Debunking a Creator

[3bob]

Om

[gatito]

Additionally, all he has really attempted to demonstrate is that his conclusions are consistent with his assumptions.

 

Same goes for those attempting the "prove a creator" but that's not the intent of the thread.

 

<snip>

 

Now here's someone who's potentially a candidate for the Direct Path

[RongzomFan]

The Dharmakaya is the creator in Buddhism and it can manifest as any being that it would like.

 

 

Dharmakaya is just the realization of emptiness.

Edited December 5, 2013 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

Now here's someone who's potentially a candidate for the Direct Path

 

With no direct introduction, what you follow is Nondirect Path.

Edited December 5, 2013 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

There is no wikipedia article on Direct Path, but there is one on Neoadvaita.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Advaita

[manitou]

I didn't watch the videos, but most everything I've read on this thread seems dual. As though the creator is something outside of ourselves. Extreme metaphysics will always lead back to the I Am and the non-duality of all of it, ourselves included. We're pretty much on our own, but at the same time part of something quite grand, without beginning or end. Those who are capable of tapping into the essence don't require science to explain anything, they possess gnowledge, and unexplainable to anyone else at that.

[3bob]

countless numbers of souls and suns but only one Spirit

[thelerner]

First off 1>, this universe is completely equivalent with illusion, like a lucid dream. So to speak of a Creator is meaningless.

 

If you can't fathom that, think about this. 2>There is an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect. Logically the Big Bang has causes, which in itself has causes, which in itself has causes etc.

 

There is no place for a Creator in an ad infinitum regression of cause and effect.

Hmnn, If you believe 1>, that the universe is like an illusion, then I don't see how its such a stretch to imagine a god. Also if its like a lucid dream, then who's dreaming?

 

2>I'm not sure how scientific ad infinitum regression is. Aren't you guessing/supposing its an infinitum regression? Without solid proof you're on ground as shaky as a theist with that argument.

[Green Tiger]

2>I'm not sure how scientific ad infinitum regression is. Aren't you guessing/supposing its an infinitum regression? Without solid proof you're on ground as shaky as a theist with that argument.

 

Turtles! All the way down.

[RongzomFan]

Hmnn, If you believe 1>, that the universe is like an illusion, then I don't see how its such a stretch to imagine a god. Also if its like a lucid dream, then who's dreaming?

 

The universe is completely equivalent to an illusion; not "like an illusion".

 

Everything is completely illusory, since phenomena never arise in the first place.

 

This is a good summary of that reasoning:

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6185&start=220#p74244

 

Dream is just a metaphor which is present in Madhyamaka.

Edited December 5, 2013 by RongzomFan

[RongzomFan]

Hmnn, If you believe 1>, that the universe is like an illusion, then I don't see how its such a stretch to imagine a god. Also if its like a lucid dream, then who's dreaming?

 

2>I'm not sure how scientific ad infinitum regression is. Aren't you guessing/supposing its an infinitum regression? Without solid proof you're on ground as shaky as a theist with that argument.

 

I don't believe in #2.

 

I am with #1, but people, like yourself, don't understand the radicalness of sunyata.

[RongzomFan]

You don't need a Creator to believe in the mystical.

 

You can still have your afterlife, Pure Lands etc.

[timelessness]

Did the Creator finally get debunked?

[adept]

Did the Creator finally get debunked?

 

No. It's all just opinion. Which is fine of course.

[manitou]

'Beliefs' aren't where it's at in any of this. Beliefs are beyond the point.

 

The point is to understand the microcosm so that the macrocosm can be understood. You can quote the texts of others until you're blue in the face but that will increase nobody's understanding. Go within and cease the parroting of others.

Edited December 5, 2013 by manitou

[timelessness]

People have been trying to debunk the Poor Guy for long time. I feel bad for Him sometimes. Lol

[Rara]

People have been trying to debunk the Poor Guy for long time. I feel bad for Him sometimes. Lol

The longest living celebrity. Media just won't let God be

 

Must be something in it then. Even if whatever it is and how much of a role it plays is far beyond reach.

[Stosh]

Kings 2:23-24

New International Version (NIV)

Elisha Is Jeered

²³ From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” ²⁴ He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

[3bob]

Old Testament "eye for an eye" which keeps the wheel of suffering turning...

[C T]

Creator or agent provocateur?

 

Im inclined to lean towards the latter.

 

This is because i cannot see a permanent creation anywhere. Process, yes. Change, yes, but a creation of solid existence, no. Are we not free to do what we will? Surely this freedom is not bestowed by a Creator, for if it is, then there would not be so much dissatisfaction in the world.

 

Divinity and Grace of God are merely conventional terms used as 'pillows' to perhaps lend comfort, but a comfortable life does not necessarily mean the induction/intervention of a Creator. A comfortable life is one where previous comfort seeds were sown. Therefore, if its one's aim to have a certain result at some future time, then one plants the appropriate seeds now, not yesterday's nor tomorrow's seeds. If there was a Creator God, then the phrase, "You reap what you sow" becomes redundant somewhat.

[Green Tiger]

Creator or agent provocateur?

 

I always liked the term Source.

 

Creator implies a ceramic sort of existence, which this is certainly not, but that really is the sort of universe the Abrahamic religions conceptualized, by and large.

 

It is no coincidence that Jesus was the son of a carpenter. Carpentry is a perfect illustration, in the Hebrew and early Christian concept of God, for how the creation works.

 

 

EDIT: to remove any positive assertions about accurate concepts of Source. It is better to avoid concepts all together. As the Upanishads say, "Neti neti." Not this, not that.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Green Tiger

[manitou]

Whatever it is, it seems to want to evolve. Or, we can resist by digging in our heels and hold firm in our beliefs. Either way, the choice is ours.

[RongzomFan]

Did the Creator finally get debunked?

 

yes

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32820-debunking-a-creator/page-4#entry501889

[adept]

yes

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32820-debunking-a-creator/page-4#entry501889

 

Opinion. Which is all we're going to get on an internet forum, or anywhere else for that matter.

[RongzomFan]

 

Kings 2:23-24

New International Version (NIV)

Elisha Is Jeered

²³ From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” ²⁴ He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.

 

 

I thought this was a joke. But its actually real. LMAO.