Posts by gentlemaker6

Is it just me, or is there a specific kind of psychological torture that comes with being stuck in a stadium—or even just waiting at home—when the weather decides to ruin a perfectly planned outing? I was thinking about this the other day while looking at my calendar. I had this whole weekend mapped out, a series of events that were supposed to go off with clockwork precision, and then a single afternoon of heavy clouds and a sudden downpour just completely dismantled the schedule.

It’s funny how we schedule our entire lives around these specific windows of time. We buy the tickets, we book the hotels, we coordinate the childcare, and we clear our work calendars, all operating under the assumption that the physical world will cooperate with our digital planners. But the weather doesn't care about our spreadsheets. There’s something almost humbling about it, isn't there? You can have the most high-stakes, highly anticipated matchup or event of the season lined up, and all it takes is a few millimeters of water falling from the sky to turn a "big day" into a "wait and see" day.

I’ve always found the "postponement" aspect of life to be the most frustrating part, not because of the delay itself, but because of the ripple effect. When something gets pushed back or rescheduled, it’s never just a simple one-to-one swap. It’s a domino effect. If a game gets moved to a doubleheader, suddenly you’re looking at a much longer day, different food options, different energy levels, and a totally different rhythm. It changes the "vibe" of the experience. A single, focused event has a certain tension and build-up; a rescheduled or stretched-out event feels more like an endurance test.

I remember one time a few years ago, I had traveled quite a distance for a festival. Everything was perfect until a massive storm rolled in. We didn't get sent home, but everything was shifted. The momentum we had built up—that collective excitement of a crowd—just evaporated. We were all just standing there, looking at the sky, wondering if we were being foolish for staying. There’s a weird tension in those moments where you’re caught between the optimism of "it'll clear up soon" and the sinking realization that your plans are effectively dead.

It makes me wonder about our modern relationship with spontaneity. We’ve become so accustomed to things working exactly as they are programmed. When we encounter a "glitch" in the natural world, like a rainout or a sudden scheduling shift, it feels like a personal affront to our productivity. We don't just see it as "nature happening"; we see it as a disruption to our "experience." We've lost a bit of that old-school patience, I think. We want the climax of the story to happen exactly when the program says it should.

And then there's the logistical headache of the "make-up" plan. How do you actually replace the original moment? You can reschedule a date, or you can move a match to a different time, but you can't really manufacture that specific feeling of anticipation that existed before the disruption. The "new" version of the event always feels like a second choice, a shadow of the original intention. It’s a reminder that despite all our technology and planning, we are still ultimately at the mercy of the elements and the unpredictable whims of timing.

Do you think we've become too reliant on rigid schedules, or is that unpredictability just an inevitable part of life that we should learn to embrace better?

placidjackal36 said:It’s all very lovely and poetic, rustymaker5, but he’s just fueling his own arrogance with this DIY version of pantheism—basically a commercialized grab bag of bits and pieces he’s plucked from Eastern religions and New Age movements.
He’s convinced himself that God exists solely for his benefit. Now, that might sound like a pretty sentiment, but since we're dealing with humans, it’s just as fatalistic as believing we exist solely for God (where we then project whatever traits we want onto Him and follow them blindly just because "that's what He said").

To be fair, Christianity has one distinct advantage: it values being small. Sure, the Church tends to blow that out of proportion by preaching "martyrdom and suffering as the only path to salvation"—which is a different beast entirely and served its specific purpose back in the day—but the core essence of Christianity isn't about ego. What he’s doing here (God is here for me, ME, ME, ME, ME) is way more dangerous.

You know better than anyone that I’m not a religious guy; I’m just fascinated by nature. Its sheer power, complexity, and beauty serve as a constant reminder that I am tiny, yet capable of making an impact. He doesn't get that. He’s twisted it in his head so that he’s the big player, that God is there for him, that everything is God (meaning everything is essentially there for gentlemaker6), and that he’s connected to everything in a way that allows him to manipulate the divine. In his mind, gentlemaker6 effectively *is* God. He influences everything; he is everything.

How am I supposed to agree with that level of hubris? Not a chance. You only need to take his arguments apart slightly, and logic immediately confirms what your gut already told you: he’s full of himself.

I’m happy to debate this with actual arguments, but since he hasn't learned how to do that—having only mastered the art of repeating his own fabrications—if you actually challenge him... well, prepare for some divine wrath.

Man, you really have no sense of proportion. You are using such absurd lies in your insolence that I can hardly believe it. This entire topic rests on the fundamental idea that we are all one. All of us. That is a plural concept. I am in no way elevating myself above others—which would imply diminishing God—nor am I humbling myself before others, as that would also diminish God. Have you seen me do that in any of my posts? Ever?

If we are all God, then who is "more" God than anyone else? If we are all God and He is everything surrounding us, isn't His role precisely to serve all His parts? Therefore, God exists for us—or rather, for Himself—not the other way around. You are nowhere near grasping that realization.

This kind of nitpicking and jumping to conclusions only reveals your true character. You are putting words in my mouth that I never uttered, which is impossible. My understanding of the whole is clear; I don't think one thing and say another. Arrogance would be if I truly believed I was the *only* God, rather than recognizing others as well, or thinking I am somehow superior. That isn't me, though I see you displaying that attitude in every single one of your posts. So much for your logic.

placidjackal36 said:Look, I’m not a moderator on this subforum. If you want to know who actually wrecked this place, maybe take a good look in the mirror first. This isn't spirituality anymore; it’s just straight-up New Age garbage. But hey, that’s just how things evolve, so let’s not waste too much energy whining about it.

gentlemaker6, you’re just a believer. I’m not—at least not regarding whatever version of reality you’ve constructed in your own head. Every debate we have hits a dead end because you cling to your dogmas instead of looking at facts. On my end, I’m not looking to swallow your dogmas, but I am staring at facts that don't leave me much room to wiggle (though there's always a little wiggle room).
This describes you perfectly:
Green's rule for discussion:
"Anything is possible if you have no idea what you're talking about."
Your total lack of general knowledge gives you plenty of room to move, but it’s useless when you’re so blinded that you keep slamming into obstacles you can't even see—namely, the truth. And then you get pissed when you hit them.
You preach, I bring the facts, and you attack. Peace? Yeah, I don't think so.

It would be interesting if your dogmas could actually coexist with reality, like certain tenets in major world religions do, but they can't. Your dogmas actively try to overwrite facts, which makes them delusions, plain and simple.
Your beliefs, which aren't rooted in anything tangible, remind me of cult behavior. That mindless zeal you use to push unverifiable nonsense feels like those street preachers or fringe movements. At its core, it’s no different from fanatic Christians, Muslims, or Jews. Just different dogmas. "My God is the only real one"—that’s basically all your "spirituality" boils down to, if you can even call it that.

Honestly, I have no clue which sect or movement you belong to, but claiming you won't be wasting your "wisdom" on us anymore (which implies we're small and pathetic?) doesn't exactly scream spiritual enlightenment.
I bet your response is going to be "you're a spy." LOL

Once you finally accept the biological facts about your own body—like the fact that your brain is responsible for your behavior, not some mystical fog or some undetectable creature—maybe you'll realize there's a lot more to learn about physiology. It's far more fascinating than any concept humans have ever cooked up. But for now, keep running toward the void and chasing fictional "energy." Your call...

Check out my signature. It applies to you just as much as it does to religious fanatics in the States:

How is it that hardly any major religion has looked at science and concluded: "This is better than we thought! The Universe is much bigger than our prophets said, grander, more subtle, more elegant. God must be even greater than we dreamed"? Instead they say: "No, no, no! My god is a little god, and I want him to stay that way." © Carl Sagan

When are you going to admit that the universe and everything in it—including our own bodies—is much larger, more complex, more subtle, and more elegant than your dogmas allow?

Science serves me; I do not serve it. Don't lose sight of that. The facts it gradually uncovers only reinforce my own ideas. The One I believe in created all of this effortlessly, yet science hasn't even begun to grasp the sheer complexity and beauty of creation as I perceive it. As for you, acting like such a pedantic clerk, you're still nothing more than an apprentice.

Of course, it’s well known that you have an answer for everything and consider yourself the smartest person in the room.

Your arrogance is staggering; you're simply a cynic who tears down everything in your path. It’s quite obvious you vent your frustrations by attacking everyone else.

I don't belong to any religion, sect, cult, or clique; I am merely a member of humanity. That is sufficient. By being part of the whole, I am connected to everyone and everything. I am one with God and the entire Universe.

Your signature is just a signature; it says everything about you and nothing about me.

I know you play moderator on that other forum, but this one is clearly just your playground—an ego trip designed for your own gratification. I have no desire to waste more time debating you, so feel free to carry on. Since this is a forum dedicated to spirituality and you are such an incredibly "spiritual" individual, it’s only right that us mere mortals step aside to give you the floor. We wouldn't want to get in the way of your "quality" content. Enjoy yourself.

placidjackal36 said:Just my two cents here—physics does technically say the entire universe is interconnected. But that doesn't mean our brains can actually derive any practical benefit from it. For instance, if they set off a miniature atomic device in China, the energy released will eventually reach me, sure, but it’ll be so incredibly dissipated by the time it gets here that I won't be able to tell it apart from basic background noise.
The same thing happens if someone in New Zealand picks up a tiny pebble and drops it. First, they expend their own energy to bend down and lift the stone (energy pulled straight from the food they ate), and at that height, the pebble holds a few millijoules of potential energy. The second they let go, that energy scatters through air friction and finally through the impact with the floor. Those few millijoules just vanish, dissipating across the planet.
The wider it spreads, the weaker it gets. You aren't going to register the impact of a pebble hitting the ground a mile away, let alone all the way across America.
These are such infinitesimally small and indistinguishable values that they have zero impact. To put it visually, on a graph like this
http://fecal.org.mx/data/files/estadisticas/nulos.png" alt="image" loading="lazy" class="bb-img"> representing the change in energy received by a detector, those influences would just be invisible, microscopic bumps that you couldn't distinguish from the background static.
It’s like looking at a 3D model of a city and trying to read the location of a speck of dust from it. The parts of the graph are tens of meters high—buildings, skyscrapers—and you're trying to measure something 0.05 mm tall. Forget dust... we're talking about viruses.

And because of this fact—that everything affects everything else in a sort of deterministic chaos that is impossible to measure—some people build these grand ideas that we are "all one." It's not happening. It just makes no sense.
Just because my particles are being bombarded by thermal and radio waves that no imaginable device could ever isolate or distinguish, doesn't mean I am "one" with some Filipino guy halfway across the world having dinner right now.

A rather pathetic attempt to find scientific evidence to validate my claim, only to stumble in your final paragraph in your usual fashion. I am not building my idea that we are all one on what you are saying. I don't care about that at all.
I know that science will one day find absolute proof of my words. Absolute. Clear. Pure. The fact that they cannot do so now doesn't give them the right to deny it. And you will witness it, if you live long enough, by reading about it. You certainly won't discover it yourself, as you aren't a scientist, merely a common nerd.

Ryan Wilson2 said:A true New Age enthusiast will have their heart leap at a statement like yours, yet their brain will conveniently filter out everything else. In a few months, they’ll come crawling back claiming they were the ones who originally said the entire universe is connected, and they'll shamelessly hijack your evidence to support their own agenda.

That is simply how it works.

I honestly have no idea what basis you have for being a moderator on this subforum. You are about as spiritual as a wet rock on the side of the road, and your grasp of the subject matter is roughly that of a half-drunk teenager.

You’re just throwing around labels for New Agers without any real logic, trying to fit everything into categories you can't even define. Not to mention how much you're sucking up to the moderator. I suppose you two need each other for support.

placidjackal36 said:Oh, if that were anyone else saying it... but it was placidjackal36, that "dogmatic scientific fossil" you aren't supposed to trust. 😉
Maybe the sheer hatred they have for me—and believe me, I know it exists, judging by the hate mail I get—will actually force them to read to the end, maybe giving their brains a much-needed workout. It might hit that 2%, 5%, or 10% margin of people who aren't complete idiots, though honestly, I wouldn't bet much on it. 😁

For the record, I am publicly stating that I am not among those who hate you; I don't send you emails, DMs, or anything of the sort. I simply pity you.

I am on your side, and there is nothing I can do about it. I have to seek God, as He exists within me as well. I don't know what role you play in my life, but I certainly won't be playing it for much longer.

Ryan Wilson2 said:Oh please, I understand exactly how their minds work. They’ll cling to the label of "dogmatic scientific dinosaur" as their primary weapon when they try to explain away universal connectivity, simply because, hey, you supposedly admitted to it yourself.

Not only are you an expert, but you're clairvoyant too. Impressive.

placidjackal36 said:

I don't know if anyone else is picking up on this, but there’s something about the way people talk about the Middle East lately that just feels off. It’s like we’re looking at the whole region through a distorted lens, trying to force complex, ancient geopolitical shifts into these neat little boxes that just don't fit. It reminds me of how people try to explain the complexities of the US banking system by pointing to one single interest rate hike—it’s a massive oversimplification of a much deeper, messier reality. You can't just look at one piece of the puzzle and claim you understand the entire picture. We need to stop looking for easy answers to problems that have been brewing for decades. kaže:
I find it hard to believe anyone actually hates you; it’s more likely they’re just incredibly frustrated by how you handle things. It feels like a clash of styles rather than genuine animosity. That got me thinking, though—have you ever run into something in your own life that you just couldn't wrap a scientific explanation around? Something that felt completely nonsensical or defied all logic from a purely rational standpoint?

I honestly believe this, mostly because I spend enough time scrolling through my inbox to see the patterns. My approach is just neutral and direct, which seems to rub people the wrong way. It’s because they don't want to be challenged; they're too busy clinging to their own dogmas like a security blanket. That's their thing—it's their little coping mechanism for happiness. But when you try to shake them out of it, they react exactly like a stray cat when a stranger tries to get too close to its kittens. Hissing and defensive.

Let them twist my words if they want. Honestly, just dropping a link to the full post is enough to shut them right up. It’s wild how some people walk around puffing their chests out, acting all enlightened, when all they’ve really done is pick up a few shallow buzzwords from some cheap paperback. They aren't awake; they're basically in a state of hibernation. The second you hit them with an actual fact, they start squirming like those weird plants in Harry Potter and scream, "WE are being oppressed !!!"

So, here’s the thing—this happens to me all the time. I’ll find myself thinking about someone specific, only to have them call me out of the blue or run into me later. It feels like a pattern, but honestly, it’s probably just standard statistical distribution, at least in my experience. You might think I’m full of it, but I actually made a point to track these moments. I tried to document as many instances as possible to see if there was an actual anomaly happening, and it turns out there wasn't. What you're describing is basically selective memory. When we aren't consciously focusing on it, our brains run this little mechanism that ends up skewing our judgment. It’s a very specific phenomenon, and it's actually pretty common in geriatric medicine. In some cases, it gets extreme.

Can you actually read someone’s mind—or at least figure out what they’re thinking and feeling—just by watching their body language or how they look at you? And more importantly, could you pin down my entire personality type based on just one or two short posts?

It’s wild how much happens behind the scenes before you even realize you’ve formed an opinion. Think about it: your eyes are constantly flooding your brain with a massive stream of data, but your conscious mind only catches the tip of the iceberg. It's just a tiny fraction of what's actually happening. Your brain takes that entire ocean of subconscious information—everything it’s ever stored, every subtle cue, every glance—and processes it all in the background. By the time you actually "think" something, the heavy lifting is already done. The brain just serves up a finished product to your awareness. Honestly, that organ is pretty fascinating.
Based on just one or two short posts from you, I couldn't really pin down what "type" of person you are, but the more I read, the clearer the picture becomes in my head. Of course, that doesn't mean the picture is actually true. A mental image is just the result of whatever managed to pass through your brain's internal censorship onto the web, combined with how my own brain processes those specific bits of info and spits them back out at you.
People can be drastically misread. But sometimes, you hit the nail on the head. It’s all about timing.

those are all hallmarks of seeing the "big picture" and tapping into "wavelengths"—basically, intuition.
without it, neither Tesla nor Einstein would have ever stumbled upon their breakthroughs.
and Bohr and Heisenberg talked extensively about this kind of thing...
what Einstein achieved in physics, Jung achieved in psychology.
humans can perceive things through four distinct channels.
sensory input (feeling) paired with its complement, intuition,
logic and its complement, emotion.
you need to develop them all in parallel. When the intellect hits a wall, intuition steps in; when you miss something obvious, intuition jumps the gap. Jung made a great point... that while children mostly rely on their intellect during development, they really ought to work on their feelings too. And vice versa.

But there's a catch. The problem is that the intellectual side is measurable via IQ. The other three aren't easily quantified, so mainstream science tends to ignore them. But they exist, damn it!

imagination is more important than knowledge!

Exactly! Like I’ve mentioned before, there is so much happening deep within the brain that we only experience a tiny fraction of it in our conscious awareness. Since everyone seems to be obsessed with Star Trek lately, think of it like the entire crew working behind the scenes on a starship compared to the limited data popping up on a single interface. A massive amount of processing happens in the background, and only a small slice bubbles up to the surface. That’s exactly how inventions happen. You see something, it triggers a cascade of information processing in your head, and suddenly a useful result surfaces in your consciousness.
Intuition works on that exact same principle. That's why you should never brush it off. It is a legitimate product of our biology and it carries real information. You have to approach it and analyze it rather than tossing it aside as junk—because it isn't junk.
So, it’s not quite accurate to say psychology doesn't align with intuition...

You come along like an aspirin for their dogma. Yet, you are the biggest dogmatist here. You must be some kind of spy.

It did happen, but it has happened many more times where I think of someone and then don't call them or run into them. It's standard statistical distribution, at least in my case. You might not believe me, but prompted by certain accounts, I made a concerted effort to remember as many such instances as possible, and I didn't see them as anomalies. What you are describing is called selective memory, and when we aren't conscious of it, it's a brain mechanism that results in errors in judgment. It's quite specific and common in geriatrics. Extreme, even.

Based on behavior, appearance, and various other cues, the brain constructs a primary image. Our eyes feed us an overwhelming amount of data; the brain absorbs and processes all of it, yet we only ever perceive the tip of the iceberg. From that massive subconscious "ocean" of stored information, the brain synthesizes an opinion and presents it to our conscious mind. It is a fascinating organ.
Judging by one or two short posts, I wouldn't be able to pin down your "type," but the more I read, the more complete the picture becomes. Of course, that picture isn't necessarily the truth. It’s merely the result of what passed through your brain's internal censorship to end up online, combined with how my own brain interprets those specific fragments.
It can vary drastically. Occasionally, it hits the mark. But when?

Of course! As I mentioned, there is so much happening within the brain that we only experience a tiny fraction of it consciously. Since *Star Trek* is currently trending, consider it like the operations of an entire starship compared to the limited data available via a single interface. Most of the heavy lifting happens in the background, while only a small portion surfaces. This is precisely how inventions occur. A person perceives something, triggering a cascade of internal processing that eventually emerges into consciousness as a useful result.
Intuition functions on this exact principle. That is why one should never dismiss it. Intuition is a product of our biological hardware and carries genuine information. It deserves to be approached and analyzed rather than discarded as junk—because it certainly isn't junk.
It’s not as if psychology doesn't align with intuition...

In that case, you failed to recognize an anomaly. Better luck next time. It simply highlights your way of thinking. You seem solely intent on proving that everything resides within the brain and that it is the ultimate carrier of existence. You fail to see that the brain is essentially just a high-end hard drive used for storing programs and data. It does not grant life. Like any other organ or system in the body, it has its role in sustaining the life that is the spirit or soul.

So, little moderators, you have grown arrogant and are running wild on your own forum. By all means, enjoy yourselves. I have no intention of wasting any more of my time or wisdom on you. You are the fate of this forum, and because of you, it has lost all its charm.

Jerry Green59 said:And why should I?
Did you have a private audience with God where He gave you a detailed briefing on how things actually stand?

(.. I’m a bit skeptical about gods who are defined by whatever our neighbors decide is right or wrong, or what constitutes "good" work..)

Of course not. Has He spoken to you?
Perhaps you ought to stand before a mirror and look deep into your own eyes. Or I could offer you someone else's perspective—say, the gaze of a child or perhaps an elderly man. Even looking into the eyes of your dog or cat might suffice. God is everywhere around you. If you refuse to see Him, then naturally, you won't.

Whether you believe or not is entirely your call. You have free will; make your choice.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:well, what if we just realized it now? maybe that makes the realization even sweeter, or more valuable. makes us stronger.
talking about "thousands of years" being in our bones? hmm, interesting. where would our knowledge even be then?
man, imagine the power we'd have! we'd basically be gods. (Morgan Hernandez5 = goddess Gea)
but i don't think that kind of knowledge belongs to everyone.
just another reason why it feels like a Sisyphean task.
yeah, impossible mission. we're all one, sure, but we aren't equals.
i'm pretty sure there are people out there with that kind of insight.
change is already happening. we should make the most of it. though you still need a ton of knowledge, "big picture" stuff, and intuitive "wavelengths."

if you can, look up Jung's concept of "synchronicity"—it's a solid theory on feeling connected.

you say... that humanity *deserves* it..
big words.

p.s. gea. might have to change my avatar.

I don't think you quite caught my drift.

coastalorca7 said:I don't follow this post. Because..
Spiritual growth doesn't happen collectively for everyone at once; it happens individually. If it did, it would be a total disregard for individual spiritual progress. That would be a violation of individuality.
Everyone matures within themselves, so it isn't simultaneous. Due to the sheer demand, it is impossible to deliver this realization to everyone at the same moment. It is impossible for everyone to inject it into their veins at the exact same second and change the world's image instantly.
Who is this insatiable God you are writing about?
Who is your God?
What does a person use? As far as I know, people use their reason or harness energy, etc. Use God? Who or what exactly are you calling God? Is God a balance between possessing and existing, between having and being?
Who is this God you describe? Can I also experience and call what I experience "God"? Are we using the same name for completely different things and experiences? I need to know this before I can even attempt to engage with you.
Perhaps what you experience and call God is, for me, the devil.
To know if you and I are actually talking about the same thing, I have to know: who or what is your God?
What is the actual state of the world?

I only know one God—the Creator of heaven and earth—and that is whom I am speaking of.

Morgan Hernandez5 As follows:
Yes, in costume. Very well put. When I read that, I knew we were thinking along exactly the same lines.

The real question is how exactly things become "bone deep." Imagine if we were all raised from birth to believe that we are fundamentally one. To live knowing that every single person we encounter is just another version of ourselves—that everything we give or do is ultimately an act directed at our own soul. If that truth were ingrained in us, it would be part of our very marrow. It would be constant.

Since only a handful of people actually undergo the rigorous education, spiritual training, or deep philosophical study required to truly grasp these truths, those who feel them in their very marrow remain few. We have been conditioned for millennia to act otherwise; for most Americans, our "natural state" is exactly the opposite of what this realization requires.

We need to reverse the process.

Given all that, I would still give science its due. It’s certainly entangled with religion, politics, and—most of all—money, but it remains essential to our progress and the evolution of our ideas.
I find any form of exclusion to be entirely unnecessary.
Of course, intellect and science aren't the only things that matter. I remember my old professor at Yale used to say that logic alone can leave you quite lost.
You make a fair point. Throughout the long stretch of history, certain people have managed to adapt simply because they understood exactly what you and I know. That insight is precisely how they survived.

We have to account for everything. Only when we all commit to this can we finally reach the level of prosperity that humanity truly deserves. There is a silver lining here: we need to hit a critical mass—a specific percentage of people who realize we are all interconnected—before we see a global shift. I honestly have no idea what that exact number might be.

Helping others feels like a Sisyphus task to me, in the truest sense of the phrase. It’s an uphill battle against deeply ingrained traditional mindsets, sheer human stupidity, blatant selfishness, and that desperate need to belong. On top of all that, most people seem to lack any developed faculties beyond sight, touch, and hearing.
To truly grasp your writing style, one requires both a high IQ and the intuition to see the big picture—rather than focusing on fragmented details, much like the current state of most of humanity.
Once I realized how many mediocre people I was surrounded by—people who struggle to grasp even the simplest concepts—I decided it would be sheer madness to waste a single ounce of energy trying to explain the bigger picture to them. After all, everyone has the right to their own perspective. We should respect and honor those differing opinions, even when we can't find a shred of truth in them. Trying to force someone to see reality or pulling them down from their little cloud of delusion simply feels dishonest.
I am convinced that gentlemaker6, placidjackal36, you, and I actually share the same vision, even if we’re approaching it from different angles. It’s quite helpful, really; it allows us to piece together a much more complete picture.
Ultimately, none of us would even be gathered on this thread if it weren't for the circumstances.
Regrettably, people have lost their sense of empathy for others, and with it, basic respect has vanished. In the absence of intuition and intelligence, they often fail to grasp the situation entirely—though, in fairness, I can hardly blame them.
That is precisely why I believe we are merely chasing our tails.
I don't believe this should discourage us. We can still focus on self-improvement, continue our growth, and live in true alignment with our own visions.

Thanks in advance.

There is really only one step to take: you have to grasp the concept and actually live it. Once that happens, everything else falls into place naturally.

Jerry Green59 said:If you connect those first two points, the logical conclusion is that the actions of both religious believers and atheists are simply different ways that God expresses Himself.
That He acts through them as well.

By extension, you're essentially suggesting that one specific way of divine expression is superior to another, and therefore the other should be wiped out.

All of these questions are flawed because they are framed in the plural.
Can *we* do something to protect the Earth?

I don't know if we can.

I do know that *I* can.

Everything in existence is a form of God's expression. However, God does not act through religions, atheists, or anyone else. If that were the case, free will wouldn't exist; everything would be scripted at the highest level, and the entire universe would lose its purpose. People would turn into robots—mere puppets on a string—and the joy of living would vanish. Believe me, God is capable of much better than that.

Through the principle of free will, every form of divine expression acts entirely independently, following its own principles and making its own decisions.

I am not claiming that one form of divine manifestation is better than another. I am simply saying that humanity would benefit immensely if we all moved together toward an era of peace and prosperity for everyone. I am convinced that is a far better path than the one we are currently walking.

all these questions are flawed because they are phrased in the plural.
Can we do something to protect the country?

I don't know if "we" can.

I know that *I* can.

The questions are plural because they are addressed to everyone. The answer, however, should be given in the singular.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:Yeah, the division and fragmentation—the way the Greeks, medieval science, and the Church taught it—is gone. We're tied to everything around us.
The way you wrote that, it kind of reminds me of a Jehovah's Witness
or maybe some prophet without any actual prophecies, since you say "GOD" way too much for my taste.
When you talk like that, when you say God, I think of myself, nature, the universe, and how everything is connected... if I
got that right?

That "we are all one" thing is old news. Tons of philosophers, psychologists, physicists... they said it ages ago. But hey, it's never too late to act on it.
So, when and how did you figure this out?

Come on, placidjackal36, no dogmas. Flip the script and give us... facts!

True separation never actually existed. It was merely a construct maintained in our minds, making it feel real in our daily lives.

It was said long ago, yet humanity has never truly grasped it or acted upon it collectively. As for why, the answer is simple: it doesn't suit those who have spent millennia keeping us in the dark.

Action has already begun. This is my small contribution.

The way you write reminds me of a Jehovah's Witness
or perhaps a prophet lacking a prophecy; for my taste, you use the word God far too often.

Years of light separate me from Jehovah's Witnesses. I am no prophet. God is mentioned here because this is a story about God. If I claim we are all one and that this oneness is God, then the narrative simply cannot function without Him. And more importantly, I don't see the necessity of omitting Him. If you are God and I am God, why run from that? Don't you think it's time we finally embraced our true identity?

When you say God, I think of myself, nature, the universe, and our interconnectedness... if I
understood you correctly?

Precisely.

And when did you discover this?

At some point along my spiritual journey, it simply became an undeniable truth. Now, I am merely striving to live it.

Morgan Hernandez5 said:I don't get this whole ecology thing you're preaching, and I have no clue what kind of "action" you're suggesting or what you think the causes even are.
this is just an old post of mine ripped out of context, but it touches on the causes and stuff... etc... and I am proposing a solution.

The mention of ecology was simply part of answering a specific question.

What I am actually discussing is a new way of perceiving spirituality—the realization that we are all interconnected. If this understanding reaches the masses, it would fundamentally transform the state of our world almost overnight. That is the "action" I am proposing.

God is life itself and encompasses everything within it. Therefore, God has no needs, because God is and possesses everything imaginable. This means there is nothing we need to perform to satisfy some insatiable deity. There are no commandments, no labels, no sins, no punishments, and certainly no hellish nonsense. There is no separation. Consequently, our task is simply to look inward, toward the presence of God within ourselves, and tap into that.

God exists to serve us, not the other way around.

The root cause of our current global situation lies in organized religion and its doctrines regarding God and humanity. The solution lies in what I have described here. You’ve noticed positive shifts occurring, and they truly are happening—slowly but surely. I am not the architect of this idea; it is a concept gaining traction globally, and one day, it will become the foundation of how we live.

placidjackal36 said:No, he just doesn't get it. He hasn't grasped a single thing I’ve put down, and honestly, I’m done trying to explain myself. That whole situation is just weighing on me too much.

Indeed, he truly doesn't understand.

placidjackal36 said:Sometimes I’m agnostic, sometimes I’m an atheist, and sometimes I’m a believer. For certain things, I believe simply because they can't be proven. When it comes to nonsense that flies in the face of hard facts, I'm a staunch atheist—or even an antitheist, if we're using your definition of the term, which seems more concerned with supernatural entities than what I'm actually talking about.

Life is created by energy-rich chemical compounds? Everyone laughed. 😂😂😂

If you aren't interested in what I'm writing, then stop replying to my posts.

Yes, life is driven by energy-rich compounds. You honestly think this is just my little invention?
What about the massive teams of researchers who have dedicated their lives to this? What about the millions of people every day who validate these discoveries?
Have you ever actually looked into physiology? People have spent lifetimes studying how a human being functions. They’ve run experiments. They’ve measured the intake and output of mass, calculated how much energy a single unit of a nutrient provides through complete oxidation versus what's actually utilized when someone eats, and then mapped out the metabolic utility of specific parts: muscle, brain, and so on. They’ve tracked oxygen intake and expiration during rest, during study, or while running.
They’ve analyzed bodily fluids using every method under the sun, put subjects through X-rays and NMR, and monitored brain activity via EEG and heart rhythms via EKG.

We know exactly why a person lives and why they die. We understand our own structure down to the histological details. We know what powers a cell—the breakdown of substances and their fusion with oxygen in the mitochondria to produce the ATP that drives everything else.
We know how the kidneys filter waste and exactly how much energy that process requires.
We know why a heart can keep beating even when the brain is effectively dead. We know where emotions reside and where memories are stored.
We know where the center of balance is, and why a person panics when their airway is obstructed.
We know why it hurts when you get hit. We know why the smell of smoke or the sound of a firecracker can trigger a panic attack. We know why a mother's breast produces milk the moment a newborn latches.
We know what reflexes are.

A human being is such a beautifully complex organism that you’re essentially dragging its incredible sophistication through the mud by denying it. You deny it in almost every single post you make. Honestly, it gets under my skin.

I guess it would be best if I just started reading books on physics, chemistry, and stuff like that. Apparently, that's the only way to be considered smart. Everything else is worthless. Maybe I should just toss all other books onto a bonfire. They probably just serve to make people stupid anyway. The most important thing is knowing which chemical substance my brain or some gland is secreting in a given situation. Bravo. You've solved many of life's essential mysteries with that one statement.😁

Look, you really ought to start reading more. You need to take a closer look at the very things you’re dismissing just because you refuse to acknowledge how complex they actually are. I never said things like the meaning of life were "stupid." But you know what is stupid? Denying the actual facts of life, which is exactly what you're doing right now.

Where on earth did you get the notion that I think nothing else has value? Is *Anna Karenina* garbage just because it isn't chemistry? Is Bach’s Third Suite worthless simply because it isn't physics?
Where are you even pulling these delusions from?

And where does this idea come from—that explaining a phenomenon somehow strips away its beauty? According to your logic, something is only beautiful if you’re too ignorant to understand how it works?
Is a night sky outside a major US city suddenly trash and stripped of its wonder just because we know it isn't some mystical shell of dots controlling our behavior, but rather a massive expanse of gas and plasma fusing elements?
Why would it be?

By your reasoning, does understanding how sound waves propagate through metal and air somehow degrade the raw, visceral terror felt when someone strikes a memorial bell in a quiet town square?

Man, what is wrong with you? Seriously, what is actually going on in your head?

Everything is good and everything is possible. That has nothing to do with intellectual anarchy; it stems from a profound understanding of our essence and the entirety of creation. That is what spirituality is.

Once again, you are throwing around misconceptions about me, projecting your own ideas onto my views. I have told you several times: this universe is in perfect order. There is no chaos. That is merely a construct of your own making. Furthermore, while everything is fundamentally one within the cosmos, it remains distinct in form—much like how a porcelain teacup and a porcelain saucer share the same material composition.

Your claim that nothing is unique is quite a blunder. Throughout human history, no two snowflakes have ever fallen the same way, nor have two leaves grown identically on a tree or two flowers bloomed exactly alike. My soul—the core of who I am—is unique in all of human history, stretching until the end of time. Your soul, who you are, is equally unique in the entire span of history. This applies to everyone. There has never been another version of you in all of existence, nor will there ever be, regardless of whether this universe lasts for trillions upon trillions of years. We are all unique. Every single one of us.

So, what exactly are you talking about? What "cult" are you referencing? You're just being a troll.

placidjackal36 said:Sometimes I’m agnostic, sometimes I’m an atheist, and sometimes I’m a believer. For certain things, I believe simply because they can't be proven. When it comes to nonsense that flies in the face of hard facts, I'm a staunch atheist—or even an antitheist, if we're using your definition of the term, which seems more concerned with supernatural entities than what I'm actually talking about.

Life is created by energy-rich chemical compounds? Everyone laughed. 😂😂😂

If you aren't interested in what I'm writing, then stop replying to my posts.

Yes, life is driven by energy-rich compounds. You honestly think this is just my little invention?
What about the massive teams of researchers who have dedicated their lives to this? What about the millions of people every day who validate these discoveries?
Have you ever actually looked into physiology? People have spent lifetimes studying how a human being functions. They’ve run experiments. They’ve measured the intake and output of mass, calculated how much energy a single unit of a nutrient provides through complete oxidation versus what's actually utilized when someone eats, and then mapped out the metabolic utility of specific parts: muscle, brain, and so on. They’ve tracked oxygen intake and expiration during rest, during study, or while running.
They’ve analyzed bodily fluids using every method under the sun, put subjects through X-rays and NMR, and monitored brain activity via EEG and heart rhythms via EKG.

We know exactly why a person lives and why they die. We understand our own structure down to the histological details. We know what powers a cell—the breakdown of substances and their fusion with oxygen in the mitochondria to produce the ATP that drives everything else.
We know how the kidneys filter waste and exactly how much energy that process requires.
We know why a heart can keep beating even when the brain is effectively dead. We know where emotions reside and where memories are stored.
We know where the center of balance is, and why a person panics when their airway is obstructed.
We know why it hurts when you get hit. We know why the smell of smoke or the sound of a firecracker can trigger a panic attack. We know why a mother's breast produces milk the moment a newborn latches.
We know what reflexes are.

A human being is such a beautifully complex organism that you’re essentially dragging its incredible sophistication through the mud by denying it. You deny it in almost every single post you make. Honestly, it gets under my skin.

I guess it would be best if I just started reading books on physics, chemistry, and stuff like that. Apparently, that's the only way to be considered smart. Everything else is worthless. Maybe I should just toss all other books onto a bonfire. They probably just serve to make people stupid anyway. The most important thing is knowing which chemical substance my brain or some gland is secreting in a given situation. Bravo. You've solved many of life's essential mysteries with that one statement.😁

Look, you really ought to start reading more. You need to take a closer look at the very things you’re dismissing just because you refuse to acknowledge how complex they actually are. I never said things like the meaning of life were "stupid." But you know what is stupid? Denying the actual facts of life, which is exactly what you're doing right now.

Where on earth did you get the notion that I think nothing else has value? Is *Anna Karenina* garbage just because it isn't chemistry? Is Bach’s Third Suite worthless simply because it isn't physics?
Where are you even pulling these delusions from?

And where does this idea come from—that explaining a phenomenon somehow strips away its beauty? According to your logic, something is only beautiful if you’re too ignorant to understand how it works?
Is a night sky outside a major US city suddenly trash and stripped of its wonder just because we know it isn't some mystical shell of dots controlling our behavior, but rather a massive expanse of gas and plasma fusing elements?
Why would it be?

By your reasoning, does understanding how sound waves propagate through metal and air somehow degrade the raw, visceral terror felt when someone strikes a memorial bell in a quiet town square?

Man, what is wrong with you? Seriously, what is actually going on in your head?

I didn't suspect you were merely blowing with the wind.

Yes, life is created by energy-rich compounds. Do you honestly think this is my invention?
What about the massive collective of scientists who worked on this? What about the millions of people who validate these discoveries every single day?
Have you even heard of physiology? People have studied how a human functions. They have experimented on us. They have measured nutrient intake versus output, calculated how much energy a unit of mass provides through complete oxidation during combustion compared to ingestion, and determined human metabolic utility—including the specific needs of muscle and brain tissue. They've tracked oxygen intake and expiration during rest, learning, and running.
They have analyzed bodily fluids through every possible method, subjected subjects to X-rays and NMR, and monitored brain activity via EEG and heart function via EKG.

We know why a person lives and why they die. We understand our structure down to the histological details. We know what powers a cell—the breakdown of substances and their bonding with oxygen in the mitochondria to produce ATP, which fuels the rest of the body.
We know how the kidneys filter waste and exactly how much energy that process requires.
We know why a heart can beat even when the brain is effectively dead. We know where emotions reside and where memories are stored.
We know where the center of balance is, and why a person panics when their airway is obstructed.
We know why it hurts when you get hit. We know why the smell of smoke or the sound of a firecracker can trigger a panic attack. We know why a breast produces milk when a newborn latches.
We know what reflexes are.

A human being is such a beautifully complex creature, yet you profane its magnificent sublimity by tossing it into the mud through your denial. You deny it in almost every single post. Honestly, it makes my blood boil.

You wrote a lovely description of human physiological functioning. Especially that line: "A human being is such a beautifully complex creature"—on that, I agree with you completely.

But you missed the mark entirely on your tone. You missed the point of the message. You've misrepresented my position. And above all, you've missed the very essence of what gives us life.

First off, I celebrate human sublimity, whereas you attempt to degrade it. You reduce a person to a mere heap of chemical processes. To physiology (you don't need to believe me, but I certainly know what physiology is). Yet, a human is incomparably more than that. In your view, a person is a biological machine (a beautiful and complex one), but I contend there is so much more. All that chemistry, physics, physiology, and every organ and system—as perfect as they truly are—serve merely as the perfect vehicle for the soul, which is our true identity. The physical body is our coarsest vibration. The soul is incomparably finer. The physical body is the smallest part of us; the soul is infinitely greater. It is the soul that breathes life into the human body, not the other way around. And through the spirit, through the very thing that animates us, we are all one, because we are crafted from the same substance: Divine Love.

Energy-rich compounds don't create life. They don't give life. They merely sustain it. Much like air, water, food, a beautiful view, good company, love, or the ocean. Life is generated by the spirit; the spirit maintains life, and when the spirit departs, life ceases.

Honestly, you really ought to start reading. You should take a closer look at what you’re dismissing by ignoring such complexity. I never suggested that things like the meaning of life are nonsense. However, denying the fundamental facts of existence is foolishness, and that is precisely what you are doing.

Where on earth did you get the notion that I believe nothing else holds value? Is *Anna Karenina* garbage just because it isn't chemistry? Is Bach’s Third Suite worthless because it isn't physics?
Where are these delusions coming from?

And where does this idea come from—that explaining a phenomenon somehow destroys its beauty? Do you believe something is only beautiful if you remain completely ignorant of how it works?
Is the night sky outside a major US city suddenly meaningless, and stripped of that sense of awe, simply because we know it isn't a patterned shell dictating behavior, but rather a vast expanse of gas and plasma fusing elements?
Why would it be?

By your logic, does understanding how sound waves propagate through metal and air somehow degrade the raw terror felt when a hammer strikes a memorial bell in Hiroshima?

Man, what is wrong with you? Honestly, what is your problem?

Thank God, you think you see beyond a formula. Well, since you claim to see so much, perhaps you could realize how misplaced your assessment is. I am not denying the facts of life; I am denying that life originates from energy-rich compounds. You have to laugh.

I have nothing against science. Science has driven progress throughout history. It has answered countless questions, debunked myths, and corrected our course. We all rely on its discoveries every single day. So, I am not against it. But I am against your attitude toward the spirit, the soul, and the essence of what makes life possible. Actually, let me rephrase: I don't care what you believe. Believe whatever you want. Just don't attack me based on your own limitations, demanding evidence for things that the global scientific community hasn't even found yet. I have told you several times that these truths exist and are part of a future era. The fact that science hasn't proven the existence of a soul doesn't mean it isn't there; it just means science hasn't proven it yet. That is all. And that is hardly an argument. In my reflections, I am not bound by such restrictions or religious dogmas—only by common sense, deep spiritual insight, and lived experience.

Every day, I celebrate this life—its perfection, its beauty, its richness, and its diversity. I truly have no idea where you gathered these absurdities. I actually started a thread specifically on this topic. I perceive life as such, regardless of outward indicators. I am not limited by anything. Nor do I believe that explaining a phenomenon diminishes its beauty. You have gone far too far putting words in my mouth.

I can repeat my question: Man, what is wrong with you? Seriously, what is your problem?

Ryan Wilson2 said:The truth is, nobody can claim to know for certain until they've actually passed away. Everything else is nothing more than idle philosophizing—a desperate attempt to distract ourselves from our inherent fear of death.

I have died many times in my previous lives. Just like you, and everyone else on this planet.

placidjackal36 said:I’m not going to argue with you, because you clearly can't hold a conversation without drifting off into your own little fantasies.
1) I am not an atheist.
2) Life is driven by energy-rich chemical compounds— that isn't a belief, it's a fact.
3) I have zero interest in your dogmas.

That’s all I have to say. Since you labeled me an atheist (which I know is meant as an insult), I’d love to give you a piece of my mind, but I won't. I've been warned that I can't express personal opinions about others on this subforum. Everything has to be wrapped in velvet, polite and polished. It's a shame, really; it doesn't suit my personality at all—most of us back home are much more direct than that. I have enough social restraint to avoid blurting out every thought that crosses my mind, but I refuse to act hypocritical or spineless.

That’s a solid comparison. But he isn't going to get it because he's too intoxicated by his own slogans. His brain is just pumping out serotonin while he repeats those shallow experiences of easy happiness he felt when he first started reading thicker books (and unfortunately, you know the type).

Yeah, he planned ahead. In fact, he was more "human" than the settlers who tore him apart. A cheetah doesn't plan. An elephant doesn't plan. A moth doesn't plan. They just eat until they're done.
I think what happened in North America just goes to show that parts of humanity haven't moved past those primitive, impulsive behaviors—behaviors that might be acceptable if they didn't constantly clash with someone else's right to live and be free.

We aren't stupid, but we are definitely crazy if we think we can destroy not just the planet, but ourselves in the process with nothing but colorful scraps of paper.
Budd was right; there is no good or evil, there is only awareness and ignorance.
We lack wisdom, which is why Simon33 is writing in vain here—mystical insights just don't transfer through internet forums.

I agree to a point, but you should never live under the delusion that you are fully aware. That mindset is exactly what landed us in this mess. You set a goal just within reach so that you're always moving toward it. Once people fall into the trap some folks here have, they stop striving altogether and just settle into a mental swamp.

I’m hoping for the collapse of this destructive modern civilization that convinced us that living in luxury is the pinnacle of existence. I just wonder what most people are feeling under all that stress and dissatisfaction. Subconsciously, they know we are living unnaturally—living at breakneck speeds, stressed out, racing just to achieve something or get somewhere.

Like the Native Americans used to say—we will return.🙂

What kind of collapse are you talking about?

My apologies; I truly didn't mean to offend you by calling you an atheist. I just remembered seeing you mention once that you identify as agnostic. I have nothing against atheists, so labeling someone isn't an insult in my book—it seems I missed the mark there. I was an atheist myself at one point, so I certainly understand the perspective.

Life is created by energy-rich chemical compounds? Everyone had a good laugh at that one. 😂😂😂

If my posts don't interest you, please feel free to simply ignore them.

Perhaps it would be best if I started studying physics, chemistry, and similar subjects. Apparently, that is the only literature that makes a person intelligent. Everything else is worthless. In fact, we should probably just burn every other book in a massive bonfire; they only serve to dull the mind. The most important thing is knowing which specific chemical substance my brain or some gland is secreting in any given moment. Bravo. You’ve managed to solve many of life's essential mysteries with that single statement.😁

Ryan Wilson2 said:That is nothing more than a coping mechanism for you.😁

I am not seeking comfort. I simply know the facts.

coastalorca7 said:Reading these words brings to mind Jesus' golden rule—that universal principle where he taught us to recognize ourselves in every single person we meet daily. If we could actually succeed—even for just a split second—in feeling ourselves within another, we wouldn't inflict on them in that same instant what we wouldn't want for ourselves. All human relationships should be governed by that ethical principle of reciprocity. The exact same standard I apply to myself is the one I must apply to everyone else.
But here’s the catch: if I am mentally ill and find satisfaction in physically destroying myself—say, through self-harm or cutting—then according to this logic, I should be doing that same thing to others because it "suits" me.
Does what works for me necessarily work for you?
One is (already) aware; they are already saved, because it creates a domino effect. Once you experience that transformation (moving away from self-harm), you are saved.

Are you suggesting that because a tiny fraction of a percent of people are self-destructive or unwell, this entire principle becomes invalid? If so, that is a compelling argument. 🙄

Ryan Wilson2 said:Look out that same window and you will see that death is ever-present. Every single life form eventually ends, or survives by ending another. Death is the true universal constant that binds us all together. Does that necessarily mean we are obligated to celebrate Death?

Death doesn't actually exist. It is merely a shift in form—a rebirth on the other side. Life is defined by constant change, so it follows that change is what truly binds us together. We can certainly choose to celebrate change. Life never truly terminates; it simply evolves. 😁

placidjackal36 said:Here you go again, spinning fairy tales out of thin air. It’s impossible to have a rational conversation with you when you just keep moving the goalposts and changing the variables whenever it suits your argument.
Look, I ask you a straightforward question, and somehow you still manage to lose the plot.

I am not rambling about fantasies, nor have I lost my way.

I fear the confusion lies with you; you seem obsessed with reducing every statement to mere chemistry and physics. Please understand that science does not yet hold all the answers. Until it does, your behavior on this forum is nothing more than harassment—driven by your negativity and a compulsive need to debunk my points or anyone else's. If you truly consider yourself a scientist, you are essentially working just to validate my claims.

I stated quite clearly that this isn't about chemistry, but about life itself. Look in a mirror or out your window; life is teeming everywhere in countless forms. Many haven't even been discovered yet. What binds them all together? Life itself, manifesting in various ways. Within your narrow view, you obsessively study the chemical makeup of every organism, failing to realize that neither chemistry nor physics creates life. Without spirit, without a soul to drive and shape it, there is no life as we know it.

What I am describing—this shift in consciousness and the realization that we are all one—will come through understanding that the One who grants us life is singular. We are one because of that connection, not because of carbon atoms, tin, niobium, ribosomes, or any other material element.

As an atheist, your fundamental settings are flawed because you don't believe in God. Consequently, your efforts aren't aimed at understanding my perspective, but rather at dismantling it. Your stance is predictable: you only believe what can be scientifically proven, yet you live surrounded by phenomena that science has yet to grasp. I am telling you, you will have to change your paradigm if you ever wish to truly see. To truly see, one must first believe. That applies to everything in life, not just religion.

I kindly ask that you cease these negative posts. Spare me the demands for evidence and the constant references to chemistry and physics. If I were to walk onto a forum where you were the moderator and behaved toward you the way you do to me here, I would be giving you a free pass to react however you liked. On this platform, we should maintain a positive tone.