Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Why not, I thought there are absolutes?
There is a true nature of reality, but we do not know what it is. The absolute nature of reality cannot be understood by humans. We are like fish in water; a fish does not understand the true nature of water, but he swims in it every day.
It's hilarious the number of ways you can package causality to make it seem much too flowery. A friend of mine described his world-view to me, which is based off a popular fantasy book series (Wheel of Time)....dorky, I know. Anyway, 10 minutes later I was like "So, it's causality, but jazzed up so much that it's almost incoherent". He was upset, insisting it was deeper than that.
Later that day, tells it to another friend of mine, who also reads the book series. And he goes, "Dude, it's just causality." I laughed my ass off.
Karma is just mystically-repackaged determinism, with some vague moral overtones. Shakya will jump in and refute me (probably quite intelligently, so I have nothing against it) but I have yet to be convinced otherwise.
I actually just read a great essay by a philosophy professor named Bruce Waller, about "no-fault determinism", which (I think) would be a mortal blow to the idea of retributive moral effects in a karmic system. It's much more in-depth than the cliffs-notes I'm about to attempt, but essentially it states that in a deterministic universe, no one is at fault for their actions, no matter how heinous. For reasons of societal protection, criminals must still be punished, but it shouldn't be something "against" the criminal. Ascribing moral labels to anything goes away completely, and the focus is on understanding the causes of harmful acts so that they can be avoided, not assigning moral characteristics to acts or people.
So yeah, what you do will affect your future in a directly causal link. Say what else you want about karma or any other system, but that's what it boils down to.
😉
Sticks, stones, low blows, who knows all I know is I have misjudged you.
just like you know that jesus is lord. doesnt make it right
I have not gained a single convert (wow) I guess I am going to go and jump off of a cliff now. Mr. leonheartmm, sir, you obviously do not understand the dynamics of conversion. No person on earth has ever converted anyone (this is the work of the Holy Spirit in response to free will).
My job is not to "convert" in the sense that you mean it, my responsibility is simply to proclaim the good news not put a gun to your head and force you into believing it (no matter what I do I cannot make anyone accept Christ). You are not the first, second, third--ad infinitum--person to resort to this low blow remark based on a lack of knowledge concerning how conversion works. The Bible states that no person can come to Christ except the Father draw him/her. The Father draws via the Holy Spirit and the individual either accepts or rejects the loving pull of the Spirit of God. God uses believers simply to spread the gospel (i.e. good news) as lovingly as possible.
the bible is false. that has already been established. besides, the greater part of the world is not christian and they beleive in a different type of conversion than you. it is not i, who does not understand conversion. it is you who thinks his version of conversion is the only true version, just like everything else, too bad your wrong, just like everything else you prophess to be the ultimate truth.
But no matter how articulate, loving, patient, calm, dynamic, eloquent, or compassionate, the believer is not responsible for anyone's conversion. It is the sole work of the Holy Spirit in response to free will (God is a gentleman and He will not override anyone's free will).
SURELY, your not referring to yourself. because the jia i have come to see{along with the majority of people on this forum} is incoeherent, delusional, devious, ethnocentric, highheaded, and rude in expressing his covert hatred for people{e.g. homosexuals}. god does not have sex.
So, I consider it a low blow because it was meant to disconcert me (real debaters don't need low blows) they let the strength of their argument and the facts do the talking (as I have done). However, I apologize if I hurt your feelings, I did not mean to. People usually lash out with low blow remarks (that they don't really mean) when they have been deeply hurt (again, I apologize for hurting your feelings leonheartmm). It is not productive or fruitful for either one of us to be hurt.
real debaters also do not like to spin words, tire the opposition out, make fallacious arguments, be stubborn and clsoe minded, and repeat arguments and not accept defeat in the face of logic. you are not qualified to call people real debaters or not. and again, if your argument is so strong, why doesnt any1 here give it weightage? my fealings are not hurt at all, stop giving yourself too much credit jia. i wasnt lashing out at anything, just stating facts.
But then again maybe I didn't hurt your feelings and you couldn't care less what I think (is it this one?) Oh well, all is well that ends well.🙂 😄
bingo. u didnt. but i do care about what u think, believe it or not. you do not realise how detrimental it is to your psyche and the affect it has on society around you.
Originally posted by DigiMark007Interesting for sure. Though with every action there is an effect. Which is why I lean towards Cause and Effect. If it works in you actions, then on a much smaller level..ie our thinking, which has vibrational properties, then why not apply it to that also. Just as you can walk into a room and feel the vibes there, or sense the feelings of another without words being spoken. I'm not sure about the Karma of ones past life effecting future lives, but how would I know anyway. It could, I suppose. If it works that way. I'm just seeing that if you put out positive then usually you would get that back. Of course, there are others that would throw a wrench into the works and sorta mess it up for awhile, but as that passes away, the effects of what you put out snaps back into play. Oh well, that's my thoughts.
It's hilarious the number of ways you can package causality to make it seem much too flowery. A friend of mine described his world-view to me, which is based off a popular fantasy book series (Wheel of Time)....dorky, I know. Anyway, 10 minutes later I was like "So, it's causality, but jazzed up so much that it's almost incoherent". He was upset, insisting it was deeper than that.Later that day, tells it to another friend of mine, who also reads the book series. And he goes, "Dude, it's just causality." I laughed my ass off.
Karma is just mystically-repackaged determinism, with some vague moral overtones. Shakya will jump in and refute me (probably quite intelligently, so I have nothing against it) but I have yet to be convinced otherwise.
I actually just read a great essay by a philosophy professor named Bruce Waller, about "no-fault determinism", which (I think) would be a mortal blow to the idea of retributive moral effects in a karmic system. It's much more in-depth than the cliffs-notes I'm about to attempt, but essentially it states that in a deterministic universe, no one is at fault for their actions, no matter how heinous. For reasons of societal protection, criminals must still be punished, but it shouldn't be something "against" the criminal. Ascribing moral labels to anything goes away completely, and the focus is on understanding the causes of harmful acts so that they can be avoided, not assigning moral characteristics to acts or people.
So yeah, what you do will affect your future in a directly causal link. Say what else you want about karma or any other system, but that's what it boils down to.
😉
Originally posted by debbiejo
Interesting for sure. Though with every action there is an effect. Which is why I lean towards Cause and Effect. If it works in you actions, then on a much smaller level..ie our thinking, which has vibrational properties, then why not apply it to that also. Just as you can walk into a room and feel the vibes there, or sense the feelings of another without words being spoken. I'm not sure about the Karma of ones past life effecting future lives, but how would I know anyway. It could, I suppose. If it works that way. I'm just seeing that if you put out positive then usually you would get that back. Of course, there are others that would throw a wrench into the works and sorta mess it up for awhile, but as that passes away, the effects of what you put out snaps back into play. Oh well, that's my thoughts.
See, I can agree with you to an extent, but you're giving all kinds of sketchy characteristics to thought that are, to me, unfounded.
Vibes? Seriously?! If we pick up on the emotions of another, there's a variety of ways we can do it, most stemming from an intuitive knowledge of the person, a deduction of the situation that narrows the possibilities and is followed by an educated guess, or subtle visual cues that we may not even be aware of, but that our minds are conditioned to recognize. Thoughts are electrically-firing neurons in our brain that form an intricate web of patterns which we coelesce into rational thought. They don't extend to some ethereal aura surrounding us though, as the "vibes" seem to suggest. They create our actions, which in turn affect the outside world, but that's just simple physical causality and I doubt is what you're referring to.
As for my views of karma, sure, your actions could and will affect future lives (this is assuming reincarnation to be true for the sake of the argument). But so will everyone else's decisions affects your future existence, because it's all just a unified causal system. Determinism. So why dress it up as something more mystical and complex?
...
...and you seem firmly entrenched in the law of attraction stuff, but insofar as a positive outlook will yield more positive results in life than a negative outlook, I can agree with it. But again, I don't see a mystical slant to it since there's perfectly explainable reasons why this happens.