Are we living in a simulation? | Page 4 | INFJ Forum

Are we living in a simulation?

Daustus said:
Don't judge me.

giphy.gif
Click to expand...

I'm not saying I approve, but I'm saying I understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daustus, Skarekrow and Deleted member 16771
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bird, Cornerstone, ThomasJ79 and 2 others
Bas said:
I quoted Jurassic Park for two reasons:
1. Because the wording was just the wording I wanted to make the point I wanted to make, AND
2. Because this conversation and the very idea of evolution is just as fantastical as Jurassic Park the movie.
Click to expand...

Right, because virgin births and resurrections aren't fantastical in the slightest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kgal, Bird, Professor Snep and 3 others
Bas said:
Strictly-speaking, the word 'virgin' only means "pure". That's it. People add what meanings they wish, but it only means "pure" regardless what other meanings people wish to give it. God's definition ('pure') is the only definition that counts.

As for resurrections, think about it, if we mortals can take a body once, our eternal consciousnesses can again-and-again-and-again, and so on. We are consciousness, how many times have we inhabited bodies before we got to where we are now? And so, resurrection? Is it really fantastical after all? No, not really.
Click to expand...
If I were 20 and still a hardcore atheist, I'd love you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow and Daustus
Bas said:
Strictly-speaking, the word 'virgin' only means "pure". That's it. People add what meanings they wish, but it only means "pure" regardless what other meanings people wish to give it. God's definition ('pure') is the only definition that counts.

As for resurrections, think about it, if we mortals can take a body once, our eternal consciousnesses can again-and-again-and-again, and so on. We are consciousness, how many times have we inhabited bodies before we got to where we are now? And so, resurrection? Is it really fantastical after all? No, not really.
Click to expand...

oh stop. We all know what is meant by Virgin Mary.

I still think resurrecting T-Rex would be cooler......and more likely

Anyways....

jesus-juice-85960-465-500.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow, Professor Snep, Daustus and 1 other person
Bas said:
For that matter, if this world is really a dream, set-aside from our true home, then who is to say that there is even any law of physics at all? Of course, if there were an actual law of physics, who is to say that God couldn't implant His seed in a womb? But again, if this is a dream world, just a virtual-reality game, who is to say the maker of the game can't just turn-on 'God-mode'?
Click to expand...

Bloody hell...then who is to say that there is even any law of physics at all...I don't know...our current standard model?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Professor Snep and Skarekrow
Yes and we are all plucking the fruits of life while throwing away the meaning of existence itself. Who needs proper co-existence after all. Go Ghost(tm), Go!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
Bas said:
How people use a word has nothing to do with what it actually means. Regardless, whether Miriam (so-called "Mary") gave birth in this manner or that, virgin still means 'pure' and nothing more.
Click to expand...


Do you personally believe, as most Christians do, that Jesus was born from a woman who never engaged any sexual acts for his conception?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow
Bas said:
Science is always trying to do their 'mad scientist' routines. They are trying to cross species, etc. Those creatures are not fish, regardless what one calls them. And things created by man don't count. Further, flying fish who find themselves on land (or were put there by man to make a point) don't count either. I was a commercial fisherman some years ago, and sometimes flying fish would land on the boat, trying to get the bait stores, and yet, some used their fins to waddle off the boat and back into the water.
Click to expand...
None of those animals I posted were manmade...
I'm no atheist either, but you've just gone a bit overboard.
How do you know that God didn't use evolution to create man?
Don't you think if it were written out exactly how mankind were created that it wouldn't be comprehensible to us for the most part?
(not to mention a book larger than any book ever written)
As goes the explanation for Adam and Eve and Noah for that matter - parables to explain what people at that time in history could not.
It says we are made from the clay of the Earth yes?
Maybe we were once microbes and in terms people could understand for the time it was worded as such?
Jesus spoke mostly in parables for a reason - and he also said that "we" would not really understand most of them to boot.
You assume way way too much.
Cheers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Cornerstone, Professor Snep, Daustus and 1 other person
Bas said:
I don't get it.

OT I'm guessing you mean "Old Testament". What's 'VIII'?
Click to expand...
It's a reference to scientology, since you mentioned not being 'allowed' to say something about your position.

That kind of esotericism and secrecy is very cultic in nature, epitomised by the 'OT levels' of Scientology.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Skarekrow and Daustus
Deleted member 16771 said:
It's a reference to scientology, since you mentioned not being 'allowed' to say something about your position.

That kind of esotericism and secrecy is very cultic in nature, epitomised by the 'OT levels' of Scientology.
Click to expand...

While I do deal lot with esoteric things, I don't do Scientology.

I was only referring to not clarifying things that the Messiah saw fit to put into parable in the first-place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 16771
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back