But atheism is annihilationism, which is also explicitly wrong view. Just as wrong as eternalism, in fact.cappuccino wrote: ↑Sat May 29, 2021 10:06 pmmore right than atheism
which is often the only issue
The two kinds of wrong view are asymmetrical. Holding to annihilationism is unavoidably an unwholesome mind-door kamma, for one can't espouse it without also espousing kammic inefficacy. Whether the same is true of eternalism depends on what it's conjoined with. For example, eternalism + theistic determinism is just as bad as annihilationism, but eternalism + the doctrine of ownership of kamma (or a doxastic commitment that's functionally analogous to this) is no impediment to merit accumulation and a bright rebirth.
Dhammanando wrote: ↑Thu Jun 03, 2021 9:13 amThe two kinds of wrong view are asymmetrical. Holding to annihilationism is unavoidably an unwholesome mind-door kamma, for one can't espouse it without also espousing kammic inefficacy. Whether the same is true of eternalism depends on what it's conjoined with. For example, eternalism + theistic determinism is just as bad as annihilationism, but eternalism + the doctrine of ownership of kamma (or a doxastic commitment that's functionally analogous to this) is no impediment to merit accumulation and a bright rebirth.
Good point. I often would hear a Christian say that, if Christianity did not exist, then she would not practice any spiritual tradition/religion. So, for such a person, Jesus is their only way to a heavenly realm.
What if God is not perfect In the buddhist sence ?so what?it doesn't prove he doesn't exist.his desire to create is part of his altruism and is not a desire brought about by necessity it is pure free will so your criticisms don't apply.and the energies of God are God they are just seperate from his essence.uncreated energies alone being insentient cannot create anything,you can't create something exnihilo without creative desire and omnipotence and I'd say it's only possible within God's mind.4GreatHeavenlyKings wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:47 pm I apologize for misusing arguments about the uncreated creator god's perfection in addressing your incorrect claims, Tutareture. I should have said the following:
But the Christians' creator is portrayed within your scriptures as having will and creative desire - indicating that he, if he were truly the uncreated creator god (ishvara), is imperfect.
None of your words about the benevolence of the motivation of any perfect ishvara for creating the universe (or the perfection of the universe) can disguise the fundamental weakness with your argument, which is that your claimed perfect ishvara desires to create. And to desire to do anything is to reveal an imperfection - otherwise, one would have no desires for any actions.
Let it be assumed, for the sake of argument, that the ishvara creates without desiring. But this would mean that the ishvara's creation, not being motivated by desire, is involuntary. After all, we do not desire to breathe, but we breathe involuntarily - and trees do not desire to grow but grow involuntarily.
Even if it be assumed that an ishvara creates voluntarily without any desire, there remains the fact that these attributes of the ishvara must have cause. If you say that the Ishvara created these attributes of the ishvara that allow it to create voluntarily without any desire, then you merely force back the issue of why an allegedly perfect ishvara would desire to create.
Furthermore, the fact that YHWH, in your model, existed with uncreated energy which he desired to create is strong evidence that YHWH was not and is not unconditioned - rather, he was and is conditioned by two things: his nature (which desires to create) and the uncreated energy (which motivated him to create and provided the raw materials for creation).
God is alpha and omegaTutareture wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:06 pm The unconditioned reality must be unchangeable and all good and all-knowing
Yes it does do your research even michio kaku said idealism is the logical conclusion of quantum experiments
All top quantum researchers that have done these experiments pretty much agree with him.its the biologists that are atheists and materialists because they've concluded that based on their theory of evolution.
You are wrong, but you are so spectacularly wrong that it will take more than this post to explain how. More to come. I'm on my phone at the moment.Tutareture wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:21 pmAll top quantum researchers that have done these experiments pretty much agree with him.
Before you comment atleast watch the video and then disagree with his conclusions.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:22 pmYou are wrong, but you are so spectacularly wrong that it will take more than this post to explain how. More to come. I'm on my phone at the moment.Tutareture wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 5:21 pmAll top quantum researchers that have done these experiments pretty much agree with him.
This will put a pin in the absurd claim that "All top quantum researchers that have done these experiments pretty much agree with" Kaku concerning this interpretation, while the longer response remains pending.A poll was conducted at a quantum mechanics conference in 2011 using 33 participants (including physicists, mathematicians, and philosophers). Researchers found that 6% of participants (2 of the 33) indicated that they believed the observer "plays a distinguished physical role (e.g., wave-function collapse by consciousness)".
