its not in the sense of the Christian fundamentalists; its transcendent. Its not something we can pray to, its not something that thinks and acts in the sense we know of.

---

I completely understood what you wrote. I suggested we get rid of that abused word god. If you like Tao then use that. Anything but god. If you don't know that the word god is abused all over the place then you just haven't been paying attention.

---

You've consistently been complaining about a word choice that I explained in the post itself...but, I'd like to know your thoughts on the topic, aside from a clear bias against a word.

---

Quote:

I like Tao or Nagual

---

Psychonot2329 said:

To use what you said: "Your ideas here are not new at all." Of course not. Everything that we will ever say or think of have been thought of or said.
You say you agree with some of them, well, could you discuss it?
You say its "blah blah for" you. You're on a forum called shroomery. With thousands of posts. You have time and have done a lot of "blah blah"'ing.
Don't pretend you're some shit

Proceed.

---