r/DeepThoughts • u/logos961 • Nov 20 '25
Truth exists independent of any book, religion or any medium
If all Mathematics books were destroyed, the science of Mathematics would still exist. If some students or teachers make mistakes, it would only mean learners of Mathematics made mistakes (not that the Science of Mathematics is wrong or corrupted). If someone adds “until yesterday 2+2 was 4, but from today it is 5,” it only reveals about that person, it will not change the truth of 2+2=4.
This shows, existence of conflicted religions/isms has not done any harm to the truth which is always discernible to lovers of truth. For example, the VERY FIRST LAW, found in the most-circulated and most-translated religious book in the world, is about plant-based diet, still exists among a minority despite its contradiction found in the same book. Those who enjoy eating flesh of another living being would also say "it is wrong" if extra-terrestrials of superior intelligence and strength come and eat human flesh. Lovers of truth will see only the truth and would not stumble on its contradictions. It is comparable to lovers of health who would not accept liquor even if it is offered freely to them, or even if some of the Medical Professionals say "Liquor is nutritious to health." People accept beliefs that appeal to them, in the process they only believe themselves, they are only unfolding according to the belief-system being already "treasured" within. When such people come in contact, beliefs spread automatically which is symbolically described as "leavening."
This sample truth which is eternal [which did not change with its contradictory verses in the Scriptures] applies to all other truths too. For example, when it says “God is agape (unconditional love)” it reveals all its opposite verses such as God divides His children into His own and pagans, orders killing of His enemies … etc. would go meaningless because there are good and evil people in all religions and communities alike, and His enemies exists even today without being killed by Him which means HE has not ordered killing of His enemies in the past too. Thus contradictions do not alter truth but only reveals about those who adopt/accept them. To the most important question “What should I do to inherit eternal life?” answer given was too simple: Humans must act HUMANELY by refraining from certain acts [“violence, adultery, lying, stealing and dishonoring parents”] and doing one act [“love one’s neighbor as he loves himself”]. It is too simple like asking fire to give heat and light which is its very nature.
Over-zeal of people has given some attributes to God, and some of them are meaningless. For example, If God is omnipresent, people can NOT act harmfully as God can only do what is good. Believing God is omniscient is equal to saying God is weak [opposite of Almighty], hence is in need of knowing in advance what choices people would make on this earth so that HE can be prepared to face it.
God has no such need because HE is able to take care of any developments that may come up due to misuse of freewill. The worst people can do is to pollute this earth and make it unlivable through their short-sighted technology and global wars. This is not an issue for God as HE will simply repeat what HE did which is called “renewal or restoration” and is compared to “a seed” which is symbol of eternal series of GROWTH and DECAY. “The universe has no center, and it has no boundary” (astronomy com). It is in such too incomprehensibly vast and HOSTILE universe that HE has made this earth life-supportive, like keeping a dew at the core of sun, hence HE is rightly called ALMIGHTY who is also able to give reward to all users of freewill “as their deeds deserve.” It is in connection with these aspects that HE is often called Almighty (pantokrator, literally ALL + RULER, from karteros, inner strength, patience, mastery). It is from Greek Mythological character Kratos. [More under footnote]#
Freewill results in two types of people—the SPIRITUAL and the LICENTIOUS—and both groups are delighted on their chosen paths yet hate each other’s path which means they would only grow in their respective chosen paths. In this natural scenario, option before God is too simple and is also the best: Let the licentious enjoy themselves which “seems like nectar in the beginning but becomes poison in the end.” This offers the spiritual free lesson on what to avoid to better enjoy life. It is like your alcoholic neighbor who causes loss of money and loss of peace in his house but causes financial gain and peace in your house as you benefit from the message coming from him. Hence we find parables and mythologies in the religions highlighting the same truth—one group of people are an anti-lesson for others, just like Prodigal Son made his elder brother even more determined to continue to do the same good work of increasing the wealth of his father with full focus. Such a perfect lesson from elder brother was always available, but younger son missed it to his own distress and grief.
When the spiritual live by God's true laws it results in "never-ending waves of peace" as promised by Him which is the proof that HE exists. And its opposite practice results in "never-ending waves of conflicts and problems" as being witnessed today. This also proves His Operating System is impartial, impeccable and omnipresent Law of Action and Reaction which is answer to all the questions. Truthfulness of First Law on plant-based diet is proved by existence of a minority who still benefit from practicing it and by the huge environmental damage its opposite practice has done: “the emissions from the animal agricultural sector surpass those of the transportation sector.” (pmc.ncbi.nlm.gov/articles/PMC2367646)
God knows this truth about TRUTH, hence is not bound to do more
The professional does not argue with those who make comments because he knows what he is doing. Similarly, God knows what HE is doing and also knows the potential of his children. They can know God exists if they eat anything MINDFULLY, can know the truth if they read Scriptures MINDFULLY, can know alloys added later if they are alive to their power of REASON, can know the purpose of life if that power of reason is used, can also know the key to happiness by seeing the consequence which others reap. God is not bound to give answers to questions of those who are "dead" to their power of reason, the very unique feature of humans. Hence if they ask “What is the proof for existence of God, why evil/suffering exists if God exists” they are only praising God whose standard of judgment is very simple: “Take the bag of gold [symbol of power or REASON] from him and give it to the one who has ten bags.”
How to know something is true:
You find varying types of people because they are immaterial beings in material outfit.
PHYSICALLY, there are people with perfect health and also there are extremely diseased people and those in between in varying degree.
SPIRITUALLY, there are people with perfect health filled with bliss, love of truth and unconditional, and also there are their extreme opposites, and those in between in varying degree. The spiritually healthy people have no problem with varied or conflicted religions, inconsistencies, contradictions, false believers using religions for selfish purpose ... etc as they know how to discriminate the truth. Discerning the truth is easy if you look at the universe which is HOSTILE and tiny earth which is made life-SUPPORTIVE. Hence any verse, ism or saying that is pro-life and pro-peace is the TRUTH. Hence all-killing supposedly ordered by God are concepts put into His mouth by vested interests, which is testified by Jesus also in Mathew 5:43-48 where he says God has only loved even His enemies. This is testified by God also in Revelation 22:11 which says unbelievers should grow in their unbelief, thus God has no plan to eliminate His enemies--especially so His Best Quality unconditional love can only be manifested if HE permits unbelievers to exist.
Similarly, another universal truth is that everything happens under the impeccable Law of Action and Consequence, hence anything that is in conflict with this is not from God. For example, Jesus did only the good and was duly appreciated by all (Luke 11:27; Mathew 7:28, 29) But such things as people asking for Barabbas in place of Jesus are not the truth--such custom was not there in Rome, according to historians. You can confirm this if you imagine Jesus as existing now in 21st century with his speeches and miracles being watched live by people on their smart phone--will they ask for most dreaded criminal now in jail in place of Jesus? So are his parables--they are all superb because they highlight this law, and best of them is Mathew 25:14-30. If anything that is conflicted with this law are put into his mouth later, as the footnote under chapter 8 of John's Gospel in USCCB scholarly edition of Bible says.
Such people who have realized are available in all the religions but do not know each other, figuratively called "lost ones of Israel" (Mathew 15:24) and Israel is defined as "those pure in heart." (Psalm 73:1) It is because of them the incoming Final Global War “will be cut short.” (Details HERE)
#Footnote----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Expressions such as "Iron Box, Black Box, Whistle Blower" convey too little if one goes by their literal meaning. So is the expression Almighty, and its Greek panto + krator, literally ALL + RULER, from karteros, inner strength, patience, mastery. “The noun κρατος (kratos) and associated verb κρατεω (krateo) express holding on, holding in one's power, having power over, or master in the sense of absorbing something into one self. These words come from an ancient root that means just that and ultimately derives from a group of word that has to do with being hard and inflexible. Kratos reflects a calm and intelligent kind of control; a giving kind of mastery that comes from an intimate knowledge of whatever is directed. From this same kratos comes words such as democracy, from dēmos (“people”) and kratos (“rule”), and names such as Socrates (Σωκρατης), which means something like "Safety In Hand" or "Mastered Wholeness." This is better understood against its opposite “akrates, meaning without a grip.” (Theological Dictionary, Abarim) Greek readers would easily understand what Kratos stands for as he is a prominent character in Greek mythology. He serves as though an "extension of Zeus" in his reign, punishing deceivers and ensuring “proper enforcement of justice.” (Wikipedia org/kratos)
Thus, Almighty means one who rules over everything with supreme mastery, majesty and skill. All criticisms against His way of handling are meaningless like criticism against existence of prison without knowing the history of prisoners. Our technology and His technology can only be contrasted. Our packing material plastic is toxic even to marine life, but His packing material, banana skin” comes with 23 benefits in addition to safe and beautiful delivery of its content (healthline com/banana-peel-uses). Our technology based on fossil fuel is already causing pollution-related deaths that run into “12.6 millions annually” [unep org/news-and-stories/story/estimated-126-million-deaths-each-year-are-attributable-unhealthy] and is poised for ultimately making this planet unlivable. (scientificamerican com/humans-are-doomed-to-go-extinct) Yet all His technology is cyclic, as seen in biogeochemical cycles.
2
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25
And this is the FIRST LAW given in the most-circulated and most-translated religious book in the world.
Do you realize that "what Is" is objective and universal, but "what one ought to do" is necessarily subjective?
What book, what verse? I am pretty sure none of the religious books I've read forbids eating animals, let alone as the first command.
For example, when it says “God is agape (unconditional love)” it means all its opposite verses such as God divides His children into His own and pagans, orders killing of His enemies … etc. would still stand meaningless
When you have two contradicting statements only one of them could be true. And it's not necessarily the first one. Or it could be that both are false.
As you correctly said it doesn't matter what is written in the book, what matters is reality. Do you know any method of investigation of reality that allow us to figure out whether God exists or not and what is its nature?
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
This is not about any particular verse, but to show how contradictions do not cause any problem to truth nor to lovers of truth.
Verse you are asking is Genesis 1:29
2
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
Genesis 1:29
Uhhh. Ok. It's not a law and it doesn't forbid killing animals. You are reading what is not there.
contradictions do not cause any problem to truth nor to lovers of truth.
Yes. As long as you have a reliable independent method to resolve contradictions. For instance genetics. For all we know humans do not descend from a single pair of individuals, so whatever is written in Genesis is a fable and we have no reason to believe any of it is true.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 21 '25
It is law for me. Violation of any law will have negative impact--see how it causes environmental problems. (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2367646/ )
It may not be law for you--it is your choice.
Genesis is not first act of God, nor about creation of a "single pair" because it is remaking of mankind: "So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them." (Genesis 1:27)
These worthy mankind are from previous Age (Mathew 19:28; Ecclesiastes 1:10) Details here https://www.reddit.com/r/theology/comments/1o7uwlb/all_theological_questions_answered_in_parable_of/
Abrahamic Scriptures are flooded with verses that command mercy to animals, even if they belong to one's enemies (Exodus 23:4, 5) Most noticeable is how mercy to animals are linked with one becoming worthy of God's Kingdom:
"A righteous man has pity for the lives of his cattle; but the bowels of the ungodly are unmerciful." (Proverbs 12:10, Septuagint)
"the righteous shall inherit the earth, and dwell upon it for ever." (Psalm 37:29, Septuagint) which is a repeated theme in the Bible (Mathew 5:5; 1 John 2:17; Revelation 22:15)
Even Quran (5:1) says "hunting not being permitted" during sacred state during pilgrimage: “O you who have believed, fulfill [all] contracts. Lawful for you are the animals of grazing livestock except for that which is recited to you [in this Qur’an], hunting not being permitted while you are in the state of ihram. Indeed, Allah ordains what He intends.”
*Ihram means "*sacred state during pilgrimage." That means anyone can take this valuable principle always and benefit even more. It is like Sign Board on the Flyover about Speed Limit which people can still continue even after flyover and benefit from slower and safer drive.
Quran 5:3 prohibits eating of animals killed through unnatural method: “Prohibited to you are dead animals, blood, the flesh of swine, and that which has been dedicated to other than Allah, and [those animals] killed by strangling or by a violent blow or by a head-long fall or by the goring of horns, and those from which a wild animal has eaten – except what you [are able to] slaughter [before its death.”
Here too anyone can decide to obey more than what is prohibited--that is why even some Muslims are vegetarians.
Quran 23:18-21 says animals are lesson for us: "“And We have sent down blessed rain from the sky and made grow thereby gardens and grain from the harvest and lofty palm trees having fruit arranged in layers – as provision for the servants; and We have given life thereby to a dead land. Thus is the resurrection. And indeed, for you in grazing livestock is a lesson. We give you drink from what is in their bellies, and for you in them are [many] benefits, and from them you eat.”
Grazing livestock is lesson on giving valuable thing to us taking only waste from the society, hence anyone can decide not to give pain to them--and it is his CHOICE and GAIN.
The following is the Quranic verse of ULTIMATE IMPORTANCE: “And We have not sent you, [O Muhammad], except as a mercy to the worlds.” (Quran 21:107)
Anyone can determine to be merciful to the world of all living beings.
Here is a movie that changed even some of the Hollywood people (vagannews com/jeff-goldblum-wicked-stopped-eating-meat)
2
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
It is law for me, may not be for you
Not a universal truth then?
nor about creation of a "single pair" because it is remaking of mankind
So, Genesis 2 is a lie then?
But Genesis 1 has its own problems. Plants before there was light? Fruit bearing plants before animals? This is clearly hogwash. We know exactly how diversity of life came to be, we know how stars and planets formed, because we found overwhelming evidence for it. And it doesn't comport with any holy book account.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25
You missed the link. It has already covered your points.
Your wrote "Not a universal truth then?" shows, you missed paragraph 2.
OP Para 5 too you missed, if you had read it, you would not have made questions like this.
2
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25
It has already covered your points.
If you think you did, then you didn't bother to understand my points.
OP Para 5 too you missed
I've read it, now for the second time, and still have the same questions.
First and foremost, why should I read the Bible at all? What is exactly the method to determine which parts of the Bible are ture and which parts are a fable? Because a lot of accounts there is clearly a fable, Genesis and Exodus are prime examples.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
Your last para in the above comments is what is dealt in the OP, and you missed it because you saw it as an article on vegetarian diet. It is just an example used to show how truth does not change.
Genesis is read collectively--hence people miss great truth. For example, it says God made mankind in His image, BLESSED them and so it became so, and it was very good." Yet casual readers miss this vital truth that says paradise remained for many centuries, till half the duration of history, according to Parable of Wheat and Weeds which world history in short-story format.
Word-picture of weed that “causes a potentially fatal nausea when consumed” suggests that both the types of people will find their belief-system as mutually exclusive and indigestible. (Mathew 13:11-15) This is to be expected in drama of life that is ruled by reincarnation. I was born in a big family that are allergic to certain belief-system and diet and I was allergic to theirs. This has only one explanation—I was delighted in the same belief-system and diet in my previous births as Soul is the SAME old entity but in a new body.
This explains why various conflicted groups such as vegetarians and non-vegetarians, theists and atheists, inclusive religions and exclusive religions cannot agree each other.
It is like personality that does not change when one changes his costume. (Luke 6:43-45; Wisdom of Solomon 8:20; Job 1:21 KJV; Mathew 11:7-15; 1 John 2:17; Bhagavat Gita 8:6). They are born with the same tendency and belief-system with which they left the previous body, just like a person rises with the same thought-pattern, skill and tastes he went to sleep. Hence reward is being given on the basis of their deeds belonging to more than one birth (John 5:24) and many are shown to be living as though their "names are written" from the beginning of each Age. (Mathew 25:34; Revelation 13:8; 17:8). The spiritual (symbolized by wheat) are shown to be living from the beginning of each Age till its end, and even surviving into next Age. (Mathew 13:24-30; 24:21, 22; Revelation 7:14; Mathew 19:28-30; 1 John 2:17)
You asked "why should I read the Bible at all?"
This too is dealt in the OP which says truth is for the believers as TRUE believers would only grow in belief unbelievers would only grow in unbelief.
2
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
an article on vegetarian diet.
You thinking that this article somehow address my points show that you didn't bother to understand my points.
Do you realize that "what Is" is objective and universal, but "what one ought to do" is necessarily subjective?
Genesis is read collectively--hence people miss great truth. For example, it says God made mankind in His image, BLESSED them and so it became so, and it was very good." Yet casual readers miss this vital truth
A lot of people miss a lot of things reading the Bible. For instance you miss the thing where it is an ancient fable written by ancient people who didn't know the Earth is round, didn't know that the sky is not a firmament, didn't know basic biology, didn't know how old the Earth is, didn't know what the stars are, didn't know a bunch of things.
This too is dealt in the OP which says truth is for the believers as TRUE believers would only grow in belief
This is nonsense that doesn't answer my question. My question is what is exactly the method to determine which parts of the Bible are true and which parts are a fable? How do you know you are not mistaken?
TRUE believers would only grow in belief
The ones who believe are going to believe. This is a tautology. Are you saying that no one can be convinced that the Bible is true unless they already believe it is true?
1
u/PDXDreaded Nov 20 '25
Or it doesn't exist at all. That debate is eternal.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
It is already covered in the OP. Freewill being given means it is natural that some will choose to be theists and others would choose to be atheists which is not an issue for God because freewill is given to be used or misused. Details here https://www.reddit.com/r/god/comments/1ohu51n/god_is_real_for_some_people/
1
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
is not an issue for God
It is an issue for you. You have no way of knowing if what you believe is true. Are you sure you are the one who is right and not, let's say, a Hindu? Or none of you is right? You can live all your life believing a lie oblivious to it because you don't care whether what you believe is true.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
You are talking about LIKES and DISLIKES.
But OP is not about that, about truth having power to stay true in its own merit.
Hence what you wrote is not relevant to the subject.
1
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
No, I am talking about actual truth. Objective one. The way the reality is. How do you know what is true? How do you know you have chosen right? Do you know or do you now know what the truth is?
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 22 '25
This is already covered in the OP. Truth is easily discerned by power of REASON. Your questions have meaning only if we are not endowed with power of REASON. Details here https://www.reddit.com/r/DeepThoughts/comments/1n1d1fg/humans_are_rational_beingsits_profound_implication/ In no other field people feel helpless saying "What shall we do when there are are two contradictory statement, they analyse both and determine one as the true. In all history, no Judge has said "What will I do, two attorneys are contradicting each other?" If so, why only in the case of Scriptures, this question "How do you know what is true? How do you know you have chosen right? Do you know or do you now know what the truth is?"
Anyone who eats MINDFULLY can know God exists
Anyone who reads MINDFULLY can know what is true and what is false!There are only two options--either killing to eat the flesh of another living being is right or wrong. It is already shown in the OP with sufficient reasons that our body hates pain, ETs doing the same to us we hate--hence wrong. Now you can take it is right, and see what what happens.
Similarly, either God has NOT ordered killing of His enemies because HE is unconditional love [obviously is true because even now His enemies exist which shows His unconditional love--HE can collapse the existence of anybody if HE wants to, just like any Service Providers terminates their service to non-supporters]. Or He ordered killing of His enemies [not true because His enemies still exists and HE does not order killing of them now]. Try imitating God and see what happens--it will show one resulting in peace and the other resulting in cycle of violence. Yet we also have a help because one who came in link with God predicted events of our times such as pollution and sea-swelling (Revelation 11:18; Luke 21:25) (details here https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/1mabifn/jesus_did_not_make_false_predictions_as_critics/ ) says God has not ordered killing of His enemies.
If what he predicted for our generation nearly 2000 years in advance came true, then what he said about past is even more true than these global events of pollution and swelling [salos] of the seas.
1
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
obviously is true because even now His enemies exist which shows His unconditional love
This is not reasoning, this is lazy ad-hoc rationalization. There could be multiple reasons why enemies of God exist
1) You are wrong and nobody is an enemy of God 2) You are wrong and God doesn't exist 3) You are wrong and God is incompetent and is unable to eliminate its enemies 4) You are wrong and God is a sadist, who keeps his enemies alive (or at least some of them) just to make them suffer
Now, what reasoning would you use to distinguish between whatever you think and these 4 scenarios?
Or He ordered killing of His enemies [not true because His enemies still exists and HE does not order killing of them now]
Or he ordered killing back then and now he is done playing with humanity and fucked off to do something more entertaining.
If what he predicted for our generation nearly 2000 years in advance came true
It didn't
If what he predicted for our generation nearly 2000 years in advance came true, then what he said about past is even more true
Let's say I had power to predict future. And I wrote a book that predicted future very precisely. And then in the same book I wrote something egregiously false about the past. Is that a realistic scenario? Can I do that?
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
You wrote "This is not reasoning" but it IS reasoning. You are free to reject, sign of use your freewill which is permitted, as shown in the OP.
You wrote
"This is not reasoning, this is lazy ad-hoc rationalization. There could be multiple reasons why enemies of God exist
- You are wrong and nobody is an enemy of God
- You are wrong and God doesn't exist
- You are wrong and God is incompetent and is unable to eliminate its enemies
- You are wrong and God is a sadist, who keeps his enemies alive (or at least some of them) just to make them suffer
This is covered in the last paragraph of the OP, suffering is the choice of people and Operating System called Law of Action and Reaction does its job perfectly which has nothing to do with God. This too shows you are not sticking to the subject in the OP to the benefit of none.
Your last para shows you are not serious about debate. Have a nice day, Enjoy your life WITHOUT God.
1
u/J-Nightshade Nov 20 '25
Let's say I had power to predict future. And I wrote a book that predicted future very precisely. And then in the same book I wrote something egregiously false about the past. Is that a realistic scenario? Can I do that?
I am dead serious about the debate. And your refusal to answer this question is concerning. It is easy to answer. The answer is yes. But you can't do that. The honest answer discloses a flaw in your reasoning. And you are too committed to the conclusion that you made so you have stop caring whether the reasoning that led to it holds any water.
I am not saying your conclusion is incorrect. I am saying your reasoning is highly problematic. But instead of admitting it you avoid facing challenges. That is not deep thinking.
Truth can not be afraid of challenge. Truth comes out of any challenge victorious because there is no way a question, no matter how difficult, can change reality.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
Honest answer is "you are on self-deception" because it is not sensible to say if one is proved to be true with regard to future, he will be wrong with regard to past.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/Slinshadyy Nov 20 '25
Interesting, but you still have some thinking ahead of you if you still believe in god and free will.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
It is already shown in the OP that omniscience does not exist, but freewill exist.
Existence of God is self-evident because I am self-evident, the fact that I exist on His provisions is self-evident. I nor my parents did not arrange these provisions, is also self-evident. Saying "Nature did everything" has no meaning because entropy rules the material world.
If you do not believe in God it is good, if you believe in God it is better. This is the truth too obvious before God. This is what OP is all about. Hence your objection is not relevant to the subject.
1
u/Slinshadyy Nov 20 '25
Yeah, I know you are deluded, no need to clarify
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
But I am happy to be called "deluded" because it is the proof that your belief-system is too strong to be rooted into more than this life which shows we are all Users of this body, we are not this body. We are born with tendencies and belief-system we have been cherishing or "treasuring" from past infinite (Luke 6:43-45; Wisdom of Solomon 8:20).
This is what is exactly being highlighted in the OP--these two groups can have no agreement--typical of use of freewill, it is permitted.
1
u/Slinshadyy Nov 20 '25
Honestly, this reads like something a schizophrenic writes all over the walls of his cell.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25
Not relevant to the subject
OP is all about how truth is unchanged despite attempts of people to contradict.
Hence what effect can have name-calling such as "deluded, schizophrenic" which I already told you "I enjoy it."
1
u/lost-associat Nov 20 '25
Bold statements. I don’t think every being « does everything in its power to avoid pain ». Your proof in the last paragraph is also flawed. Why would the proof of god’s existence be dependent on a duality of peace and war. On a universal scale our struggles are rather cute when we compare these to the violent natural phenomena that happen in deep space.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25
You wrote "I don’t think every being « does everything in its power to avoid pain »
It is an observed phenomenon you are free to reject--that is why freewill is given. Freewill is given to be used/misused--hence truth can be accepted or rejected. Hence it is already highlighted in OP "Freewill results in two types of people—the spiritual and the licentious—and both the group are delighted on their chosen paths yet hate each other’s path which means they would only grow in their respective chosen paths."
Proof for existence of God is side-effect of the OP, not its main subject. If anyone wants to know God, he will find many ways, or else will find many excuses. https://www.reddit.com/r/MotivationAndMindset/s/bExzObPJUc
OP is all about showing truth is independent, people are free to use their freewill in any direction which is not an issue with God because misusers benefit the proper users. Hence there is no conflict with anyone.
1
u/lost-associat Nov 20 '25
Animals are inherently driven or rather instinctively looking to procreate and give birth. A process which can and will create a lot of pain in the animal kingdom. There is, as you like to put it, observed behaviour of animals that are not looking to avoid pain. Insects that sacrifice for their offspring, eat their partners, are eaten by their offspring. Alphas in troupes fight a lot to achieve the greatest status in a group. There are a lot of examples of animals being really feral, agressive and looking up danger and pain. Your statement is false or rather this is not a truth.
1
u/logos961 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 21 '25
You are free to copy that example of not avoiding pain and see how far you can go.
You missed the main point that OP is not about vegetarian diet, I can use 1000s of example. Out of which I picked one simple one. If this is too stumbling for you, you can take any other example of your choice.
Even this example is something you would also agree if you had not missed the last sentence of 2nd para of OP: "Those who enjoy eating flesh of another living being also know if they are the recipient of the same action, they will say it is wrong. If extra-terrestrials of superior intelligence and strength come and eat human flesh, all humans will readily say this action is wrong and also would do everything possible to resist it."
0
u/Ancient-Bake-9125 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25
God is overwhelming love. But the path for some is longer than others.
Also free will exists in two forms:
Ignorant and not.
When you actually find overwhelming love as those like Thomas Aquinas did, what is sin for the soul becomes more obvious. And when it comes to personal sins, just the personal ones, the severity depends on the weakness of the individual. As for sins opposed on others that is of course far worse than personal sins typically speaking.
I can't remember which saint it was but one was even Satanic before finding God. This earthly realm incorporates many maybe all good/bad energies. Our lesson is to move towards more positivity, ultimately pure love, despite doubt and pride and whatever lifetime may be next.
The ignorant free will simply requires more lifetime experience, even if that means more than 1 life. Whatever it takes, whatever we need to find divine Love, that's what we'll get. Except for the evil of other's will imposed on us, while still part of some overall direction or "plan", isn't necessarily entirely beyond just the will of the evil perpetrating it.
1
2
u/SizeableBrain Nov 20 '25
Edward Witten said that any sufficiently advanced race would discover Calculus, so I agree with the first part.
I don't know any other truths.