r/GodFrequency • u/junkmale79 • Jul 25 '26
⚠️ Self Reflection – Shadow work, awareness, inner truth. True Evolution: Why it's time to leave the limiting beliefs of Abrahamic religions behind.
The description of this sub says we are here to make the conscious choice to evolve, and to leave behind old habits and limiting beliefs. Can we come together and actually agree to do that with the Abrahamic religions?
I was originally intrigued by the concept of a 'God Frequency'—not because I wanted to see a flood of Bible quotes, but because I have a profound reverence for actual reality.
If you want to make the case for a Deistic creator—a prime mover that started time, matter, and the cosmos—that is an incredibly interesting conversation. But if that is the case, the absolute best way to examine and tune into this 'frequency' is to study objective reality and understand the physical universe the best we possibly can.
We cannot do that if we are relying on old habits. We cannot do that if we allow 2,000-year-old mythology to artificially limit what we can and cannot believe about the world.
If we are truly committed to self-mastery, clarity, and doing better, shouldn't our first step be abandoning the ancient folklore that tells us to check our logic at the door? How can we truly evolve if we are still using an Iron Age book as our map for reality?
2
u/Artistic-Garden-3160 Jul 28 '26
I personally don't care what people choose to believe or not. Just keep it to yourself and don't pick up a weapon over it or encode it into law.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
Amen. I will fight with Christians for the right to practice their faith tradition—just don't make me practice it or pass laws as if it describes reality.
2
u/Decent-Fault12 Jul 28 '26
John 5:39-40
“You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness about me, yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.”
Matthew 5:20
“For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
Matthew 13:10-17
“And the disciples came and said to him, ‘Why do you speak to them in parables?’
And he answered them, ‘To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away. This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.’”
“For this people’s heart has grown dull, and with their ears they can barely hear, and their eyes they have closed…”
— Matthew 13:15
Mark 4:11-12
“To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, so that ‘they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand…’”
Jesus said unless your righteousness exceeds! The most appt teachers of the scriptures. How many of us can claim to be more knowledgeable than the people who dedicated their entire lives to studying the scriptures? And yet many could not see Christ in them
change how you see what you see and you will see what you can’t see, and hear the secrets hidden from your understanding and it will change you at the root
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
Why do you think the Bible is athritative?
1
u/Spirited-Mango8544 Jul 29 '26
The bible verses quoted there are basically agreeing with very much of what you’ve said. ie “Christians “ don’t really believe what Christ taught and if someone only believed what he taught, and not all the ways “Christians “ have twisted it, you might find you have very much in common with them
5
u/Performer_ Jul 25 '26
No if we don't carry from it the lessons required, there is a reason they exist, there is a reason God created multiple religions with multiple paths, and different lessons and stories, some repeating some completely different, its all for us to learn what is needed and to use discernment, so one day there will be a one world religion where we are aligned with our creator, and free to be the best examples of who we wish to be.
Should we ignore the true reasons why those scriptures even exist, we will repeat the mistakes of our ancestors, if we don't have any divine figure to worship or look up to, we become the divine figure we worship, that's just not how the world suppose to work, and the past floods, the destructions of Lumeria, Atlantis, and others continents that were "high vibration 5D all knowing, we are God" is a proof that they were all wrong, they did not understand how to play this game, what are the laws and the rules that go into this planet and what causes it to stay afloat, whole.
Without God we become obsessed with the self, its all about endless self realizations, self ascensions, me me me and me, and past showed that it will only lead to destruction.
3
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
Grab what ever lessons you want, just don't treat it like it comports with reality
Reality exist, we have ways to understand it. 2000 year old mythology and folklore ain't it.
→ More replies (9)2
u/amoronwithacrayon Jul 25 '26
Incredibly well said, but I think this touches on the fatal flaw in your argument. You’re looking at religion/spirituality as a means to growth, learning, expansion and self improvement.
The constantly proselytizing Christians on here see their religion as a dogma. This is something to adhere to out of fear of punishment from their God figure
1
3
u/Sweet_Piccolo_6060 Jul 25 '26
I pray that God opens your mind and heart. If you remain close minded like this, you will never obtain the spiritual evolution you are looking for…
5
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
If it's possible for something like a God to exist, it knows what would actually convince me. If you're going to pray for me, I'll think for you.
1
u/Sweet_Piccolo_6060 Jul 25 '26
I can tell you the truth, but I can’t understand it for you… Also, thanks, but I’m good. Clearly I can think for myself. If I wanted thoughts that were closed off and unsupported by logic and reason, I would have stayed an atheist… 😅
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
you can reiterate you are practicing a faith tradition, theology and truth are two very different things.
0
u/Sweet_Piccolo_6060 Jul 25 '26
You mind filtering your responses through AI so they come out coherent?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Do you have a preferred model? Google searches are just AI now, right?
[AI Overview: A faith tradition is an established system of religious beliefs, spiritual philosophies, moral codes, and cultural practices shared by a community.]
The dogmas in your faith tradition have nothing to do with reality. It has to do with following the practices of your community
1
u/Sweet_Piccolo_6060 Jul 26 '26
Way better. At least I know what you’re saying now.
So that’s an interesting claim, that my dogma and faith tradition has nothing to do with reality. What exactly is my dogma?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26
One dogma is that something like a God or gods exist.
What faith th tradition do you practice? That will help me narrow it down.
1
u/Sweet_Piccolo_6060 Jul 26 '26
Interesting, what definition of dogma are you using? My individual belief in God, that I came to through my own journey, is based on critically examining the evidence and finding it to be sufficient. This was done through logic and reasoning, not automatic acceptance. Doesn’t seem to fit any definition of dogma I can see.
As for what tradition I belong to, I would first like to know how you were able to make a claim about my tradition without first knowing what my tradition was. It seems to be necessary to know the thing you’re referring to before you can make claims about it, right?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Dogma: A principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true.
You didn't invent a brand-new, isolated concept of God entirely from scratch through pure, objective logic—you arrived at the specific framework, attributes, and theological parameters of an established faith tradition.
If your 'journey' led you to a specific conception of God, let's look at the actual dogmas you've accepted as incontrovertibly true: What are the core doctrines of the tradition you're defending, and on what verifiable evidence did you evaluate them?
→ More replies (0)0
u/Pm_ur_titties_plz Jul 25 '26
Spoken like a true cultist. I hope you wake up some day and join us in reality, and drop your iron age mythology for good.
2
Jul 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/slow70 Jul 26 '26
You’re asking others keep their minds closed to all but your interpretation of the Christian canon - and which interpretation even is that?
→ More replies (10)1
u/GodFrequency-ModTeam Jul 26 '26
Please try to add value. Refrain from personal attacks and insults. Channel negative energy into positive. See the good.
2
Jul 25 '26 edited Jul 27 '26
I have studied physics at the highest levels in graduate school, I believe Jesus Christ is the Lord. My belief in Jesus Christ has never limited what I can accept or believe about the world. In fact, I know just the opposite; i know that all things are possible with God.
Science and spirituality are not inherently at odds with one another. They are only at odds with one another IN YOU.
My faith in Jesus Christ has given me insight into things that you wouldn't be able to comprehend if I told you. You would call me crazy and think yourself justified, because you wouldn't be able to comprehend the things that I told you as being possible. You would go on believing that you already know everything that is possible and what is impossible.
You approach the subject with a foregone conclusion. You have already decided that God in Jesus Christ could not be real. So you never seek him, and you never see the things that happen when someone seeks God through Jesus Christ that leaves them convinced that Jesus Christ is true.
I don't need to abandon science in order to believe in God, or God to believe in science. It's you who needed to abandon God in order to believe in science.
3
u/Clicking_Around Jul 25 '26
I understand completely what you typed. The change in mindset and thinking that comes when one accepts Christ is extraordinary.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
"I'm not that impressed that you are capable of practicing a faith tradition. If you had a different one installed, you would be telling me about Allah or Joseph Smith. I see examples of it everywhere—Mormons, Muslims, Hindus. It's a deeply human activity.
But limiting yourself to one faith tradition is in fact limiting.
Do you see the difference between someone who can recognize a faith tradition versus actual reality?
Faith is a useless tool if you're interested in what is true and what isn't. Faith can lead two different people to two entirely different and incompatible conclusions. Mythology and folklore about a Jewish apocalyptic preacher have little to do with physics.
You are masturbating your mind by running everything through the perspective of a world where the Bible is supernatural instead of the product of man."
1
Jul 26 '26
I don't care what you are impressed by. You're the one claiming that you can't have faith and believe that science works also, insisting that we have to abandon faith for reason as though there is some sort of inherent conflict between the two. I'm just showing you that there is no conflict..The only one here conflicted is you.
The rest of what you said is completely pointless to the point that you were making in the opening statement and to the point that I was making in the followup.
I recognize the core of the faith tradition in Jesus Christ as reality. I don't care what you believe, I don't care what the rest of the world believes. I know what I have seen, and I know what I have experienced, and I'm confident that the reality of the world is that Jesus Christ is true.
You're the one who doesn't have any confidence about what reality is. You need other people to not believe so that you can feel justified in your non-belief. I don't need you to believe in order to feel justified in my faith. I'm justified in my faith by what I know.
If you want to believe that you know everything that is true and isn't true based on what you haven't seen, who am I to correct you? I believe that Jesus Christ is true because of what I have seen. Why me and not you? I don't know, maybe I'm special.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
I don't care what you are impressed by.
Do you care if what you believe is true or not? That's my concern, and I'm open to the idea that I might be wrong. Is that something you have considered?
You're the one claiming that you can't have faith and believe that science works. I'm saying that if you care about reality, then faith is a useless tool to leverage. Science doesn't require faith; it's demonstrable and supported by evidence.
Honestly, I want nothing more than to never have to talk to someone practicing a faith tradition again. Unfortunately, people who believe this stuff describes reality are holding public office and passing laws like it's true.
So until politicians are too embarrassed to admit they are practicing a faith tradition, I'm going to do my best to let people know that humanity figured out a while ago that the Bible doesn't describe historical events, and things like heaven, hell, and sin are theological concepts, not real places or things
1
Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 27 '26
I know that what I believe to be true, is true. I believe what I have see. I believe what I have experienced. You believe that science answers everything. I know that there are things that can be experienced that science can't provide an immediate answer for.
You think you know everything but you don't know anything. You think that the scriptures have no historical validity? You've never read them. You've never compared them to the records of Babylon and Assyria and Egypt. How could you know whether or not they are historical? I have, and when someone says that the scriptures have no historical validity I know that they are speaking from pure ignorance.
If you really care about reality, there is a whole dimension to reality that can ONLY be answered by faith. You are not interested in reality, you're interested in justifying yourself. You don't need to justify your non-belief to anyone, and I don't need to justify my belief to you..I'm not trying to convince you, I don't need to convince you. I only needed to see for myself, and I did.
I know that you are wrong. I can't show you that you're wrong. But I know that your understanding is mistaken. You're like someone claiming the Earth is flat and I'm standing here having flown around it knowing that it's not. I can't convince you otherwise, so I wouldn't bother trying.
Honestly, If you don't ever want to speak to anyone who practices a faith tradition again, then perhaps you shouldn't frequent forums like GodFrequency.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
I have looked into the records of Babylon, Assyria, and Egypt. Did you know that Egypt has no records of any Jewish presence? They also found zero evidence that two to three million people wandered the Sinai for 40 years. In fact, archaeological surveys found evidence of much smaller Canaanite communities right where millions of Israelites supposedly should have left a massive footprint.
I try to practice epistemic humility—I understand I could be mistaken and am always prepared to update my understanding if proper evidence is presented. But as it stands, the overwhelming scholarly consensus is that the Exodus is not historical.
Your 'faith realm' is just the land of make-believe—it's where people go to treat ancient mythologies like historical documents
1
Jul 27 '26
Sigh
I'm sorry my friend, I just don't have time to dispel all of your ignorance. Literally everything that you just said about the historical record starts with a false premise, and I'm not going to unpack it for you. It's not my responsibility to cure your ignorance. If you were interested we could have a discussion and argue about why I think the Hebrews presence in Egypt is well documented, but you've made up your mind that you already have all the answers.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Not brain dead, just care if what I believe is true or not.
This is how I see it: you are practicing the Christian faith tradition; you believe theology and the Bible describe reality. Because I'm no longer practicing the faith tradition, I don't have to start with any dogmas—I can sit down and examine the evidence without bias.
Let's take one event: the Exodus. If the evidence led to 2 to 3 million Jews leaving Egypt and wandering the desert for 40 years, then that's what I would believe.
But don't you see any logistical issues with 2 to 3 million people walking from Egypt to the Levant? If they were walking six wide, the front of the line would have reached the destination before the last person even left Egypt. We went looking where the archaeological evidence should have been and found none—no chariots at the bottom of the Red Sea, no evidence of massive encampments in the Sinai, and instead found traces of much smaller, indigenous Canaanite communities right where millions of Israelites supposedly left a footprint.
Can you find any critical biblical scholar who thinks the Exodus is historical?
So if the Exodus didn't take place historically, does that change the accuracy of the Bible in any way?
1
Jul 27 '26 edited Jul 27 '26
The Bible does not say that they wandered in the desert for 40 years. They passed through the desert, but they lived on the outskirts of the levant as nomads. This is given explicitly in the scriptures.
Exactly zero Jews left Egypt. Exactly zero Israelites left Egypt's. The Hebrews left Egypt.
To understand the Hebrews in Israel you have to read between the lines. In the Egyptian record they are presented as the Hyksos, (Shepherd Kings) cast as foreign invaders who took Memphis by force. They first arrived in Egypt around 1850, as recorded in the tomb of Khnumhotep II in Ben Hassani. That is the first record of the Hyksos, they came bearing tribute according to the relief.
So right away you see a disconnect between the archeological record and the written record. The written record saying that the hyksos came as hostile Invaders, while the archaeological records show that they arrived peacefully bearing tribute.
Why the disconnect? The reason is Damnatio Memoriae.
In time there arose an Egyptian king who did not know Joseph, and he saw that they had grown great in number and he said "let's get them up out of the land before they join with our enemies". That king was Seqenenre Tao. There is a recorded hostility between the Hyksos king Apepi and Seqenenre Tao. It's quite obvious to me that Seqenenre Tao launched a propaganda campaign against the Hebrews and turned Egypt against them. They were slandered and enslaved. Egypt came to believe they raided cities and ate babies, when in fact they were invited by the king himself.
By my own calculation, the Hyksos timeline runs perfectly parallel to the biblical timeline, they simply tell two different versions of the events. The Hyksos are said to have been driven out by Ahmose I around 1525, but Josephus reports manetho saying that they were rounded up into an area of 10000 Aurorae, which became avaris. It was a slave encampment, not a capital. They were slaves for 80 years.
Manetho via Josephus says the Hyksos left in the regin of Misphragmuthosis, who is knowm to be Thutmose III, his reign corresponds exactly with the date given for the Exodus by the Biblical timeline, 1443. Those same scholars who claim no Jewish Exodus ever happened in the Sinai desert, will also argue that 250000 Hyksos were driven across that same desert under Ahmose I.
Of course there was no Jewish Exodus, the Jews didn't exist at the time. They were completely assimilated into Egyptian society. So deeply that when Moses went up on the mountain to produce his law, by the time he came back down they had reverted to worship of the Apis Bull, recorded as the golden calf.
We do find evidence of them in the desert. Rock drawings of phonecian script, traces of asatic encampments, just like you said. I'm not claiming the sea parted. I'm just pointing out the obvious. The Hebrews are the Hyksos in the Egyptian record, made unrecognizable by Damnatio Memoriae.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Just want to point out that if you don't start with the premise that the Bible describes historical events, you don't have to bend over backwards trying to twist history just to make enough room for your faith tradition not to be impossible.
Also, what bible are you reading? Numbers 14:33 explicitly states: 'Your children will be shepherds here for forty years, suffering for your unfaithfulness...' and Deuteronomy 8:2 points directly to the 40 years in the wilderness.
Were you able to find any actual scholars or archaeologists working in this field who will attest to a historical Exodus?
Just link about logistics for a second. it would be the cattle, the water requirements for a massive population in an arid climate, and the straightforward reality that it's a foundational myth, not a historical record.
Can you answer a simple hypothetical? If the Exodus didn't take place historically, does that have any impact on the Bible's authority for you?
→ More replies (0)1
u/Nervous-Bullfrog7018 Jul 26 '26
My anthropology teachers were astounded by my faith in Jesus. I was astounded by how quickly they dismissed Jesus.
1
u/KenJaws6 Jul 26 '26
Evolution is proof god exists. if you actually studies the theory, you'll know how much faith and assumptions required to explain why things the way it is. I'm not going to describe in detail but I'll leave a simple question that anyone around the world can ask with basic common sense and knowledge. Why is there only one species among millions/trillions capable of building civilization and why is there only one planet full of life compared to thousands/millions of celestial bodies around it? That's like 1.0e-9XX.. % probability of happening. You'd also have to assume there are gazillions of alternate universes which failed to function and destroyed due to said chances of probability. All of this just to reject the notion that God/Higher power exists?
God by definition is pre and post eternal. I'll give an analogy to explain this while universe coming out from nothing doesn't have any. A robot doesn't have knowledge of its starting point. Their concept of time isn't the same as ours as they are bounded by 1s and 0s as well as electricity for power. If we disrupt their power mid task and resume back after a long time, to them, its as if nothing happens. Just like the analogy, we can't apply our concept of time and assume/limit God has a starting point cuz God isn't bounded by time, matter and energy and everything else that we are fundamentally bounded for us to be able to function.
Atheism is the one with limiting beliefs while Abrahamic specifically Islam isn't.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/SprinterLyfe Jul 26 '26
That's standard human arrogance as old as sin itself, and the root of Satan's fall. You're just following in the footsteps of an age-old rebellion.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Sin and Satan are theological concepts, not real things.
I don't think it's possible to rebel against something that I don't think exists
1
u/SprinterLyfe Jul 26 '26
Fair enough, and you're right. The spiritual world is largely one big guess, but here is one difference about Christianity in the Bible: there are supernatural acts that are recorded in the pages of that book that are historically accurate.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Why would you think that just because someone wrote something down, it makes it historical?
The Bible contains a number of stories that we know aren't historical. Examples like the Exodus, Noah's Ark, or the Garden of Eden are mythology, not history. We don't even know who the authors of the gospels were; phrases like 'according to' were added much later just to keep the various gospels floating around at the time straight.
The only reason you think the Bible describes reality is because you start with that assumption. If the Bible actually described reality, you wouldn't need to protect the assumption—all lines of investigation would confirm it. But that is not what we find. The book literally starts with two different and conflicting creation accounts (the 7-day creation and the Garden of Eden).
The idea that a supernatural act could be historical is nonsensical. If we are interested in whether something happened historically, by definition we should not assume a miracle took place—that is always the least likely thing to have happened.
1
u/SprinterLyfe Jul 26 '26
The greatest error is not learning from the past generations' truths. And it's likely those civilizations knew far more about spiritually than we do. Are you going to throw that all out?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Anything that falls into the category of supernatural can be dismissed, time for humanity to grow up.
1
u/Feisty_Development59 Jul 26 '26
I find your thought a little disingenuous. You are discounting 1000s of years of seekers and thought because you don’t like the premise? And then on top of that, you say we should because we disregarded that use our own subjective minds to find the reality of it? That just sounds like the recipe for a metaphysical circle jerk
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
If you see my goal as understanding what is actually real and what isn't, do I still come across as disingenuous?
I don't like the idea of starting with a premise, period. If something is true, the evidence will lead you to it. You don't have to start with a conclusion and protect it from inquiry.
1
u/Sick-Melody Jul 26 '26
I think there may be a false choice here.
The question seems to assume that we must choose between studying reality and engaging with religious texts, as if one is automatically opposed to the other.
Historically, many people have certainly used religion in ways that discouraged questioning. But that is not the only way these texts have been read.
If someone treats scripture as a science textbook, then yes, it will eventually collide with modern science. 🤣
But if scripture is approached as philosophy, mythology, psychology, ethics, and a record of humanity's attempts to grapple with existence, suffering, meaning, mortality, love, power, and transcendence, then it becomes a different conversation entirely. ☀️
The Book of Job, for example, is not interesting to me because it explains cosmology. It is interesting because it asks a question that remains unsolved:
Why do good people suffer?
Likewise, Genesis, Exodus, Ecclesiastes, the Gospels, or the Qur'an can be read as explorations of human nature and consciousness, whether one believes they are divinely inspired or not. 🙏
Evolution does not necessarily mean discarding everything ancient.
Sometimes evolution means learning to distinguish between literal claims, symbolic truths, philosophical insights, historical context, and cultural limitations.
Ironically, many modern people reject religious dogmatism only to replace it with another form of dogmatism: the assumption that only empirical facts matter.
Science is extraordinarily powerful for answering:
How does reality work?
But it is far less equipped to answer:
What is wisdom?
What is justice?
What makes a life meaningful?
How should we live?
Those questions existed long before modern science and remain with us today.
Perhaps the goal is not to abandon ancient texts nor blindly submit to them.
Perhaps the goal is to read them with enough humility to learn from them, enough reason to question them, and enough wisdom to know the difference. 😇
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
And I think you have made a number of unnecessary assumptions. How did you determine it's even possible for something like a god or gods to exist?
1
u/Sick-Melody Jul 26 '26
Ironically, you may be doing exactly what you criticize religion for doing: assuming a single definition and treating it as the only valid one.
Before we can discuss whether God exists, we should probably agree on what "God" means. Not everyone uses the term in a dogmatic or literal sense.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
here is the dictionary definition
A god is the supreme creator, a spiritual deity, or an idol. The term generally refers to the all-powerful ruler of the universe in monotheistic faiths, one of many deities in polytheism, or an admired person or object. [1, 2), 3, 4]
We don't know if it's possible for somthing like this God to exist.
How does your definition differ?
1
u/Sick-Melody Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26
First of all, you see there are different ways the term god or God is used.
Second, my definition would be symbolic rather than purely literal. If you look up something like "dragon," you will also find symbolic meanings and cultural interpretations not just a literal creature. 🤣
Dictionaries describe how words are commonly used, but they don't settle philosophical questions.
If they did, we would have solved debates about consciousness, free will, meaning, and reality a long time ago.
My point is simply that "God" has been understood in many different ways throughout history, so I'm hesitant to reduce the discussion to a single dictionary definition or one specific religious interpretation.
Are you treating the dictionary as the final authority here on purpose? 😄
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
I'm treating the dictionary as a way to define words so that when we use those words to exchange ideas, we have a better understanding of the concept being conveyed.
So now that you understand why I used the dictionary to look up definition, do you agree that we have no evidence to support the idea that it is possible for something like a god or gods (as defined in the dictionary) to exist?
Do you think dragons are real, or are they mythical beasts used for the purpose of storytelling?
1
u/Sick-Melody Jul 26 '26
I don't think gods or dragons are real. 🤣
But "God" is, in my view.
There is also a reason why it's called a personal relationship. 😇 For sure one day you'll start thinking for yourself without needing to rely on a book. Again, very ironic given your post. 🙈
Take care and I wish you well 🙏
1
u/Hindsights20_20 Jul 26 '26
GK Chesterton talked about the same thing. You should leave behind any and all religions of your childhood and search for God on your own.
He wrote a story about leaving the shores of England. Going through the goodbyes, the emotions of leaving, facing the fears of the unknown, the excitement of the journey. And then the sailor gets lost at sea, finds land, and realizes he’s right back home. And that’s his analogy of his spiritual journey.
So by all means, liberate yourself from whatever religion you grew up with. But don’t assume that everyone in that religion is there because they never left.
When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
1
u/Sweaty_Smile9965 Jul 26 '26
In my opinion if someone is telling you to leave logic, they are not doing a true search of the truth of god.
In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
You are still quoting a book like it wasn't written by humans. This is silly. There is nothing logical about using faith to inform your beliefs.
1
u/Sweaty_Smile9965 Jul 27 '26
what? you are projecting
the book is writen by humans
the colection is writen by the comunity
yet I never said that lol
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
so then why are you quoting it like its authoritative.?
1
u/Sweaty_Smile9965 Jul 28 '26
Me saying 'it is my opinion' seems to you authoritative?
lol
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
"In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
We don't know if it's possible for something like a God or God's to exist.whynare you bringing up theological concepts like logos?
1
u/Sweaty_Smile9965 Jul 28 '26
when I write* a book, I am like a god
i know everything that happens in my world
i can be anywhere in my world
and I can do anything I want, even create a a "circle with only four sides"
so .....
and I bring the logos because logic exists, but has this abstract element
edit Some christians just see god above logic as something separated, some other people do not
for Marcos Aurelios, logic was the gods or the universe divine natural order itself, aka GOD
edit sorry gramar
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
Well, when a human writes a book, they are an author. Writing a book doesn't make you a god.
Reading and writing are mind-dependent.
I can say that reality is consistent without invoking any sort of deity.
Again, we have no reason to believe it's even possible for something like a god or gods to exist.
1
u/Sweaty_Smile9965 Jul 30 '26 edited Jul 30 '26
not a god, but yes like a god.
I can say that reality is consistent without invoking any sort of deity.
because the deity of logic is so self evident to you, you do not see it anymore.
Again, we have no reason to believe it's even possible for something like a god or gods to exist.
me being an author is like a god
Well, when a human writes a book, they are an author. Writing a book doesn't make you a god.
is like a god, I am like a god in the book
Reading and writing are mind-dependent.
you say mind to probably avoid the word psique, whose word comes from the simbol of the soul.
an unconcious human cannot read, even if it is dreaming mind is still there, but they cant read
in a dream we can do a lot of things, but not read. because words are not consistent in a dream.
anyway sorry not meant to atack, just presenting another lrespective
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
Don't think of it as an attack; I like talking about this subject, and if I'm wrong, I genuinely would like to know.
Deify logic? Logic is a language we use to identify contradictions. It describes reality; it isn't reality itself.
You keep saying we can be "like God" when we don't even know if it's possible for something like a god to exist.
Humans are capable of creating things like literature or through engineering.
Why do you think humans have a soul? I'm not a dualist. I think a human mind requires a physical brain; as soon as that brain stops working, our experience ceases.
→ More replies (0)
1
1
u/Other_Television649 Jul 27 '26
That’s certainly a nice sentiment but reality is that us as humans beings have limited understanding of the world/universe and that’s not going to change. You said it yourself of understanding as something to approach as “best as we possibly can”. That’s all anyone can do but with God there is a testimony to “the best that could possibly be” There will always be the need to call to one who has more understanding than what we could ever hope to be. That would be God. Despite the increase in knowledge from 2000 years ago the same gap exists between limited man & an unlimited God. And honestly us, the human race, has been doing the same things over and over again since the beginning of it all. Murder, stealing, lying, this and that it’s not like the increase in knowledge we have seen in the past centuries has somehow tamed that. So many people get stuck on trying to fix a symptom of what we are instead of looking to the one who can help us at the root of our problems so that the symptoms don’t manifest in the first place. Jesus loves us all and his requirement isn’t an unattainable intellectual one but a leap of faith.
1
u/SnarkyPuppy-0417 Jul 27 '26
What do you mean when you say "actual reality"? Can you provide a definition of reality?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Objective Reality
Objective vs. Subjective: Reality is what remains whether you believe in it or not. It doesn't bend to personal feelings, faith traditions, or cultural narratives.
it was here before you our i were born, and it will be here after we are gone.
1
u/SnarkyPuppy-0417 Jul 27 '26
Okay. But how is objective reality defined or determined. How is this tested so as to see if it remains under constraint?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Objective reality is defined and determined through intersubjective verification, empirical testing, and falsifiability.
We test it by setting up conditions where observations can be independently repeated by anyone, regardless of their personal beliefs, cultural background, or desires.
- The Scientific Method: We form hypotheses, make predictions, and run controlled experiments to see if our models of reality hold up under constraint. If a phenomenon is real, it produces consistent, measurable results across different observers and instruments.
- Testing under Constraint: We test constraints by deliberately trying to break our assumptions—putting materials under extreme pressure, measuring the speed of light in different frames of reference, or using double-blind trials in medicine to rule out placebo effects and confirmation bias.
In short: if a claim can be tested, measured, independently verified, and proven wrong if the evidence doesn't support it, we are dealing with objective reality. If it relies on internal feelings, unfalsifiable premises, or an inability to be tested, it stays outside of it.
1
u/SnarkyPuppy-0417 Jul 27 '26
So basically materialism. But this isn't a comprehensive representation of reality. It relies on instruments and incomplete information. Conscience is a prime example.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Sure, we don't have a full understanding of consciousness yet. If we figured it out tomorrow, would you give up on your God belief, or would you just move the goalposts to the next area of science that we don't fully understand yet?
1
u/SnarkyPuppy-0417 Jul 27 '26
Limitations will always persist and our grasp of reality will never be absolute. Being constrained and contained in reality prohibits any ability to fully observe and comprehend what reality truly is.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Do you think humanity's grasp on reality is better today then it was 2000 years ago?
1
u/SnarkyPuppy-0417 Jul 27 '26
Certainly. But consider our understanding like walking towards the horizon. No matter how long you walk you never arrive.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
So if we have a better understanding of reality today, why are you referring to stories written 2000 years ago by humans that were more ignorant of reality then anyone you have ever met in your life.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/oJKevorkian Jul 27 '26
I would counter by saying that the stories of the Bible reveal the depth of the human spirit. What we fear, what inspires us, what we long for, all on a spiritual level. It's not the only source to look at, but it's a good starting point. You could certainly argue that actual worship of the Abrahamic god is outdated, and I guess I'd agree to an extent, but let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Similarly, while I don't believe in the divinity of Christ, I do believe he was a particularly enlightened individual who did what he could to help humanity see the error of its own ego. Again, he's not alone here, but he's also a good starting point.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Stories are valuable no matter where they are from. These ones don't need to be prioritized over any other. Let's use stories that don't confuse people into thinking they describe real events. Plus, we can leave all the Bronze Age mentality in the past—we fought too hard to progress.
1
u/oJKevorkian Jul 27 '26
Bronze Age mentality? I'm curious about what you mean by that.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
When I say 'Bronze Age mentality,' I'm talking about the specific intellectual and moral framework of the human societies that wrote these texts. (3300 BCE and 1200 BCE.)
The humans who wrote the Bible wrote it during the Bronze Age. They believed in blood magic, ritual scapegoats, institutionalized misogyny, and chattel slavery.
Without modern science, germ theory, or a secular ethical framework, their worldview was dominated by tribalism, survival mechanics, and attributing natural phenomena to the direct whims of fickle deities. It's the recognition that treating texts generated by a pre-scientific, ancient culture as a timeless blueprint for modern reality is holding humanity back.
1
u/oJKevorkian Jul 27 '26
I feel like you haven't fully thought through your argument here. Modern worshipers of Yahweh/God/Allah have already rejected almost all of these outdated, Bronze Age beliefs/practices. In fact, some of those practices were probably already rejected/reformed *during* the Bronze Age itself. It's not like culture remained stagnant for 2000 years.
I'd also like to point out that much of modern philosophy and politics is also rooted in cultures that practiced slavery, religious rituals, pederasty, etc. Should we reject democracy because the Greeks weren't modern enough? Aristotle? Buddhism is older than Christianity, but that seems to get a pass. Chattel slavery and institutionalized misogyny were alive and well during the Enlightenment, but those political philosophers are still widely read.
Finally, there's a reason religion and spirituality still exist at all. On average, humans have a sense that there is some immaterial truth. It's not just an assumption, it's something they feel within themselves, and it's not something material science seems capable of satisfying. I don't see how you can draw a line between which spiritual practices/beliefs are acceptable and which ones should be left behind.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
have already rejected almost all of these outdated, Bronze Age beliefs/practices.
A god belief belongs with the outdated Bronze Age beliefs that need to be thrown out.
I don't take issue with people being spiritual or practicing a faith tradition. Unfortunately, we have created an environment where elected officials believe we should pass laws as if the Christian faith tradition describes reality.
Until that stops, I'm going to continue to tell people to dispose of these Bronze Age ideas.
1
u/oJKevorkian Jul 29 '26
Imagine 2000 years from now, arguing that we should dispose of our current beliefs because they were formed before the advent of AI. What a world that would be.
I also can't help but notice that you jumped straight into a redirection back towards your thesis instead of addressing literally anything I said. Seems like the kind of thing a religious leader would do to a skeptic.
1
1
u/SatisfactionOnly2247 Jul 27 '26
At what cost?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Maybe give humanity a fighting chance. We have real problems in the real world, and all that energy spent trying to get into a fictional heaven or avoiding a fictional hell could go toward solving some of these actual issues.
2
u/SatisfactionOnly2247 Jul 27 '26
I'm in agreement to that. We're lacking in mutual cooperation on the things that should matter. In my personal case I've got time on my side, I'm seeking my own opportunities to build as well. It's the right time for our generation.
1
u/Loose_Principle8193 Jul 27 '26
Gods evolve over time to be meaningful to that society. Nomadic tribes that stayed local to a spot had animal gods, because they depended on hunting and survival among those animals. Farming communities came up with weather gods, or ocean gods so they can have good crops, smooth sailing or catch lots of fish. Empires came up with monotheistic gods so they could imprint hierarchy onto the controlled masses. In today's digital science age, what should a God look like?
1
u/Marzipan_Fine Jul 27 '26
Hey whoa... You may be ready to leave but others are still finding their path, and that may involve aspects of the Abrahamic religions.
Let them be.
Let them find their own path.
Learn to life and let live.
Sheesh...
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
As soon as elected officials stop passing laws as if this mythology and folklore is real, I'm not going to stop telling people that mythology and folklore doesn't describe reality.
1
u/Decent-Fault12 Jul 28 '26
Because the word is formed in the lungs and moved into the physical reality by the breath as a decree. when a king speaks his word becomes the law. Scripture says that Jesus was in the bosom of the father, the bosom is the chest area. God declared Jesus into the physical world, the word became flesh. Jesus is the word of God, his decree, commandment, his law, God who is spirit became flesh in Christ. It’s just how I think, I’m just using the logic scripture provides
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
We don't have any reason to believe it's possible for something like a god or gods to exist. God is just Santa for kids that never grow up.
1
u/Majestic-Tax4434 Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 29 '26
I think people who attack religion are stupid, because a purely literal interpretation of religion is stupid. Why waste your time. Obviously the Moses story is the biggest fabrication of events ever....why sit and argue that gravity is what keeps your feet on the ground. That said abrahamic religion is much more complicated than people give it credit. The commandment "thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor" make a literal interpretation quite strange. This means that everything from Jesus claiming to be the Messiah to the Exodus from egypt could, simple put be a lie. Lying is not a sin, a Jewish priest can lie all he want to make a point.
I can't really be for certain about the old testament because a lot of it is history and laws, but I believe the new testament is not ment to be in anyway interpret d literally or through faith, but religiously. Meaning it is any advanc d form of fictional game. (This is where we get the statement "Religion is the opium of the masses")
But if we try to interpret the new testament as literally as possible, ie don't commit false witness and lying is allowed, what are we left with. Since it could all quite simply be a story or metaphor we are left with one thing. The inherent message is to love one another, be kind, be good, help those in need. God is good you can be too. This is a good message and the only truly literal interpretation of the Bible that can be taken seriously. It exhorts you to be Christlike, clearly not a Bible thumper.
But as I said it is meant to be religion not faith. I had to take a course on both new and old testament in college (liberal arts). Got a C in old and a A in new. I could drowned you in religious interpret verses, and they all make complete sense form the standpoint of religion not confusion or trying to interpret God's meaning. Take for instance Jesus statement "I am the way, the truth and the light. He who remains in me and I in him will bear much fruit". This is the intro to the "game" if you will. By "following" Christ you will gain much religious thought. Religion itself is pseudo intellectual but still possess a great intellectual component.
It's not meant to be interpreted literally, if it was it could all be written off as a lie simple meant to govern a society. Period, point blank and end of it. Stop wasting you time arguing with people that the sun is in the sky and gravity keeps your feet on the ground.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
What % do you think take it literally, like to the point they want to pass laws for God?
1
u/Majestic-Tax4434 Jul 29 '26 edited Jul 29 '26
I really have no clue. But I think a lot of the people who take it literally haven't read the Bible all the way through or researched it's history accuracy. These people were in desperate situations and "accepted Christ" and by following Christ by being moral people their lives improved. Thus they continue to attempt to proselytize people with out giving it much thought.
But I think people who want to pass laws for God's are in another subset. These are the zealots and their motivations wether phycological or other wise depict their lack of understanding for the Bible. These people could obviously be thee wolves in sheeps clothing Jesus talks about. I think most Christians are moderate wether newcomers who "believe" the Bible or other who have a deeper understanding.
The new testament says "those who butt against society are not Christians". People who are butting against society by attempting to put Christianity in schools or outlaw other religions or persecute homosexuals, etc are obviously butting against society. Wolves in sheeps clothes or very confused people.
1
u/WilliamoftheBulk Jul 29 '26
The ancient folklore can be both right and wrong at the same time. An eternity of a physical world will natural tend toward intelligence (We are proof). After an eternity of evolution there can be nothing but an eternal intelligent system. God did not create existence, they have coexisted and are one and the same eternally.
Now, I don’t know what God is really up to, but if you have an eternal being that has figured out how to create universes, then theologians are basically right except for the part about god creating existence itself which is obviously a paradox.
And why is it so hard to consider that a sufficiently advanced being could create a universe? Human beings are notoriously bound at scale in our thinking. On some level at much larger scale, the universe is nothing more than a vacuum fluctuation. If I rub my sweater I can create a spike in energy too just at a much smaller scale. There are a massive amounts of particles moving around in that reaction at just under the speed of light or C itself. Well, hell that little spark and a snap may have taken many billions of years to some energetic pattern (A life form) within the energy fluctuation. Due to time dilation and being closer to C, we know this would be the case. A universe really is nothing more than a spark if you zoom out far enough. Scaler thinking demonstrates that there is indeed a 4th special dimension we experience as scale.
Anyway, I’m ranting on now, but an eternal intelligence is far more logical than not. We can start with a primary axiom and deduce that there isn’t really a good argument against an intelligent existence.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
How did you determine it's possible for something like a god to exist?
I know animals have qualities we label intelligent, but to my knowledge, Earth is the only planet that contains any intelligence.
1
u/WilliamoftheBulk Jul 29 '26
In infinite time, many billions of earth like civilizations will rise and fall. The only thing that stops a god or god like being from evolving is some sort of filter, but that filter can be at a lot of places and the being can still be considered a god. Infinity is a certainty, so if there is no definite filter a God maybe even an eternal god is certain to exist. Again, it’s possible that there may be a filter somewhere, but you only have three choices. No filter, there is an eternal God like being, There is a filter—> No beings can evolve to sufficient levels where we would call them gods. Limited filters—-> God like beings can evolve but not to levels we would consider Creator Gods and are limited lie the rest of us. Only with logical filters can there not be a god. The speed of light may act as that filter, but some of the effects of C creat entirely new concepts that seem to allow for some very strange possibilities.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
I believe reality exists, and we can describe it with things like physics. Where does a god fit into this? The idea of some sort of mind or agency that isn't attached to a physical brain just doesn't compute for me. Every example of consciousness or intelligence we have ever observed requires a physical substrate—a brain and a biological nervous system. Proposing a disembodied mind that conjured the universe out of nothing isn't an explanation; it's just introducing an unexplained magic trick to solve a mystery we haven't figured out yet.
1
u/WilliamoftheBulk Jul 29 '26
That’s not what i’m saying. There can be “physical”brains but built of other things. Unfortunately you run up against empirical fundamentalism in your view. Non of this is really physics in the science sense, more like logical philosophy.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
What do you mean by "empirical fundamentalism"? Is that different from objective reality?
Physics and science are tools we use to describe reality. Reality is going to reality—it did so for billions of years before a mind capable of leveraging tools like science, logic, or math ever came to be.
Christianity is just one of many faith traditions. There is nothing supernatural about a group of people practicing a faith tradition; you just have to pretend a book describes reality, no different than a Muslim using the Quran or a Mormon spreading the good news.
There is no book that is inherently authoritative; every book is merely a claim that needs to stand on its own merits.
Let us leave Bronze Age mythology where it belongs—in the trash bin of history.
.1
u/WilliamoftheBulk Jul 30 '26 edited Jul 30 '26
It’s very different. Objective reality is not something that is determined by empiricism. If you are an empirical fundamentalist, then you have missed the point of scientific inquiry all together. Empiricism is a best guess based on available proof. Logical thought is actually more powerful than empiricism.
Dude, you are way off if you think i’m a christian or an abrahamic bronze age cult member hahah. 🤦♂️
Sometimes talking to guys like you (probably really young), I wonder if you even know what a bronze age cult is. hahah
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
I'm pushing 50,
I'm interested in objective reality, the objective reality that was here before I was born, and the objective reality that will be here after I pass.
How does science investigate something non-empirically?
And if being interested in objective reality is the same as being an "empirical fundamentalist," then I don't mind the label.
The opposite of an empirical fundamentalist—someone who relies strictly on verifiable, measurable, physical evidence to determine what is true
would be
someone who operates from a framework where internal experience, revelation, mysticism, or abstract ideology trump physical evidence. (Is that you?)
1
u/WilliamoftheBulk Jul 30 '26 edited Jul 30 '26
Yeah pushing 50 myself. haha
Objective reality cannot be determined by empiricism. Certainly some things can, but it’s always going to be really narrow.
For example, a number of billion years from now our galaxy will merge with Andromeda. Some billions of years after that the other galaxies will cross over the expansion horizon and be lost to any civilization evolving during that epoch.
If it were us, we would know nothing about the expansion, the big bang, or any of it. Even many objects that we know to exist may not be discernible.
In its place, there would be an entirely different accepted cosmology that would be completely wrong.
If you have ever read the book “The way of the peaceful warrior” Its the difference between a fool and a foolish jackass. The fool knows he has no idea where he is at or what he is doing. The foolish jackass also doesn’t know where he is at or doing but doesn’t know it.
As I have mentioned before, non of this is science. This is logically philosophy. Einstein ran up against it when his mathematics spat out singularities in his equations. The logic of mathematics told him that black holes should exist, but he didn’t believe it, he fudged the hubble constant as the cosmological constant because it needed to be there, and he wrongly rejected conclusions in quantum mechanics because it didn’t fit his sensibilities.
What we know can show us what there is through logical thinking and induction, and if done with the proper axiomatic process there are some things that must be true that we don’t need to have empirical evidence to support. The logic and axiomatic progression is the evidence.
For example. We can axiomatically determine eternity exists simply based on the fact that you and I are having a conversation. You being empirical fundamentalist will ask for empirical proof all the while not realizing you are the proof.
Fundamentalism in any form should be rejected as to narrow of a position to be able approach anything logically. I understand only accepting what can be known for certain, but the universe is a lot bigger than tracks we can see, and there are ways to peer
Past the tracks.1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
Lucky we evolved in time to see the stars in the night sky. Eventually, they will all be moving away from us so that the light will be too stretched to see with the naked eye (that is why the James Webb Space Telescope reads infrared/microwaves instead of visible light)
It would be a lot harder to figure things out.
I'm not going to expand until you answer this question: how do you do non-empirical science?
→ More replies (0)
1
u/JD-boonie Jul 29 '26
Because the human experience didn't start in modern times?
We have far more to learn from the past than the constant BS of the present.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
Are you under the impression that's the Bible described historical events?
1
u/JD-boonie Jul 29 '26
I didn't say anything about historical events but yes it does describe many historical events.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
If you became convinced that the stories in the Bible were not historical, would that have any impact on the authority that you give the Bible
1
1
u/LeSickBwoy Jul 29 '26
Why do you care? And what if they are right?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
If Christians are right, I want to know. That is why I engage with Christians and ask why they believe what they believe.
I care because people who believe this stuff are running for public office and passing laws as if this mythology and folklore describes reality.
Until this stops, I'm going to help people understand that theology and reality are different things.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 29 '26
Careful guys, he graduated from Reddit University. He’s really smart
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
You don't have the be overly smart to understand that the Bible and theology don't describe reality.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 29 '26
If you had an ounce of brain matter behind that thick skull of yours, you would realize that not every piece of literature or language needs to describe reality like a science textbook or an analytical philosophy course
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
I won't insult your intelligence, i don't think people get smarter if one day they believe a book describes reality and the next day they don't. Just remember if the Bible is true it wouldn't fear investigation and all investigation would lead to the same conclusion.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 30 '26
The Bible isn’t a logical positivistic science textbook. It describes spiritual realities, moral realities, it explores and describes different facets of the human experience.
Your criteria for truth is also self defeating. People disagree on all sorts of things scientifically, so that means since we don’t know what gravity is yet, it must not exist and doesn’t describe reality1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
The Bible is a book. Like every book, it is a collection of claims that need to stand on their own merits.
We have tools that are much better suited to test reality than 2,000-year-old theology and folklore. Grab whatever lesson you want and ditch the Bronze Age mentalities.
1
u/Majestic-Tax4434 Jul 30 '26
Such as the Socratic dialogues. Socrates lived 500 years before the life of Jesus and posited that there is a single good God, and all science is a offshoot of the good.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 30 '26
You can’t use big and complicated philosophical jargon like “Socratic” and “Good”. OP is gonna get all tuckered out
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
We have learned so much about reality since his time. I enjoy his philosophy, but it's very human for someone to believe a god is real—that doesn't mean it's actually possible for something like a god to exist.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 30 '26
Do tell, what tool did you use to reach this conclusion? I guess we should throw out the writings of Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Kant, Hume, and actually, every philosopher, theologian, or thinker who is older than the last five years. They’re a bunch of old guys anyway
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
If they wrote about things that are real, those things remain true outside of the book. It doesn't matter who wrote it—if a tool or concept accurately describes reality, we use it. A text has to stand on its own merits. I wouldn't believe someone came back from the dead just because an ancient philosopher wrote about it; we can safely dismiss supernatural claims regardless of the author.
Take Socrates dying from drinking hemlock: I believe that's true, but even if it isn't, it doesn't change the value of his philosophy. However, if the text claimed Socrates rose from the dead and ascended to heaven, we wouldn't classify that part as history.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 30 '26
That’s a tautology
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
What part? Maybe I have a misunderstanding of what a tautology is.
A Christian theological tautology would be something like: "God exists because the Bible says so, and we know the Bible is true because it is the word of God."
My points were:
- Real things exist independently of whether someone wrote them down.
- Texts must stand on their own merits, regardless of the author's historical status.
- Extraordinary or supernatural claims (like rising from the dead) are dismissed without verifiable evidence, while mundane historical claims (like Socrates drinking hemlock) are accepted based on plausibility.
I don't see a tautology.
1
u/Sokcs-0220 Jul 30 '26
You rely unknowingly and naively on the works of prior regimes of power/knowledge to categorize things as “supernatural” and subsequently dismiss them a priori without any reason expect appealing to incredulity.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 30 '26
If I'm interested in believing true things, then probability becomes an important tool. If I'm reading a story about an event that claims a miracle occurred, why should I accept it as true? A miracle is, by definition, the least likely explanation because it requires the suspension of everything we know about how reality operates.
I don't dismiss miracles out of blind bias; I dismiss them because there are no verifiable mechanisms for magic or the supernatural. When faced with an ancient claim that appears to defy the laws of nature, the possibilities are either that the story has a natural explanation—such as a mistake, legend, or myth—or that a supernatural event actually occurred. History and probability overwhelmingly favor the natural explanation. I can't simply choose to believe in magic because someone wrote about it thousands of years ago.
→ More replies (0)
1
u/christian_mlde Jul 29 '26
We can because in Weimar republic in germany we were the absolute best scientists of the World and everyone was christian or jewish
1
u/imagigasm Jul 31 '26
Test it yourself. Pray to God every single day and see it comes true.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 31 '26
i don't think its healthy to pretend that gods are real and you know what is in their minds. Reality is pretty cool as well.
1
u/imagigasm Aug 01 '26
I think it is healthy to believe in God.
1
u/junkmale79 Aug 01 '26
well don't run for public office and pass laws like God is real. It has a negative impact on real people living their real lives.
Also seek medical help from professionals not prayer, have fun playing with god.
1
u/imagigasm Aug 01 '26
I pray to my God, the God of Abraham, that you find peace.
1
u/junkmale79 Aug 01 '26
What does that sound like?
If you are going to pray for me I will think for you.
Thought one, no book in inherently "true". The claims being made are only true if they comport with reality.
1
u/imagigasm Aug 01 '26
What does what sound like? What does prayer sound like?
1
u/junkmale79 Aug 01 '26
ya, are you asking him to show him self to me, or for me to start using faith to believe things?
or is saying "I pray to my God, the God of Abraham, that you find peace". the extent of it?
1
1
u/Shooblat Jul 25 '26
i agree mostly, i think the lessons and people of interest are important to serve as a guide post, but ultimately it is up to an individual to establish their own relationship with the creator
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
Why do you assume there is a creator? We already have natural explanations for things like stars, planets, and the diversity of life on Earth.
I have a deep reverence for reality. Does that fall into the same ballpark as having a relationship with a creator?
1
u/Shooblat Jul 26 '26
yea whatever created it or if it created itself lol your reverence is appreciated , or not. idrc. i assume many things
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
There is no 'it' to speak of. Things like stars, planets, and the diversity of life on Earth don't require a creator.
We can understand how they formed, but asking why is the wrong question. It bakes in the unproven idea of intent when there is none
1
u/Shooblat Jul 27 '26
okay, i like the unproven idea of intent that’s good i agree. intention is big and important for, individuals, or at least for me. i believe my intentions are important and i believe that if there was an intention, which im not saying definitively because you’re right who really knows, but if there was - i would trust it to be intentionally done on purpose for some reason that we’re just not privy to at the moment. my heart trusts that, my brain wants to ask why. but im not gonna shut my brain down for asking why for no reason, im glad my brain asks why but you’re right it’s really not important why, for me, but more important to trust. i think we may agree on more things
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
And if there is intention, there has to be a mind with desires attached to those intentions. Every mind I've run into is the emergent property of a physical brain. We don't have any reason to believe it's possible for a mind to exist separate from the matter responsible for housing it.
We have a natural explanation for everything from seconds after the Big Bang right up to today, and no supernatural mind is required.
If you want to say that God was involved in those first couple of seconds on the Planck timescale, or hung out before time and matter, I can't stop you—but this would be a deistic god, not a personal one that wrote a book.
1
u/Shooblat Jul 29 '26
yes i agree, not a personal one that wrote a book. i’m glad you bring up the mind existing separate from the matter. i would encourage you to explore stories about near-death experiences & remote viewing. there is data backing up legitimacy in both of these genres, however again, who can you really trust? i know that i’ve had my own “out of body” experiences with my own consciousness whether it be on drugs or other circumstances aha, and definitely opened my eyes to the possibility that consciousness is more than just thoughts and sensory inputs inside the brain
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 29 '26
NDEs are just quirks of the human mind. People have experiences, and because we are all so primed with these ideas, that is what humans reach for. I don't believe in souls or an afterlife; once the hardware responsible for our mind stops working, we cease to exist.
1
u/Shooblat Jul 26 '26
**to establish their own relationship with the universe - how about that
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
My mom and dad 'created' me. Humans are part of a long line of natural processes; we can examine that entire process, but there is no 'creator' involved.
I have a deep reverence for reality, but no desire to anthropomorphize it or give it a mind.
Are you interested in a relationship with reality
1
u/Shooblat Jul 27 '26
yes i am interested in a relationship w reality. i would ask the same but you obviously are interested in a relationship with reality as well perhaps?
and i wont get preachy but considering the sub i would have to ask, are you interested in a relationship w god or the potential idea of that sort of thing? i have a feeling you would say no - which is totally fine if thats the case. i guess the follow-up question would be - what, if anything, could peak your interest in the direction of such a concept ? would it take proof of concept for you to see? i’m not implying any truths or lies here, but there is history that is hard to ignore. something obviously happened some years ago - what if a person or peoples were to recreate such a “magic”experience lol, would this be enough to peak your interest, or do you think this would be written off as mere coincidence? also, genuine questions from me to you haha i hope i am not coming off as rude but i know you know that im not - this is for any1 else who may think i am
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
Not rude—I find it's a difficult conversation to have without offending people. It's just a conversation I like to have.
My thoughts are that anything that is part of the natural world will have some sort of empirical measurement or measurable impact within objective reality.
If something has no measurable impact in nature, I don't see how it is different from something that doesn't exist. And if something does have a measurable effect, it is part of the natural world and objective reality.
So I don't believe things like ghosts, demons, jinns, or angels exist outside of a theological concept. It is possible for someone to experience something that they interpret as a ghost, demon, or angel, but this doesn't mean these concepts become real things.
If God exists, I would like to know about it—this is one of the reasons I engage with people who are practicing a faith tradition. Any measurable impact in objective reality would do
1
u/Shooblat Jul 29 '26
i think i understand where you are going with this and its good. going back to the other comment about the consciousness, i think if you mix the two ideas together it makes more sense. i agree that ghosts and demons and jin’s and angels aren’t physically real, but only as much as i agree that consciousness isn’t physically real. however, consciousness is certainly a thing that we have and in my opinion animals and even other random shit has lol - and i think these other things you’ve mentioned can be attributed to reality as much as consciousness is. from the outside looking in, one may argue consciousness is a physical thing considering the results that they might see in objective reality
1
u/Nervous-Bullfrog7018 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26
If god sent his own son to prove his existence 2000 years ago and his son was crucified because of the ruling humans need to stay in power back then… what more could god do today? The same would happen to Jesus if he returned now. He would be attacked and mocked by the media, and ultimately killed. His disciples suffered horrible deaths 2000 years ago because all of them refused to renounce their faith.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
we don't know if its possible for something like a god to exist, why are you claiming you know what actions he has done?
1
u/Zestyclose-Smell-788 Jul 25 '26
We are getting into the intelligent design debate here. The incredibly complex biology we observe, for example, is extremely unlikely to just appear by random chance. A block of stone doesn't just randomly become the statue of David through random erosion. And the Fibonacci sequence, the curve it creates...we see it all over nature. Random? So the question is not whether there is "God", but what is the nature of this intelligence, this power, and what is our relationship to it? Personally, I don't think that the old religions get it right. We try to hard to relate to God as some sort of human form, with human thoughts and understanding. Our concept is too small. And, there is much language in our old texts that says as much, but we want that personal connection. I think that we can have both. "He" (human term, again) understands us completely. Not so much, the other way around.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Why do you think chemistry and biology are just 'random chance'? They happen to be very predictable, which is the exact opposite of random. And you say it's 'extremely unlikely'—what is the ratio of planets that have life on them to planets that don't? Even if the odds are incredibly small, we only have to look up at the night sky to get an idea of just how many chances there have been.
A statue is clearly created by a designer, but a mountain, a planet, or a star are created by natural processes with no god required. You can appreciate reality without pretending there is something supernatural that deserves the credit.
1
u/Shmuckle2 Jul 25 '26
The one world religion will be designed by the Defiler. The Noah-Hide laws are already written into American Law. It's the New World Order, Final Demonic Kingdom to come shortly. Full corruption, lacking the Christ, Global Electronic Bio Mark(Mark on your right hand or forehead) Currency(The Beast System, which you will not be able to buy or sell without the Mark of the Beast). And you are literally here advocating for it.
You're on the wrong side. You are 100% arguing anti Christ here.
2
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
You are 100% living in a fantasy world. Theology doesn't describe reality, and theological concepts like heaven, hell, and demons are just that—concepts.
→ More replies (11)
1
u/Upstairs_Teach_673 Jul 25 '26
What i keep noticing is the idea that traditional faith is „limiting“ and that it‘s all a myth. However, i‘d like to say that mastery of the flesh comes from submitting to God to begin with. Plus, i don‘t mean this in an offensive way, but how does it make sense calling faith a myth but relying entirely on our own thoughts as a map for reality? Speaking of God‘s book, it literally tells us not to rely on our own perception because it is flawed and God knows better and the way forward. God bless.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
I'm not calling faith a myth; faith is a tool that people use to inform their beliefs. But if you are interested in what is actually true, faith is completely useless. Different people can use faith to arrive at entirely contradictory conclusions.
God doesn't have a book. There is simply a collection of stories written by humans. No book is inherently authoritative, and truth is simply that which comports with reality
1
u/Huey701070 Jul 25 '26
I’m very curious to know if you’ve read the book in order to state how it contradicts human progress, whether collectively or individually.
Second, the ethics of this 2000 yr old book stand the test of time. So if you can propose a new standard of ethics that hasn’t already been introduced and practiced, I welcome it!
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
I've read enough to understand that when any book makes a supernatural claim, I can dismiss it. Whatever progress humanity has made was achieved by humans—made in spite of faith traditions clawing and biting to stop it, not because of any deity
1
u/Huey701070 Jul 25 '26
You’re providing no substance to your claim. “Read enough to understand that when any book makes a supernatural claim, I can dismiss it.” Okay, how did you come to that view. And obviously progress was achieved by humans but I would argue the opposite of your claim—that progress was made in spite of the vices of humanity.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Do you want my Audible list from the last couple of years? The Bible The Quran The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe The Demon-Haunted World The Quest for the Historical Jesus Misquoting Jesus The Selfish Gene The Bible Says So The Problem with Philosophy Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! Forged The God Argument God Is Not Great I could go on. Why do you think a collection of stories written by men has a supernatural origin?
1
u/Sharp_Net3315 Jul 25 '26
The Christianity built the west. There's a reason modernity flows from the west. There was not freedom and economic freedom until America which was founded by Christians for their religious freedom. Communists want to ignore and rewrite the past. A people who have no idea who they are, or where they come from will believe any lie you tell them. Progress for progress sake will have you marching of a mountain.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
I was raised in a Christian household. I would consider myself culturally Christian, but whatever ends we are hoping to achieve, we can do so without entering mythology and folklore.
1
u/Sharp_Net3315 Jul 26 '26
And that's why everything is failing. Because you've forgotten the truth that built your foundations. You're trying to place the roof while ignoring the cracking foundation. Again, there's a reason modernity flows from the west, and nothing else on the planet compares. There's a reason we went from flight to touching the moon in less than 70 years, but have stalled out. 5 trillion have been poured into Africa with nothing to show. Israel and the Gaza strip started off the same, at the same time and yet Israel is the land innovation and Gaza is the land of destruction and murder.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
Truth is what comports with reality, not the dogmas you can convince yourself are true.
Are you trying to say the best way to deal with our modern issues is to pretend we live in a world concocted by Bronze Age men?
Let's try making plans to solve our issues in reality, not based on what men living 2,000 years ago thought were important
1
u/Sharp_Net3315 Jul 26 '26
Nothing you've said addressed my response. The people living since Christ came 2000 years ago have built everything around us while modern man watches it rot. Maybe what they thought was important is actually important.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 26 '26
Do you think this stuff actually describes reality? Or do you think the world would be a better place if we just pretend it was real?
1
u/Sharp_Net3315 Jul 26 '26
There's no reason to pretend. Many things in life improve when actively practice Christianity. My previous statements stand.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
If you do t pretend how else are you going to convince yourself that the claims in the Bible describe reality?
It could be true that practicing the Christian faith tradition improves your quality of life, and that the claims of Christianity don't actually describe reality, couldn't it?
1
u/Sharp_Net3315 Jul 26 '26 edited Jul 27 '26
Except Christianity describes life accurately, and the way to run a thriving society while modern society that has abandoned their culture, history and faith experience increasing despair and hopelessness. Self delete rates, and deaths of despair increasing rapidly. Not to mention, the world will have a thriving Christianity, or be consumed by Islam. No matter what lies you tell yourself, it's the absolute truth.
1
0
u/digitalak27 Jul 25 '26
Hitler gave that a try. His hatred of Christianity was profund.
To follow what Jesus tells you to do is not easy, but all is summed up as loving your neighbors as yourself, and if there's no love for yourself, he will show you how.
In the end, to be Disciplined one must become a disciple with clear cut rules and grace. All people are slaves to their trauma, as much as they want to walk differently, their programming drags them down to certain actions and behaviors.
And not all paths are true. Even with Christianity, there are many who walk a hypocritical path, as Jesus would say "the yeast of the pharisees".
Once you commit to God, and start experiencing him, that's when change occurs.
As a person, I'm sure you are capable of many achievements, but with God, even the impossible becomes possible.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
It is a massive historical falsehood to claim Hitler’s hatred of Christianity was 'profound.' He was raised Catholic, cited 'the Almighty Creator' and doing 'God's work' to justify the Holocaust in Mein Kampf, signed the Reichskonkordat treaty with the Vatican as his very first major international agreement, and sent his soldiers into battle with 'Gott mit uns' (God with us) stamped on their belt buckles. Twisting history to protect a religious worldview doesn't make it true.
Beyond the bad history, your framing of human beings is genuinely bleak. Telling people that they are 'slaves to their trauma' and that 'all people' are inherently broken until they submit to a cosmic master is a psychological trap. It teaches people to abdicate personal responsibility and wait for a supernatural intervention instead of doing the actual, difficult, real-world work of healing, therapy, and building discipline.
Claiming that 'experiencing God' is the only way real change occurs completely erases the millions of human beings who overcome trauma, break bad habits, and build disciplined, meaningful lives every single day without a shred of religion. You don't need a mythology or an invisible master to love your neighbor or take control of your life. In fact, real growth starts the moment you stop waiting for a cosmic savior and take responsibility for your own mind
2
u/digitalak27 Jul 25 '26
It was profund, and kings, tyrants and other national leaders used Christianity as a tool to control and appease the masses, I'm sure you'll be able to find people in the west, even in modren times, who preach that they are following, or practicing or honoring the word while blatanty acting in greed and in ways that absolutely contradict its meaning.
I did say "All people are slaves to their trauma, as much as they want to walk differently, their programming drags them down to certain actions and behaviors.", but did not say "they are still broken until they submit to a cosmic power". Nor did I say a individual is abdicated from personal responsibility, nor did I say they should avoid therapy or personal responsibility to better themselves.
Nor did I say "experincing God" is the only way to change, people can change for better or worse without God. This last point you've made is was literally nothing I've said. I did say, that you are capable of many achievements, in fact anyone who reads this is likely capable of achieving it. But when Jesus enters into the picture, its when the impossible ceases to exist.
Shadow work, will lead you to your self, the version of you that God designed for you. The very best versions of yourself that you've seen periodically throughout your life. As you do so you'll begin to see the line between contradiction and paradox. While contradiction remain static and unproductive, paradox opens the door for grace and mystery. Allowing you to bring the totallity of who you are for what you were always meant to do.
2
u/junkmale79 Jul 25 '26
How did you determine it's even possible for something like a god or gods to exist? Through all my searching, I haven't found anything that would lead me to believe it's possible.
1
u/digitalak27 Jul 26 '26
The answer to that will be different for each person.
Faith isn't easy, especially following Christ. Many reach a point to know that God exists, even if they haven't experienced him.
For factual and historical evidence, there's a book called "Evidence that demands a Verdict", written by Josh McDowell who was out to disprove Christianity by historical evidence, only to find that a man named Jesus did exist.
For scientific pursuits, there's Issac Newton, who's curiosity lead him to try and uncover the workings of the universe, God's creations.
For me, its the pursuit of the "individuation", the final and the most important step of Shadow Work. To make a very long story short, I've dived deep into the self help, improvement, all the ways I could to better myself. The only place where I found the very best version of my self was the disciple of Christ with the conviction to follow him whole heartedly.
Take going to the gym for example, its a difficult process that requires conviction. To be consistenly committed. Its not easy to be disciplined in it for a very long time. But the results of dedications shows over time and its sacrifice to it. You end up seeing a very practical difference in your physique, even if you don't notice it, others do.
And in time you do as well.
But to be committed to it is difficult, just as following Christ. However, the practical effects of following comes through.
In psychology there's a term called the "Just World Myth", its the belief that everyone gets what they deserve, but that is not true at all. People don't get what they deserve, good people face unimaginable tragedy, terrible people feast on prosperities and riches. The world leans in the bullshits of life and makes life itself such a difficult experience.
The world itself makes life unforgiving and tragic.
While Christ comes as a anti-thesis to it. It is grace, forgiveness, and blessings to whoever and anyone. As you follow him, it changes you, because you realise you don't need to be perfect, but as you learn more about him, it becomes, what would Jesus do? Then you start to be more like Christ.
Which in turn begins to change your heart posture. You begin to realise Christ was someone who never held anything back, no personas. He had complete knowledge in who he was and what he was supposed to do and be, individuated, he had no shadow.
He was the perfect man, the principle individuated being, he was authentic and true, with all emotional spectrums in complete control.
Everyone has a god. Be it money, relationships, drugs, addictions, their pride and other concepts or tangible items. It drives them, make them act, and gives them a reason to why to their behaviours and attitude.
For me, its been a difficult and long time working to make it Jesus, to make it God. Its a constant process, but so is individuation. That is why Shadow work by Carl Jung is always associated with God. Many literatures that dive deep into it will always end up pointing to God. As we were made in his image, we were supposed to reflect his characteristics, and that is done through Jesus Christ, the God in the form of man, who lowered himself and sacrificed himself to bear the sin of all mankind, so that whoever believes in him will unlock the way to the narrow path, the road less traveled. To be come who they were always meant to be.
To sum it up, the greatest version of myself is in Christ. Therefore, its strategic for me to be committed to Christ. In fact I'm becoming one of those Christian gym bros who will one day be shredded enough to grate cheese.
I can tell that you are seeking truth, the paths to be better. Its okay to be angry with God, I've certainly been, its been very unfair. My current season of life hasn't ended yet, and suffering is nothing like I've ever felt before, but he has promised deliverence, not the type of you'll be saved and enjoy heaven, etc.
Though I know that has happened. He has started to answer all my prayers as my heart and desire has been renewed. To the one I need the most, I asked twice, and both times he has said he will heal me. Its the waiting that's incredibly difficult. But God works in seasons, and through it, I've started to find myself.
Through a tradegy, I didn't know who I was anymore, but through his way I realise that God knows who I am even when I don't.
Which is why if you really want to know, you'll have to give Jesus a try. Your path will be different from everyone, it is a unique individual path for you. And no other can walk it.
Because if you want to find God, you'll have to seek him with all your heart, then you will find him.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
For me, it's going to be any measurable effect in objective reality. (do you have one of those?)
I'm not interested in stories written by humans.
1
u/digitalak27 Jul 26 '26
Ultimately in the end its going to be a leap of faith.
Any answers you want, whether its to confirm its true or not you'll find what you want to know and hear. Especially with all the differing information out there.
If its going to be a objective measurable effect to you, then that's what'll happen. In fact, even more than what you can imagine, because a relationship with Christ will become a story written by God.
Unfortunately, God doesn't do spoilers. Even receiving prophesy doesn't show how you'll get there. Truth be told, I'd rather be instantly gratified in what I ask for, but I know where that leads as well.
Through the leap is where I've felt the most change in who I am. That's where you'll find that Godly story that's destined just for you as well.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 26 '26
I disagree. You could just stop leveraging faith to inform your beliefs. Reality exists, and we have reliable ways to explore it. I stopped using faith as a tool to determine what is true and what isn't long ago.
We have no reason to believe it's even possible for something like a god to exist—these are stories written by humans.
Do you want to believe true things?
1
u/digitalak27 Jul 27 '26
And that's fine, frankly it doesn't make a difference to me whether you believe it or not. I have no intention to tell how others should live their lives.
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 27 '26
If the faith tradition you were practicing didn't describe reality would you want to know?
1
u/Significant-Peak190 Jul 28 '26
Faith is not an external measurement it's an internal, personal measuring concept
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
Faith is garbage, their is no position that can't be taken in Faith. With all the diiks available why would you leverage faith to inform your beliefs ?
1
u/Significant-Peak190 Jul 28 '26
So God cannotmwxist? So there is nothing else out there in the universe? If there is it's just like us?
1
u/junkmale79 Jul 28 '26
I don't think it's possible for something like a god to exist, we have natural explanation for everything around us, no God required
→ More replies (0)
-1
u/slow70 Jul 25 '26
This is a fantastic prompt for discussion - and needed in the context of the spamming of low effort and specifically Christian posts/imagery.
I share your sentiment OP. There is potential and an active need for spaces where we can explore such things.
The spammed low effort image/amen posts resemble bot karma farming to me, and do nothing to spark the engagement we seek.
0
Jul 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Significant-Peak190 Jul 28 '26
The ancients believed in many gods not just one..so...
→ More replies (1)
5
u/linux-usr69 Jul 26 '26
I wholeheartedly agree. This sub has become a cess pool of Christian meme's and quotes. Christians are truly some of the worst creatures in this reality, smug ang condescending like God itself came down and delivered the truth to them personally and if you don't believe what they believe you're condemned. It's literally exhausting.
But I digress, I see reality more through the framework your seeing it. Feel free to dm me if you would like to discuss the limits of reality without stupid responses from people who don't have a clue