to convert, pay money for proof, and perform tricks on stage, I think that approach to be totally wrong headed.
What you call tricks on stage, I call changing the world forever. Creating an entire new branch of scientific study. Proving once and for all that we don't live in a harsh, nihilistic, meaningless universe could well change the course of human events for the better and pacify aggressive tyrants who for the first time would see "something more" than the quest for power and wealth. Perhaps such conclusive demonstrations of magic might lead finally to peace on Earth and universal compassion.
But noooooo, these people with magical powers and self-described enlightenment are too arrogant and selfish to demonstrate to the world that there is indeed something more awaiting us than non-exixtence.
Sounds like a crock of shit to me man.
Jesus demonstrated such powers and look at what good things he started. I believe he was a phony, but people believed his miracles were real, and as a result, great things began to happen in his name. His religion has been perverted today in large part because no miracles happen today, only hucksterism and self-deception. No miracles happen scientifically verified and so people are jaded. One REAL miracle (not the bullshit occasional terminal cancer cures that happen to the atheists as much as to the faithful) would change everything. But it doesn't happen because, according to you, the people who are capable don't want to "do tricks on stage". If such people exist, they're self-important assholes for refusing to show us.
what self respecting discorporeal jiva or deva would enter a vessel that entertains the midwestern game show scenario except Elvis (the true son of god)?
Plenty claim to do it all the time, including in this forum. But when asked to do it under proper observing conditions, they bring out the tired old canards you just did.
They have no interest in convincing others (even though they spend hours posting here trying to convince others).
And they have no need of the million dollar JREF prize (even though they get up and trudge off to work every morning to earn money).
And they have no time for such demonstrations (even though one such demonstration would win them money and all the free time in the world).
And they're busy taking care of their family (even though a million bucks would take care of them for the rest of their lives).
And they don't have material interests (but they won't win the money and donate it to some starving children somewhere).
And so on and so on...
--------------------
Republican Values:
1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.
4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
Quote:
Samurai Drifter said:
Quote:
BlueCoyote said:
No, it's an obvious possibility, when working with the premise of a 'soul'.
It's only an obvious possibility if you assume the soul's existence, which is the very thing being questioned. So you'd have to provide evidence that such a thing was actually occurring in order to support the concept of a soul.
Haha, yah that happens when trying to negate a disprove about something, which was tried to be disproven before (prove of not existing) 
I could reason, the person acted different than before, because of brain damage which damaged the function of the brain as an 'interface' to his 'soul'.
So diploids conclusion about an assumption about the existence of a soul can be ruled out by this argument.
The fault lies in trying to prove something to be nonexistent, like diploid already stated.
Edited by BlueCoyote (02/22/12 12:50 PM)
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order
Diploid
BlueCoyote 
[Re: 
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )
Diploid
soulcircus
OrgoneConclusion
chemkid
