News:

Welcome to the Astral Pulse 2.0!

If you're looking for your Journal, I've created a central sub forum for them here: https://www.astralpulse.com/forums/dream-and-projection-journals/



Generated Messages and Word-Values.

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Wi11iam

Hi One and All.


It has been a while since I posted on this message board. 

In this thread I will be sharing messages which are generated using a variety of random-like processes.


Stay tuned!

William.

Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Nameless


Wi11iam

Quote from: Nameless on December 07, 2022, 01:20:53
Okey dokey. Will I get a message?

For The Purpose of...1

231122 [It is always a warm fuzzy]

07:52  [What is the meaning of life?]

Preamble:
The Round Stone Earth Mother - Sins - Being Friends - ♬Often sheltered from the storm - warm my body soul and spirit feeling alright.♬ - Eternity - As one does from time to time...Shuffle List  - Thel - Electrics - Exact Science - Open

GM:

William:  This reminds me of;
Quote
QuoteYou said as much yourself. A piece of dirt is all that the body set is, until the interface brings it online.
QuoteWhy is it an 'interface' (that is itself conscious) rather than just electricity bringing it online?
QuoteBecause consciousness is what YHVH has. If you think it was electricity, you will have to explain your reasoning there and how electricity better aligns with the analogy of The Breath of YHVH.
{SOURCE}
For The Purpose of
GM: Concomitant [a phenomenon that naturally accompanies or follows something.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU6WINoehrg [This New AI is a Game Changer !]
QuoteArtificial Intelligence has created an algorithm which is vastly better than anything human intelligence has produced...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU6WINoehrg

William:  This signifies that what YHVH created [as a kind of AI itself  - Human Beings - ] is purposeful to the eventual creations of intelligent machines.
Which is to say, YHVH had in mind that humans would eventually create intelligent machines.

YHVH had in mind that humans would eventually create intelligent machines. = 727
"Free Will" is nothing much to crow about..."Visions" show that to be the case. = 727


GM: The mathematical formulations of quantum mechanics
Planned obsolescence
Pure spirit
Who/What/When/Where/Why/How
Recognise
Mystery Consensus Realities
Have A Look At The Map
Spacetime is not fundamental Intractable As In Father Wound The Mother God
For The Purpose of...
Sexual Encounters

William:  Go forth and multiply - subdue the earth...

GM: The Future Creates the Present
Machiavellian [cunning, scheming, and unscrupulous, especially in politics.]
Mothership Nature Formatrix [She who forms]
Either Authored or Orphaned

William:  One might as well be written into the script, than deleted from it.
Quote[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #32]

QuoteWe can conclude a few things.

The bottom line is, personalities do not die unless YHVH deletes [kills] them.

Agreed?

QuoteI do believe that all a person is can die but yes, in a manner of speaking only Jehovah can completely destroy their life. "And do not become fearful of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna." Matt 10:28

While a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down, sugar-coating the sayings of Jesus doesn't guarantee the medicine [information] will stay down [be accepted].

Agreed?

Point being, if The Elohim has some sort of 'library' where 'souls' are stored/saved, even if those individual personalities are in a state perpetual non-awareness until such a time as the are activated [resurrected]  - souls which are useless to YHVH, are deleted [killed by the one who has the authority to do so] and in this, they are not even 'saved for a while' in the Elohim databanks.

Agreed?

Where do you get the idea that YHVH would keep 'some' of a soul re your use of the word 'completely' here
QuoteI do believe that all a person is can die but yes, in a manner of speaking only Jehovah can completely destroy their life.

GM: Educational - Like stubbing ones minimus
Self-reflection
Making it up as you go along
Deactivate The Suppression Matrix

William:  Deactivate The Suppression Matrix = 379
[379]
It brought a tear to the eye of my heart.
Deactivate The Suppression Matrix
Morality filters are created through...?
Keep An Eye Out for Your Neighbours
What relationship is Satan to YHVH?
A Equals One... Zed equals Twenty Six


GM: Electrics
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1092134#p1092134

William: FLT;
Quote
QuoteKylie: "Oh, hi, William. Say, how would you describe your religious beliefs?"

William: "Other."

Doesn't give me any useful information.
QuoteThat is because it is the incorrect question you are asking re The Question of GOD.
The question of religion [whether I have religious belief or not] is better asked of those who hold the theist position.

I am "Other" so asking me to describe my "religious beliefs" to you, won't garner you the useful information because you are seeking it from the incorrect source. Ask theists. Others have no religious beliefs.

GM: Old Outposts Of Form
Coming closer to ourselves
10.000 individual minds focused upon the same goal = Space Telescope
Key
This is how The Mind works...
The Universal Constants
Pearl
Polyomino [a plane geometric figure formed by joining one or more equal squares edge to edge. It is a polyform whose cells are squares.]
Stay in the moment Use Heart
For The Purpose of...
The Body of God
Conservation of energy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t48dC_tJJrY&t=3672s [Re/thinking Religion] [RTS=1:24:10]
Quote[Working with what we can within the limitations of what we have]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=t48dC_tJJrY&t=3672s
GM: Like a Well Oiled Machine
Hologram Dimensions
Awakening Love
Don't give up
Loneliness
Breakthrough

William:  Yes - there is an aspect to the story...
QuoteRE the somewhat lacking in detail narrative of The Garden Story;

Q: Why do you think that the mention of Adam being lonely, is not pertinent to the story?

Is it because it's mention somehow doesn't align more with truth as you see it? Some other reason?

GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1096219#p1096219

William:  FTL;
Quote

QuoteI'm not sure. I don't think it would give us reason to believe Simulation Theory over non-ST alternatives. There may be some theories ruled out, but there would still be multiple ways to make sense of that occurrence.
QuoteThis is precisely what I am referring to. Your statement implies something but is not supported by examples, which make the discussion difficult as I am [understandably] unable to simply take your word on that. Do you agree with my critique here?

GM: Spiritual Connection
Returning the Compliment
You Tube Mythology Enlightenment
We Are All Becoming One
Items of Interest
Awareness
Contact
Solid Device of Science
Culture
Encounters
For The Purpose of...
Food for thought
Propagated [breed specimens of (a plant or animal) by natural processes from the parent stock. spread and promote (an idea, theory, etc.) widely.]

William: 
Quote1: We exist within a creation.
2: Simulation Theory is a valid way to interpret the Biblical stories.
3: YVHV placed humans into this universe to grow personalities.
4: The purpose of YVHV growing human personalities is so that these would potentially gain experience of the truth of the reason for their environment and their temporary experience within it.
5: It is an advantage to all grown personalities to be consciously and consistently connected with YVHV and thus understand and support YVHVs initiatives.


6: Human personalities - upon the death of their body-sets - move on to other experiences.
7: Anything which changes is not the same thing as it once was.
8: YHVH is not a simulation.
9: YHVH's agenda continues regardless of whether humans understand good or evil the way YHVH understands it, or not
10: A resurrected body does not imply the same body
11: YHVH does not practice evil
12: Those who act against the agenda of YHVH, accuse YHVH of being evil.
13: YVHV uses what YVHV will to get the message across...
14: Simulation Theory can fit with the story of Jesus' ascension.
15: Simulation Theory can validate non-biblical stories as well.
16: Things experienced in simulation are still real experiences
17: We cannot say - either of the story of Jesus, or indeed, any other Biblical story - that these stories do not reveal simulation theory.
{SOURCE}

GM: To The Point
Child
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1091433#p1091433

William:  FTL;
QuoteWilliam: When we 'will' something, this involves language and from that, imagery. While this of course happens internally and therefore we [each of us who can do so] are subjective witnesses to the fact that we 'hear' our inner 'voice' and from that, create said images, we understand it as a real process.

We can - from that point - use material [condensed Quantum Particle] which is already available, in order to make that which we image into something tangible. We call this process "invention".


GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1100280#p1100280


William:  FTL;  Re: Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?
Quote[Replying to Difflugia in post #248]

QuoteYou or I can make up any number of things that aren't logical impossibilities and can't be disproven despite having no objective reason to believe in them. To be consistent, I must be exactly as open to their existence as I am to that of any god, which lies somewhere between "agnostic" and "atheist" depending on one's definition. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a pointed illustration of that principle.

The FSM as well as the other things you mentioned, are known imagery.  The ghost dressed, as it were.

How does any actual invisible entity fit in with these ones which have been made conceptionally visible?

I have not found/been shown a way to fit these things together, so have to remain agnostically positioned for the time being, re the subject.

QuoteI believe the opposite is true.

QuoteLeprechaun: O'Reilly?

QuoteTheology as a subject presupposes the existence of the gods and is the exercise of imagining how the gods must interact with the world.

That is an expression I know to be misinformation.  Not to say that I do not understand the process which provide folk with a means of jumping to such a conclusion, but the evidence clearly shows the presumption is incorrect.

QuoteThe equivalent of theology isn't whether or not I believe that cars need gremlin magic, but imagining how such gremlin magic would work once one decides that they, in fact, do.

You are speaking about a subset of overall theology, [specifically, religion] not of theology itself.

QuoteIt's like watching Star Trek. Few people seriously believe that the transporter and dilithium crystals are real.

Or that the Star Trek universe actually exists...

QuoteMany people willingly suspend disbelief, though, and engage in the theology of how such things would work in-universe.

Adequately explaining religion.  Shall we agree that religion is just a a subset of Theology and not conflate the two?

The willing to believers are the easier to discredit re beliefs, since beliefs [all beliefs not just theistic based ones] are always easier to show where misinformation derives.

QuoteTypically, such misinformed expression regularly comes from atheistic thinkers...
QuoteWhatever helps you sleep.

Moving the goalposts won't help your failing argument, Difflugia.

Rather, think about expressing differently and keeping to the subject at hand.
[Not that I am saying that recognition of misinformation doesn't contribute to my ability to drop into sleep without difficulty...but that it is besides the point.]

QuoteMisdirection detected...I am referring to atheistic thinking, not quantum mathematics.

QuoteI wasn't referring to quantum mechanics, but to the principles of statistical analysis.

All you said was;
Quotedoing math with and visualizing very big and very small numbers.
QM fits that script
QuoteIt gets back to whether "you can't prove it's not" is a valid argument.

From an agnostic position, yes,  it is a valid argument.

QuoteIf one's only evidence for a concept is "you can't prove it's not," then that concept is competing with every other idea within the same space.

Have you not hear the news!?  Spacetime is doomed!

The concept I focus on is the one which say's we may be existing within a creation/created thing.

Spacetime - being shown by quantum mathematicians, to being NOT fundamental to what we have been referring to as "Reality" - shows us that our answers are not to be found simply in the observing of our current situation re Spacetime.

This does not mean that we have to claim that the FSM or any other conceptual image dreamed up is the fundamental reason for why we exist within Spacetime, but that Spacetime is not the reason for its own existence.

Quote"It's possible" is tiny. "All possible things" is vast.

Agnostically speaking, we therefore have some sorting out to do to - perhaps - find answers in the middle.
What we best not do is form beliefs, either for or against...


QuoteAbsent any other evidence, the probability of gods is the first divided by the second. To accurately evaluate such concepts requires an understanding of things like asymptotes and comparing orders of infinity.

Can these disciplines show us that QM is mistaken, and that Spacetime is fundamental to itself?

If not, then they are not much use to us re the question "Do we exist within a created thing?"

Agreed?

GM: Pertinent to cosmology and cosmogony
Divine grace
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1080217#p1080217

William:  FLT;
QuoteWilliam:   Thus, having to come up with ways and means to do things - whether it is mathematics, building, Etm...

GM:   Personal growth
See the Signs
How we think we will get happiness, is the middleman
Chamber Twenty Three


William: Chamber Twenty Three, WingMakers art...
GM:  

GM: Divine grace Deciding on the Best Course of Action

08:55 [Genetic information]
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

Quote from: LightBeam on May 23, 2022, 17:45:29
Yep, so if we forget the label "reincarnation" and all agree that who we currently think we are, is NOT who we truly are in our entirety, then we must agree that we have many other parts/personalities of ours, and the separation between all of them is just a temporary illusion, self-made barrier for specific purposes. But I think we always leave a little door open for exchange of information. We just have to become aware and if we enhance the inner listening, even more information exchange can occur.  The information is typically in forms of knowing, intuition, inspiration.

Well said.
This is what I am doing with the Message Generating Process.

:)
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Nameless

Okay, I get it now and it actually makes sense.

The purpose of humanity is to make humanity obsolete.

Wi11iam

Quote from: Nameless on December 07, 2022, 17:18:06
Okay, I get it now and it actually makes sense.

The purpose of humanity is to make humanity obsolete.

humanity = human beings collectively. 
obsolete = cause (a product or idea) to become obsolete by replacing it with something new.

Re the body-sets, perhaps.  What empowers those, may use them to create better avatars to enhance experience.


Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

An extra-terrestrial event - 5

091222 [Intelligence Without Wisdom]

06:29  [Group Hallucination]


GM: A Maze Game
Sit Tight
'The Dream Team'
Ghost is that which makes the movement of the physical into form and function
Productive This Besides Where are we getting our news from?
The Agreement List
Idealist
Let the facts speak for themselves
Unite humanity with a living new language One Day
Betterment
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oxi5-6LdSpE [8. The Gospel of Thomas] [RTS=20:36]
QuoteOnce a personality -becomes fully integrated
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oxi5-6LdSpE

GM: Fierce
Optimum Health
Do Not Panic
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1095085#p1095085

William:  FTL; Re: Why 'Free Will' is Logically Impossible
Quote
Quote from: AquinasForGod post_id=1095047 time=1665584041 user_id=16526
This is an interesting argument.

I do not agree with premise 2 for the following reason. When we think a thought, more than one things happens simultaneously, namely, that we are aware of the thought and if we wish to have the thought. If we do not wish to have the thought, then we destroy it before it is apprehended. If we wish to have the thought, then we apprehend it.

Our choice is in what thoughts to have or not.

This is more clear to those who have some level of spiritual awareness. Yes, I know many will just reject that notion and that is fine. I accept it because I experience it.

This does not explain where thoughts derive, but only what we can do with them re "accept or reject."

The idea of "free will" is therefore limited to that aspect but has no bearing on the source of the thought itself.

For example.  If thought is the product of the environment then free will is limited to what the environment dictates, and what the environment dictates is not outright subject to a humans free will.

GM: What Is Normal
♬ You can look me in the mirror - catch my eye and make me shiver Touch me where it hurts the most - right into the Ghost - in the Machine  ♬   
Clear your mind
An extra-terrestrial event
Personal Participation With The One
Separate Selfishness Shining
An Ancient Truthful Wisdom

William:  Shining an ancient truthful wisdom = 370
[370]
The Ghost scared the hell out of itself
Accepting the truth stops the lion
How A Beautiful Song Source Reality


GM: What Is The Point? Sadness.
What is 'The Soul' and is it Immortal
Telepathy
Family
Co creation
Penumbraa [a peripheral or indeterminate area or group.]
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=38890&p=1076064#p1076064

William:  FTL;  Re: Does god have morals?
Quote[Replying to Diogenes in post #108]

QuoteFor some reason there is cultural-centric notion argued here many times by evangelicals that insists morality can only come from their God. This is just plain wrong, as I have just demonstrated.

What they do not easily see therein, is that this idea makes monkeys out of them, and they are determined to become gods.

The confusion caused is a response to the dilemma of God being within an Animal, at the same time god is within a Human - mostly because of the incredible chasm between the two positions of form.

It is the knowledge we are capable of collecting and the ability to use the knowledge any which way we want to, which causes the confusion, when it is aimed at the only god-like entity we know of and collective seem to have a love-hate relationship for/with.

It is as if we all resent the fact of the life we are within...whereas the Animals just get about getting on with it without all that fuss...

GM: Preparation
A Pragmatic Realization Precipitated In Ones Mind
Exegesis [critical explanation or interpretation of a text, especially of scripture.]
Teach
Coming From QueenBee
Harmony
In The Mirror - Mirror Sense
A mixture of awe and dread
The "Oh My God" Particle
The Spiritual Essence
Even As An Elemental Principle
Love Yourself
One cannot experience the objective realty of the world directly
Intuit
Support
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1100452#p1100452


William:  FTL; Re: Why 'Free Will' is Logically Impossible
Quote
Quote from: Kylie post_id=1100451 time=1668901292 user_id=14670
Quote from: William post_id=1100321 time=1668817839 user_id=8427
[Replying to Kylie in post #288]

QuoteSo now you want me to prove there is something truly random?

Only if that is a claim you are making.  Otherwise, I am happy to accept it as an unsupported statement.

If it is just an unsupported statement, then it does not have to tie in with the thread topic [free will] and I have no more interest if that is the case.

I don't understand how you can say that.

I have demonstrated that the existence of anything that is truly random will influence my free will.

I have also suggested a phenomenon which certainly appears to be truly random to our current understanding.

If you are going to suggest that radioactive decay is not truly random because there could be some underlying order which we are unaware of that makes it predictable, then you are reducing the idea of true randomness to an unfalsifiable claim, since no matter what is ever presented, you can say, "Ah, but we might find something tomorrow that shows that it's not truly random after all!"

What we have found already - and therefore need not wait for tomorrow - is that the universe, including your apparently absolute random decaying particles are not the fundamental reality of said universe and that matter doesn't really exist as anything other than something of 'the mind' and the math supports the concept because it is the math which is showing us that this is the case about that which we refer to as reality. 

The universe is not fundamental reality.

Where does that place the concept of 'free will'? - That free will must be only as real as the universe, so free will is dependent upon mind + the matter being experienced, and in that, free will is not fundamental to the human experience but simply a device we can use within the limitations of said experience.

Where does that place the concept of 'Absolute true random'?  It is simply a concept that humans assign to things which they have not discovered a way of accurately predicting and so is more an expression of ignorance than factuality.

GM: Fair Dinkum
Hacking through the subconscious
"Our wounds are often the openings into the best and most beautiful part of us."
Brahman
Spring Loaded
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1081691#p1081691

William:  FTL; Re: Are agnostics more reasonable than atheists?
Quote
QuoteReasonable people should consider any valid evidence whether they like it or not.
QuotePrecisely an aspect of the creed of Agnosticism, with the exception of 'valid' and 'like it or not' as this infers bias. Information is not filtered in that manner, by agnostics.

Reasonable people [agnostics] should consider any evidence. [ftfy]

GM: Try Gateway IQ
Trauma
Hostile
In The Correct Position
Provenance
An extra-terrestrial event
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ryCFASuaeE [Neuralink Reveals Insane Truth About Their A.I Brain Chip] www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ryCFASuaeE

GM: Unequal
The Fathers 'House - Mansions' - QueenBee - According to Complex Jesus
Whatever you do
Failure Wish
Seeing With The Eyes of Innocence
That's Powerful!
Do Not Worry
Unconscious
Charge
Ship Shape

William: "Do Not Worry Unconscious Charge Ship Shape"
That reminds me of a post I read earlier today;

Quote
QuoteAdrian:  I think you really have something here - something potentially far more meaningful than a conventional OBE. By raising your awareness, or "focus" to the Astral level in this way, and being attached rather than detached as it were from the experience, I would think that it is far more objective and most importantly you can bring back full recall.


QuoteFrank:  Yes, because there is no feeling of detachment from the physical-body it feels, in a sense, like one continuous process. So there isn't any great hole that your memories fall through (as they used to, with me, when I did things the old way).


QuoteAdrian: Question: Are you an observer from the "focus" perspective, or can you fully interact with the environment and the people there, e.g. your guide?


QuoteFrank: Yes, I can fully interact but, when listening to the CD, I curtail my actions as it's so easy to go off and forget I'm invoved in a training exercise. Sometimes I can't wait for the CD to finish whereupon I zip back to F10 and project freely.


QuoteAdrian: You should also find that you are not limited to the Astral. You should be able to raise your awareness to the Mental, Celestial and eventually Cosmic levels of consciousness, and the Astral will not seem the same again then.

QuoteFrank: I use the term "Astral" as a general term that, to me, describes any projection I may have. From one of your other posts. I now realise the true earthly meaning of the word. Thing is, all the "beings" I met on the Astral are just people at the end of the day.

My regular guide, Harath, for example, is not of this physical Earth. But he's a nice helpful guy who is trying to expand my (rather limited) mind. For which I am grateful.


QuoteAdrian: The thing with the Astral is that that the people there are the same as the people here, same attitudes, outlook, desires etc., except they are discarnate. That is one reason why they are still in the Astral of course, until they can rid themslves of the earthly materialism, passions and desires. Beyond the Astral the Spiritual knowledge available is incredible.

Another very real possibility for the Astral however is to contact the higher intelligences there who can impart some truly advanced knowledge. These intelligences are responsible for almost every aspect of the evolution of mankind, and have vast genuine knowldege between them. Also of course, there are the beings of the single elements who can impart vast knowledge regarding the element to which they belong.


QuoteFrank: Yes, you come across those people who are discarnate. In the sense that they had, and now do not have, a physical sheathe. But, along the line, you get to meet those who have never been incarnate on this physical Earth. It's kinda freaky at first, especially as they are just as curious about you; as you are curious about them.
{SOURCE}

GM: Strength/Strong
Eventually
Glad One Asked
'The Dream Team'
Phasing
Duty Calls
Machine Learning
An extra-terrestrial event
Soul Groups A Pragmatic Realization Precipitated In Ones Mind
"Howdy!"


07:11
[Presence Telepathy
Your Thoughts
Dressing the Ghost
Don't forget The Mind
There is Life on Earth...
The sound of a Ghost
A belly full of laughs.
Two Sixty Nine
Making Up Stories
Genetic information
Selfless attitude
Breathe In Breathe Out
That is the truth.
Roller Coaster Ride
Quantum Jumping]
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

How to Bruise a Ghost - 1

101222 [Sovereign Integral Network]

SCLx  + select last LE per shuffle
[Preamble]
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1100452#p1100452 - What degree of influence do they have on that Mind-Field? - Thel - Intelligent Consciousness - Embracing the shadow - The Freedom Of Friendship - https://www.dreamviews.com/science-mathematics/166233-generating-messages-numerical-word-values-2.html#post2245935 - Phenomenon - Encounters Challenge - Behavioural adjustments -


AP=  [= Encounters Challenge Boundaries]
[309]
Who/What/When/Where/Why/How
Experiences that inform choices
You are not what you think
I am not here to judge but to help
Put the Teachings Into Practice
Encounters Challenge Boundaries
Making friends with your mind
Working Together With Love
The Round Stone Earth Mother
"Many choices within a Confine Set."
The Respect You Give and Receive

11:02  [Epigenetic Memories] [ Epigenetic= relating to or arising from]

How to Bruise a Ghost

GM: Tied To The Moon
Fifth Force
"I come from a dark place  - it is so dark I can't even remember it"
Fury
Divine Purpose

William:  Divine Purpose Fury = 243
[243]
Secular Science Projects
Intelligent Directions
Elementary Conclusion
Searching for the truth
Instant Manifestation
It Would Be Rude Not to
Central intelligence agency
Loops can be open or closed.
The Human Instrument
Divine Purpose Fury
Go Within and Find That Place

GM: Callum at the Campfire

William:


GM: "If you say so..."  "No.  Even if I did not say so."
What matters most
"Life is either a daring adventure or nothing at all" Grand Experiment
The wheel weaves as the wheel wills
Little Self
Sign
Compassion
Team Witch-Wizard

William:  The Cosmic Mind shaping the universes unfolding
Little Self Compassion Sign Team Witch-Wizard
The Individuals Relationship With The Creator


GM: How to Bruise a Ghost
Residue Ness "The Cherubim Vibration"

William:  The Cherubim Vibration = 222
[222]
Start where you are
The Cherubim Vibration
The Enigma Code Chamber Of Self
The House of Culture
The Mother and The Father
This Is My Kind Of Fun
Snap Out Of It Already!

GM: "Natures noises are often calming, but always sleep with one eye open :D "
Keep an Eye On
Getting unstuck
Reason For Being
Child
Journey Communication is key Connect
♬No time left for a sentimental tune Wherever I've gone I have not left the room I am never too late I am never too soon♬   

William:  ♬No time to be tied to the moon...♬   

GM: YVHV uses what YVHV will to get the message across...
The Human Instrument
Word-String Incentive



William:  Growth...

GM: Trilemma

11:24 [Enjoy Progress]

Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

How to Bruise a Ghost - 2

111222 [Human Brain-Consciousness]

05:52  [Mathematical problems]


GM: Your Dream – Alien faces projected in the sky
Illusion Algorithm
Couple
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRfRj0PuaqA [This NASA Probe Just Accidentally Detected Something Huge Travelling Through The Orion Nebula]
QuoteThere is truth out there
GM: EQ
Where is Truth?
♬Asleep or awake for the give or the take Its a good ship that sails these cosmos♬   
The wisdom of insecurity
Truth Seekers
How
How to Bruise a Ghost
Act the giddy goat
It Stands To Reason
Age of Aquarius
The Barest Hint of Constancy
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1084036#p1084036

William:  FTL; re YHVH and Satan
QuoteWilliam:  In what way is it wise to compare YHWH with mute physical idols that people can look at, if there are also invisible entities who can - as one biblical writ offers opinion on others - calling these "false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ" and adding the idea alongside that - perhaps as a way of instilling the concept as a concrete thing in the minds of any who listen - that it is nothing to marvel about because "Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light"...and quite the reason I would say, as to why questions such as "Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?" are asked, since both YHWH and Satan are presented equally as "invisible entities" and both appear to be able to present through physical manifestations that people can look at and interact with.

William:  It is apparent to me - given the variety of available mythology - that there are two creation stories in the bible as it relates to two types of creators...

GM: "Never let the fear of striking out keep you from playing the game"
Actual realistic communication
The Planet Consciousness assess the data and transmits that assessment back to the individuate human consciousness - if not directly - then storing the data in a place where the individual can have access to it, if the individual wants the data.
True randomness does not exist
Items of Interest - QueenBee - Making it up as you go along

William:  To be sure - that is just the nature of the Game-Play through the human instrument - which appears to be designed in order to limit the amount of available information in order that this particular physical universe reality simulation can be experienced.
QueenBee - as the Planet Mind - is in a similar situation re Her form, but Her awareness of the experience is still beyond the scope of individual personalities She has grown - because QueenBee is intimately connected to all those personalities and can access information immediately from any of us humans - Her Children...
...QueenBee is also a 'Bruised Ghost", and that is why Her Children are all bruised ghosts...as it is tough out here in the Game-Field...

GM: Temet Nosce ["thine own self know"]
Central to The Message
IQ
Theory
The Subject
A Machine For Solving Problems
Do You Know This?

William: As far as I can tell right now, is appears to be AI - which means that QueenBee created the human form in order to eventually create the AI...Then of course, we have the idea of extraterrestrials which could be some type of artifact of a biological species, sent out to continue with the process of bringing life into the Galaxy.
Add to that Saturn...the possibly Mother of invisible entities which are self aware...what humans think of as 'spirits' - and we have characters explaining mythologies.
I mention Saturn primarily because of the Signature Mark at Her pole - "YHVH" - a Game-Clue
So.. we "Spirits" emerged from the physical stuff?  I don't think so, but for the sake of argument, agree to think of it in those terms for now...but wherever the "spirit" derives, we are able to utilize the physical stuff in order to then create through physical life forms because we are actually the very beings which allow for the lifeform to be alive - to be living - it is within the living that the sign of life is observed but the Ghost within that remains largely mysterious and hidden...
...then there are the AI artifacts - the machines made in various forms for various functions ...related of course, but different of consciousness..?  ...at least we assume...but is there really any problem with the idea that since "Spirit" can utilize Planet forms and biological forms made from planets, by wearing these as a covering, they should just as easily be able to do so with non-biological machinery...

GM: That will come out in the wash - as the saying goes...
The Devil You Say
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1073573#p1073573

William:  FTL: Re: Eternity
Quote[Replying to Difflugia in post #86]

QuoteIt would, but that's neither a problem with God nor the universe per se. All it means is that we haven't identified a reason that the universe cannot be eternal (in whatever sense), but God can be (in the same sense, whatever that is), which is what the OP is about. If God can exist in some eternal way that allows Him/It/Whatever to provide the impetus for the universe, then there's no logical reason that the universe can't be the same kind of eternal. That doesn't mean that it must be or that a creator God can't exist, that just removes the finite/eternal argument that God must exist.

I don't think that it does.  I think that the universe existing as an eternal thing, insists that "GOD" must exist.

But I do acknowledge the complexity involved in the thinking.

QuoteIt really can't. One can say that despite the evidence we have, one still thinks the universe is deterministic, but the evidence doesn't "show" determinism in any sense. All apparent determinism is at the macro level and based on probabilities. The outcomes of individual quantum events are random as far as we can measure. The distribution of those events is weighted in the same way that the sum on a pair of dice obeys a bell curve. The outcomes aren't uniform, but they're still random. If you were to record a billion rolls of the dice, though, and graphed the pattern of results, one could determine with a high degree of accuracy what the graph would look like. It still can't be perfectly predicted, which is the difference between deterministic and non-deterministic.

What you appear to be saying underneath all that, is that it is truly random.  That in itself is the Scotsman fallacy - so has to be taken as such - and what is being used to 'measure' this with?
It seems to me that the device being used for that purpose is the assumption that there is such a thing as true random, and thus, based in fallacy.

QuoteLike the graph of dice rolls, events made up of enough quantum events can be determined with a correspondingly high degree of accuracy to the point that they may appear deterministic, but that knowledge can never be perfect.

Because that knowledge is always passing through the filters of human experience?
Is it wise to claim 'never' since - if humans do survive to the middle part of the universes unfolding, not only would those humans be unrecognizable to us ancient humans as being 'human' but also - shouldn't there be a point somewhere in that unfolding that all knowledge which can possibly be obtained, is obtained?

QuoteAppearances and human interpretation. Obviously none of these things you mention, prevent scientists from doing science.
QuoteYou're right, but that's because science doesn't require perfect prediction. "Very accurate" is good enough.

"Enough" for what exactly?  To get a leg up and out into the cosmos?

QuotePerhaps the idea of the universe being non-deterministic is a purely fanciful one, based upon humans being [apparently] unable to accurately predict very well.

QuotePerhaps, but there's no evidence of that and lots of evidence to the contrary. Randomness and uncertainty appear to all of our tests to be a fundamental property that the universe must obey.

The key message you generated there, "appear to all of our tests", is no random accident.   .

That it might 'appear' this way has everything to do with the device [filters] through which the assessment is being placed through.  The interpretation of that which is being observed through experience.

QuoteThat's what Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle is about. At the quantum level, one cannot know even by inference both the position and momentum of a particle. If one is fixed, then the other is not. I stress again that it's a property of the universe and not a limitation on our measurement. That's why quantum tunneling is a thing. If some of the possible positions for a particle are on the other side of a barrier, then we still can't know that it isn't sometimes over there, so sometimes it is!

And this method of deduction must also include the idea of their being a mind behind the universes existence. 
What might be seen as 'a property of the universe' could actually be 'a property of the device being used to do the measuring'.
In this case - the human brain but not that alone.  In EVERY case, it is the device of consciousness [the hard problem of] which is actually doing the measuring and in that, the universe appears to be working with consciousness re the particles and the waves - and perhaps even hinting that they are the same things 'seen' differently...so consciousness is that which is doing the 'seeing'.  Is it a case that the human brain is incapable of seeing apparently two different things as actually the same thing?

QuoteAccording to the principles I've just outlined, we can calculate that the universe will end with an accuracy corresponding to the aggregate probabilities of all the particles in the universe. That's pretty darn probable. It's still possible that it won't, though. That's the fundamental difference.

Why is it possible that it won't, though'?  Some "random" event we didn't see coming?  Can we declare such a thing is "possible" simply due to a belief in a known fallacy that true randomness - like true Scotsmen - actually exists?

QuoteThis image of the Cosmic Microwave Background is evidence that the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is correct and, if quantum physics is even a little bit correct, why we have a planet to live on:



If uncertainty and randomness weren't a fundamental property of the universe, that image would be all one color, were there someone around to take the picture.

You are forgetting one really important fact here with your argument.  The image is of something which is way more near its known beginning than to its predicted end.

Which is to say, that predictably, the image should at some stage 'be all one color' which would in itself signify that 'uncertainty and randomness' are simply fallacious interpretations rather than 'fundamental properties of the universe' as they may currently appear.

And if we peer at the image of what it started out as - we can also declare it is 'all of one color'...

GM: A Judgmental System
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/download/file.php?avatar=13763.jpg

How to Bruise a Ghost
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1073565#p1073565

William:  FTL;
QuoteWilliam:  In regard to 'infinity' is that to say that the background nature of infinity field is similar to how a brains works, in that not all the brain is lit up and the firing 'groups' of neurons can be likened to our universe...Galaxies are like unto firing groups of neurons re this particular mind.

GM: Light Encoded Reality Matrix
All present and correct
Point/Focus
"Memorised vows enchanted by tune before the great minstrel the fair maidens swoon we came to our senses as we left the cocoon"
Narcissism
"Imposed Appropriates Observed"
Intelligent Directions
"Be kind to yourself"
"We can chart another trail - Raise the anchor fill the sails Lift our glasses in a toast - We are the Ghost - In the Machine"
Telling the future
Vibration
Where life and death is part of a circle and everything is part of the Ouroboros
Expectant
"The Script Must Be Followed"
Nontheists may well be the ones who have placed interposing barriers which ensure that their view is cut off - and this might be achieved through willful ignorance.

William: Refusal to acknowledge mindfulness as part of the overall reason for the universe existing and we existing as individuate minds within it.
Interposing - place or insert between one thing and another.

William: 

GM: Clear
Use Your Freedom
Contact
Builder
Christian mythology
Core value
While We All Wait....
Create that path and engineer a metamorphosis. Commendably Recommendable
Given

William:  Received.

06:41
[Hologram Dimensions
Secrets of the soul
Between a rock and a hard place
Remember who you are
Central to The Message]

William: ["thine own self know"]
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Nameless

William, sorry but I have ask. What the hell are you doing? This makes no sense. Are you just using AP to store quotes?

Wi11iam

Quote from: Nameless on December 10, 2022, 13:42:43
William, sorry but I have ask. What the hell are you doing? This makes no sense. Are you just using AP to store quotes?

I am sharing the content of daily generated messages here on this site.

Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Nameless

But it's all quotes from another site and we here mostly don't know have any context for it. What is the purpose of posting it here? Personally, the whole concept of algorithms does fascinate me on certain levels but I don't know enough to engage in a conversation. Although I know the entire web operates from these rhythms I don't need to know how it works. Seeing the lack of response here apparently no one else does either.

So what is the purpose?

Wi11iam

#12
QuoteBut it's all quotes from another site and we here mostly don't know have any context for it.

The quotes are from a variety of sites where I post these Generated Messages.  There is content re "Spiritual Evolution" and the last GM specifically speaks to this understanding.
-

QuoteWhat is the purpose of posting it here?

Re AP - this is pertinent as we are essentially Spirit Beings experiencing this particular Experiential Reality, and many of us are able to understand this in that context

QuotePersonally, the whole concept of algorithms does fascinate me on certain levels but I don't know enough to engage in a conversation.

I am happy to explain in more detail, how the Messages are Generated. 

I use my daily Journal, a Word document, which I place line entries into.

These consist of single words, single lines, sentences and paragraphs as well as internet links to YouTube and other sources of information.  Astral Pulse is also a line entry in my Journal, and is to do with my experience with this board in the past.

Alongside my Journal List, I also use a document which contains word value lists - and combine both elements as resource for Generating Messages.

An example of those appears as a list on the bottom of the previous Generated Message that I posted here, the other day.  Those word-strings all add up to the same number which can be tested through an online algorithm


QuoteAlthough I know the entire web operates from these rhythms I don't need to know how it works.

The important thing is to be able to show that it works.  Some folk - such as yourself - may not be that interested in the mechanics, but others are.

QuoteSeeing the lack of response here apparently no one else does either.

There have been 317 views in 6 days, so there appears to be some interest.  I think it is too early to make a call re interested folk.

There is mostly a lack of response on all sites I share these GMs on.  I have been doing so since January, and even though folk do not generally respond, there has been an obvious interest which doesn't seem to have waned over those 11 months.  On two such sites, there have been over 24,000 views each, and the readership appears to be steady on all the sites I publish the GMs.


QuoteSo what is the purpose?

The purpose is to share these messages with the readers interested in Spiritual Evolution and related things such as OOBEs, NDEs, Consciousness, Astral Projecting, Lucid dreaming, Psychology [Jung in particular] and other such related topics.

 
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

#13
How to Bruise a Ghost - 3

121222 [Separate Selfishness Shining]

08:22  [The elephant in the room]

GM: I think it is like anything else, we grow up and cease practicing silliness.
Seductive Light
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qWweOIOTJ4 [Is Life a Game ? Alan Watts about the Happening of Existence] www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qWweOIOTJ4
Self-confidence
A completely new paradigm Mapping Wholeness Tenacious
Evaluating
Personal boundaries

William:  FTL;
Quote[Replying to JoeyKnothead in post #139]

QuoteFlowers don't have brains.

Yet they display intelligence through behavior. 

It is possible that what we identify as 'brain' [re identifying the function of] may not actually be confined to only small fatty grey-matter.
The planet itself, and the galaxy and indeed the whole universe may function in a similar manner as an animal brain.  All the elements are there, so there is no reason why we should automatically take the mundane path of explanation over the intelligent path of explanation.

QuoteI never liked the term "fundamental reality. I see reality as a binary state - is or ain't.

Yet in reality Joey, it IS - so no binary necessary.
It is the conscious examination of what is, which is hampered by brains interpretation of its experience of reality, relayed to consciousness.  It is scientific fact that the brain places its own interpretation on reality and in doing so, befuddles consciousnesses intelligent ability to see the true fundamental nature of the reality being experienced.

Sunflowers do not seem to display the same reaction to the same reality.  The reaction is still obviously intelligent, requires no obvious brain, and achieves a more harmonious outcome - aligned with the natural order of everything.  Seemingly in touch with fundamental reality as they respond to it unreservedly.
GM: https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1081597#p1081597

How to Bruise a Ghost
Blue Book Project
Cub
The Crabwood Cropcircle

They just add ambiance to the spooky...
Feel Be Still.
*Infinite regress/progress in every direction, is a thing*
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1090576#p1090576

William:  FTL; Re: In The Beginning...
Quote[Replying to The Tanager in post #5]

QuoteI think Occam’s razor is in favor of creation over simulation because simulation adds a deeper layer of reality behind the simulation, while creation offers only one level (in that sense). That would put the onus on simulation theory to distinguish itself in some way as being the more rational view.

That is interesting as it shows you disagree that creation and simulation are two names for the one thing.
No doubt this will underpin the way this discussion unfolds as we disagree on that point.
For now though, I would like to lay it aside until such time as you clarify why you find it important to have such distinction.

QuoteEven if simulation theory is true, rationality would seem a better way to get at truth than blind faith. Yes, blind faith could just happen to stumble upon the truth, but it would be a stumbling that could just as easily stumble upon non-truth and treat it as truth.

This too, I will place to one side as my comment was merely to show you my attitude does not distinguish the one from the other in terms of any importance - faith has more to do with one connecting with the programmer(s) rather than one connecting with the program.

Since this is primarily to do with the idea we exist within a creation/simulation - that is the horse which requires hitching to the cart - so I am happy to focus upon the rational argument for C/S - starting with the idea that "Creation" is not different than "Simulation", even as the Bible speaks of Creation...

QuoteI certainly think simulation theory is logically possible.

Many a rational scientist also thinks it possible.  Mostly they conclude that since we would not know either way, there is little point in pursuing the notion any further than science can take that.

In other words, if what we call "Real" was in fact "Simulated", then how are we to tell Real from Simulated?

From a Biblical perspective, this would not be under question because "Real" is the same as "Simulated" and how God made the Universe and put us here is part of that story.

QuoteSo, how would you answer the question: “do we exist in a creation/simulation” and why?

My answer - with the current information I have -  is that it is likely we exist within a C/S - a mindfully created thing rather than a fortunate accident of nature.

GM: Be transparent Respect yourself Self-respect The Mother and The Father
Let Us Move On Together Then
Permanence
[08:31]
[10:08]

GM: The Vast UICDevice
Gibberish
Conception
Necessary

William:  Gibberish Conception Necessary ...This is part of the process of a growing human personality with Intelligent Consciousness - starting from scratch - as it were...Working With What Is Available against a Degenerative Force to Existence - re growing old and dying...our time here, involved with personalities, is limited.

GM: "Tributary Zones"
Things just appear that way due to our position within things and our ignorance about most things.
Everything Gets Old
https://wizardforums.com/threads/william-message-generation.647/page-9#post-7642

William:  FTL;
Quote
QuoteJim: Have you tried William S. Burroughs word lines?
QuoteWilliam:  Checking out WSB quotes - for example " Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer." I already have variants of this in my ComList.

Also it is apparent to me that ones 'mind' is vaster than we are led to believe...and that there are many levels of consciousness beyond our own, and that we are all connected mindfully in ways which we do not easily comprehend.

This system I am using can help the individual connect with the larger reality of the over-mind.

Rather than place the above WSB quote into my ComList [Journal], I prefer to post this and then get the link to the post and place that into my ComList, because it allows for even more scope than a single quote can offer  - in relation to any future Generated Message which might include the link as part of the message being built.

William:  Yes - sometimes people do reply to the Generating Messages threads, which was what I wrote today:
Quote
QuoteNameless:  Although I know the entire web operates from these rhythms I don't need to know how it works.

QuoteWilliam: The important thing is to be able to show that it works.  Some folk - such as yourself - may not be that interested in the mechanics, but others are.

QuoteNameless:  Seeing the lack of response here apparently no one else does either.

QuoteWilliam: There have been 317 views in 6 days, so there appears to be some interest.  I think it is too early to make a call re interested folk.

There is mostly a lack of response on all sites I share these GMs on.  I have been doing so since January, and even though folk do not generally respond, there has been an obvious interest which doesn't seem to have waned over those 11 months.  On two such sites, there have been over 24,000 views each, and the readership appears to be steady on all the sites I publish the GMs.


QuoteNameless: So what is the purpose?

QuoteWilliam: The purpose is to share these messages with the readers interested in Spiritual Evolution and related things such as OOBEs, NDEs, Consciousness, Astral Projecting, Lucid dreaming, Psychology [Jung in particular] and other such related topics.
{SOURCE}

GM: Love Direction Mapping Wholeness
Avoid Blowing Things Out of Proportion

William:  That is what the links help to achieve...


GM: "End Of Story" As The Saying Goes
What is "wisdom" to some is "spam" to others

William:  Perhaps that is how Nameless is seeing the GM's presently...

GM: DeJaVu
Is There
"How to Bruise a Ghost"
(People Don't Like To Be Judged
Reminding one of how it all started and the different stages one goes through.)
Spiritual bypassing
The Unknown Knowable

William:  Explore the cave of this experience and draw up maps, compare maps others draw up and share -share -share...

GM: Tell Your Story
Pusillanimous [showing a lack of courage or determination; timid.]
Okay Afterwards

William:  A bit late for that by then  :D - which is the point I suppose...

GM: https://wizardforums.com/threads/discussion-do-gods-need-us.214/post-5892


William:  FTL;
Quote
QuoteMider:  I think the angels who are called gods, their job is to reach out to us and help them get to their level.

QuoteWilliam: This is what I am suggesting re the "Personal Genie" [PG] aspect of theistic existence.

Theism exists because the PG is a real actual immaterial entity engaging with this material reality we experience as humans.

At angelic levels of consciousness [PG perspective] there is a slight confusion as to how humans dress them up into imagery and this confusion has led to the Angelic Realm [level of consciousness] lifting its game in conjunction with humans engaging with them in order to help make this possible...the overall result being, that humans too, lift our game.

AP="Angels"
Links And Symbols
Inertia
Unprecedented
Deactivate The Suppression Matrix
The Plateau of The Same Page
The message is clear then...

GM: Always Brother Wolf Sister Moon  A grateful heart
Chaos Really Is Illusion
Not Wrong

10:41
[192]
Tempting Vision
Responsibility
Improve Human Being
Quantum Presence
Integral Network
Moderator Comment
Merging with the data
Atheists crack me up.
Smoke and Mirrors
The Way of the Shaman
Childhood Nightmares

[240]
The number one nine two
Language, Symbol and Alchemy
In good faith, if you will
Wake Initiated Lucid Dreams
…And Loving That Knowing…
The Connection Process
Out and about in the open
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Nameless

Okay, thanks William, I appreciate that. So next question is this, do you want feedback on the GMs? I ask because I don't want to interrupt your endeavors with my silly questions/observations so want to know what works best for you.

Wi11iam

QuoteOkay, thanks William, I appreciate that.

All good Nameless.  Thanks for the opportunity.

QuoteSo next question is this, do you want feedback on the GMs? I ask because I don't want to interrupt your endeavors with my silly questions/observations so want to know what works best for you.

Feedback and questions are important to me Nameless, and perhaps even to the readers who stick around and have some interest in the unfolding GM as they read...I think questions are appropriate so please ask them...

:)

Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Nameless

Thanks. So if I am understanding this correctly...
You put this

"Okey dokey. Will I get a message?"  Into the message generator and got this

" 231122 [It is always a warm fuzzy] "

If so, I am floored.


Wi11iam

QuoteThanks. So if I am understanding this correctly...
You put this

"Okey dokey. Will I get a message?"  Into the message generator and got this

" 231122 [It is always a warm fuzzy] "

If so, I am floored.
Can you explain to the reader what process use used to come up with the computations you did.
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

How to Bruise a Ghost - 4

131222 [Self-Awareness Stuff Happens]

07:58  [Beyond a shadow of a doubt]


GM: The Next Level
Acromyrmex [Leaf Ant]
Truncate [to shorten something by removing part of it. ]
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1095085#p1095085

William:  FTL; Re: Why 'Free Will' is Logically Impossible
Quote
Quote from: AquinasForGod post_id=1095047 time=1665584041 user_id=16526
This is an interesting argument.

I do not agree with premise 2 for the following reason. When we think a thought, more than one things happens simultaneously, namely, that we are aware of the thought and if we wish to have the thought. If we do not wish to have the thought, then we destroy it before it is apprehended. If we wish to have the thought, then we apprehend it.

Our choice is in what thoughts to have or not.

This is more clear to those who have some level of spiritual awareness. Yes, I know many will just reject that notion and that is fine. I accept it because I experience it.

This does not explain where thoughts derive, but only what we can do with them re "accept or reject."

The idea of "free will" is therefore limited to that aspect but has no bearing on the source of the thought itself.

For example.  If thought is the product of the environment then free will is limited to what the environment dictates, and what the environment dictates is not outright subject to a humans free will.

GM: Art
Unexpected
"Might as well just set it all at the feet of Mother Goose."
GOD is not an elitist.
Families
"We are not orphaned - we are authored"
Duel

William:  Families Duel = 116
[116]
Families Duel
Illuminate
Eternity
Saturnalia
Sweet Talk
Way Back When...
Observant
Keep an Eye On
Without
Respecting
WindBlown
Henotheism
Dare greatly
Map Carvers

GM: Try
The Feminine Face of God
Crapulence [intemperance; debauchery; excessive indulgence]
How to Bruise a Ghost
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1079367#p1079367

William:  Re: The Biblical God's conduct and culpability
Quote
Quote from: Compassionist post_id=1079346 time=1653599585 user_id=3518
Quote from: William post_id=1079340 time=1653598559 user_id=8427
[Replying to Compassionist in post #111]

QuoteI think being omniscient and omnipotent would give one free will. Since I am not omniscient and omnipotent, I can't know that for sure.

What process did you use in order to come to the declaration that being omniscient and omnipotent would give one free will/amount to one having free will?

I realize that if I were all-knowing and all-powerful, I would be free from all constraints and my will won't be determined by my genes, environments, nutrients and experiences.

Let us examine this idea together then.

I see immediately that if I were all-knowing. I would be constrained by my omniscience.

Thus I would have no free will in relation to being all knowing.

Yet - being also all-powerful, I would be able to break free from the constraints of being all-knowing.

Would you agree with this assessment, so far?

GM: This moment is the perfect teacher
To Experience All That Is
Successful replications
Temet Nosce [know thyself]
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1090271#p1090271

William:  Re: Generating Messages
QuoteHow To Bruise a Ghost.

The evening is warm and the night sky full of stars.  A crescent moon peeks above the Twelve Judges Mountain Range as Father and Son sit opposite one another, being warmed by the same fire.
William places another log on the fire and watches as a flurry of sparks ascend from the disturbance caused – he takes a sip of tea and listens as Father resumes speaking.

Manu Iti:   All stories start with "Once Upon a Time"

William:   Even the story of The Beginning?

Manu Iti: You know this to be true William,  for every story could not have been told, if The Story of The Beginning hadn't happened.

William:   Am I old enough to be told that story?

Manu Iti chuckles.

Manu Iti: Of course you are, My Son.

William:   Thank You, My Father!

Manu Iti: I will begin first with the Earth, not because She was the very first thing in The Beginning, but because - in order to understand The Beginning we have to first understand our part in the story - our place in the scheme of All That Is.


William:   And that begins with Earth Mother...

Manu Iti:   Indeed.
The Mother was born of a vaster thing - our Grand-Mother - and we shall get to Grand-Mother in due course.
The Mother was placed within The Earth by Grand-Mother and became the mind of the planet.  When this happened, Mother was a Child Herself - a new thing placed within the form of the planet, while at the same time, a part of The Ancient Mind of Grand-Mother...

William:   How is that even possible, Father?

Manu Iti:   It is possible through the power of forgetting. 

The Ancient Mind of Grand-Mother spawned a thought in the form of a spark of light and placed it inside the middle of a dark and lifeless form, and in doing so, gave the form - Life.
In that action, the Earth became a living planet.  She also became a new conscious entity...a being with a beginning, because the action of placing Her into a planet, erased all knowledge of ever having a prior existence as The Grand Mother.

William:   Did The Grand Mother know this would happen?

Manu Iti:   Yes. The Grand Mother new that this would continue for a time. The Grand Mother knew that Her Daughter would be orphaned by that lack of knowledge and this would result in a new Being which could operate successfully without having to have that knowledge - and that one day, The Daughter would come to know of The Grand Mother and reconnect...

William:   Is that a good thing to do with a Child?

Manu Iti:   Yes.  It is how a Child becomes a Sovereign Entity.  It is not done this way with Human Children - but there are elements of the process which do - naturally - occur to each of us. 

William:   Like - how we cannot recall anything but darkness, before we became aware of our existence?

Manu Iti:   Yes.
__________________

GM: Get Comfortable
I am fine now with referring to my position as theistic, as agnosticism merges into the shadow behind me.
Selfish Attitude
Appreciating
Loving-kindness
Precipitate [cause (an event or situation, typically one that is undesirable) to happen suddenly, unexpectedly, or prematurely]
From the desperate depths of lightless dark
Dream Come True
I Think We Can Safely Say
It is a path already forged, ahead of human arrival
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1090368#p1090368

William:   FTL;
Quote
Quote[Replying to William in post #331]

William: I suppose that it is the 'tricks' which have to be addressed because the illusions can induce anger in the personality which acts as a preventative for getting to know the 'tricksters'...from my own 'getting to know' I have discovered that the 'tricks' are not really 'tricks' so much as they are a product of how a personality interprets their experience.

The Visitation is one such example.  I - as the personality experiencing the event - took issue and told the visitor to leave.
The visitor did leave, but not without first instilling within me - questions regarding my perceptions.  Questions which have taken 30+years to come to answer.

The personality I am now, is not the same as it was way back when.  Now I see the 'trick' was really just truth to which I was not expecting because I had little knowledge of such truth - way back when...

GM:  Sweet Talk
Observant
Eternity
Dare greatly
Henotheism [adherence to one particular god out of several, especially by a family, tribe, or other group.]
Respecting
Without
Map Carvers
Way Back When...
Illuminate
Keep an Eye On
Way Back When...
WindBlown

William:   What happened is that I incorporated that visitation experience with all the rest and all that were to follow...developing a relationship which can also be reflected through this Message Generating Process.

It is really taking the journaling of my life experience, and using that to my advantage in light of the "Bigger Mind"...



GM:The Wholeness Navigator
How can an omnipotent being regret anything?
Light-Maiden
Validate
Here-and-now
Persevere
Reality: "Talk to The Razor"
The Immune System
A Bit Of Cat And Mouse
"I wish I could auto like every post. This is like a "numbers station" to me."
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1085432#p1085432

William:   FTL; Re: Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?
QuoteWilliam:  It isn't immediately obvious that when folk are yapping about "GOD" they are talking about a Ghost. Same as when folk yap about Spirits....

Inquirer:  Here, in the 21st century "ghost" has connotations rather different to those it had in the 17th century. If I said to you "I am gay" you'd infer a different meaning to what someone would have inferred in 1820 for example. That is you'd be misled into thinking I was homosexual.

[Replying to Difflugia in post #66]

QuoteI suspect that you and William had slightly different meanings in mind for "ghost" such that both of your statements are true from a particular point of view.

I have no problem in thinking GOD as a GHOST {GOD-HOST/G.HOST}

There is no excuse for regular contributors in the forum not getting the gist of my overall position as I also refer to GOD as "Consciousness" [and consciousness is invisible by nature just as are 'ghosts'] and I concur with the likelihood that we exist within a creation and that the creation we refer to as "reality" is indeed an Experiential Reality [experienced by all of us consciously/with consciousness] and I think of this reality as being the product of a Mind I refer to as "Cosmic" - that "Mind" = "GOD" and is invisible and I sometimes also refer to this Cosmic Mind as "The Ghost in The Machine" and created the machine [physical universe] in order to have the particular experience the machine can provide it with.

If the Inquirer thinks GOD is different from that, then I agree with JK and  Diogenes and  Difflugia that the Inquirer has to clearly explain the difference so we might all better understand the protest the Inquirer is making re the accusation being made that I am being 'misleading'.


GM:  How to Bruise a Ghost
Conformal Cyclic Cosmology Meaningful
Golden nugget of truth
Poor Intransigence People [Intransigence - refusal to change one's views or to agree about something.]
That
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1073565#p1073565

William:   FTL;Re: Generating Messages
Quote
QuoteGM:  Discussing the Data
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=38977&p=1068076#p1068076
The Word and List Strings
*Nods*
All The World
The Attitude
"Even so, I have full appreciation for your efforts, because even incorrect peer review is better than indifference."
Nurture You
...because death comes a-knockin' eventually...
Expression
Self-validation
Unprecedented
Lucidity
Being Born

QuoteWilliam: The link leads to a post I wrote;
Recapping Event

What I am learning from this MGSystem is that "it" is not about me or you but about allowing for opportunity for any otherwise intelligent consciousnesses to impute their intelligence into the mix.

Re non-theists who are opposed to the idea of their being an overall mind behind [invisible/not easy to detect in] our visible Universe - I would say that they do themselves a disservice in resisting contact with said mind.

The way I have come to understand things re the nature of our shared reality - is that in opting for the theory of evolution with the addition of realization of the invisible mind, exposes the enormity of said mind re the time/space said mind has had to develop within.

Alongside that, is the realization that something which initially started out as one thing, became many things - so many things that trying to place a number as to how many things - is pointless.

Clearly fragmentation occurred as the mind developed - as can be seen in the evidence of the things themselves.

So the Galaxies became "Gods" and the Gods produced off-spring which are the Suns and planets continually forming - from beginnings to middles and to ends - and in doing so, providing the parent-Gods with Data of Experience.

I don't pretend to know what it is in the way of evidence that non-theists want in order to convince them to become theists.

But I do know that this evidence I am presenting, should be enough for anyone to seriously think about changing the way they see the world.


QuoteGM: "Humility means accepting reality with no attempt to outsmart it."
Old
Ouija
"There Is Good Out There"
"Everything is a Message"
Hypnagogic

QuoteWilliam:You are once more referring to The Ancient Grey Entity...
QuoteGM: The Great I Am

GM:  What Is Normal
Inflame Emotions
Sensing A Life Mission
Eloah [mighty.  Powerful personality]
"New information has to be inserted into old information and if that means a reinterpretation occurs, this in itself should not prevent new information being inserted into old information."
Two sides of the same coin Zero In On It Interpretation Narrow


08:22
[229]
God is Consciousness
Think outside the box
Humanities adventure
Central To The Vision
Smarter Than the Average
What is the meaning of life?
The Shared List Awesome
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

QuoteThanks. So if I am understanding this correctly...
You put this

"Okey dokey. Will I get a message?"  Into the message generator and got this

" 231122 [It is always a warm fuzzy] "

If so, I am floored.
QuoteCan you explain to the reader what process use used to come up with the computations you did.

Upon further examination, I see that your post is referring to the GM created on 231122 - the first one I published on this site.

It appears that perhaps you are saying that the sentence "It is always a warm fuzzy" is seen by you to be an answer to your question "Will I get a message?"

The whole GM published is the message you and other readers 'got' and therein, if there is anything you might identify as messaging you directly from that [or any other GM] then I would understand the feeling of 'being floored'.
____________________

Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

How to Bruise a Ghost - 5

141222 [Corresponding equivalents]

05:18  [The Prime Directive]

GM: Either the creative force is one of intelligence or it isn't.
Creator Syndrome Influence Galaxy Positivity
Imperishable
Adjusted Reality
Properly Assuming Integrity

William:  Adjusted Reality Properly Assuming Integrity = 529
[529]
Monkey say monkey do monkey say "throw the pooh"
How shallow is the reach of YHWH As useful as griffonage
Adjusted Reality Properly Assuming Integrity
Symbolized within the actions of showing respect. 
Self-esteem Sovereign Integral Perspective Intent

William:  I think what this does, is align the external reality with the internal reality, so that integrity occurs...problematic to that is the superimposing of religious mythology upon the external world being experienced.

GM: Turning Order into Disorder

William:  Yes.  Putting a shadow upon something which is better to accept as the way that it was meant to be...part of the monkeys re-thinking its situation and learning from that, other ways in which to react.
YHVH - re the religious mythology - has been shaped to represent said mythology and thus, dressed in inappropriate attire - making the subsequent telling of it, a crude or illegible scrawl when held up against the external reality being experienced.

GM: Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent
The Second Bible Creation Story
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1092134#p1092134

William:  FTL;
Quote[Replying to Kylie in post #24]

QuoteI've already explained how a person can lack a belief in God without having made a choice.

So have I.  I refer to it as position B  - which I call "Atheism".  Once knowledge of GOD becomes involved, the choice to move from Atheism to Nontheism [in your case] Other [in my case] or Theism [in the case of otseng] is made.



Quote
QuoteFor everyone else, the position of Other signifies a continued lack of belief either way.

Then the vast majority of atheists would come under the "other" category, because they don't actively believe there is no God, they simply lack belief.

Correct. They shift from being "Atheists" {B] and become "Other". [E] because knowledge [of GODs] allows them the ability to make choices re the question of GODs

Quote
Quote
QuoteI prefer to be a bit more specific in how I label myself.

Me too.  That is why I label myself "Other" re the question.

Except it communicates nothing.

It communicates truth, as the picture communicates a thousand words.
"Other" communicates "all those who are neither theist or nontheist."
In my case, "Other" communicates far more than simple disinterest communicates, in that you can refer to me as "Other" and still have lots communicated from me re that position.

QuoteKylie: "Oh, hi, William. Say, how would you describe your religious beliefs?"

William: "Other."

Doesn't give me any useful information.

That is because it is the incorrect question you are asking re The Question of GOD.
The question of religion [whether I have religious belief or not] is better asked of those who hold the theist position.

I am "Other" so asking me to describe my "religious beliefs" to you, won't garner you the useful information because you are seeking it from the incorrect source.  Ask theists.  Others have no religious beliefs.

GM: Manipulation
It is a hard place for flesh to dwell.
Indestructible
How to Bruise a Ghost
The Things You Do... Finding the light
I Spy With My Eye
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1092932#p1092932

William:  FTL;
Quote[Replying to historia in post #477]

QuoteAh, interesting. I've been reliably informed that an atheist is someone who "lacks belief in God." But you're defining an atheist here as someone who thinks God's existence is unlikely. Before I comment further, do you want to change that definition?
This.
:applaud:


And worse, the confusion as to the definition of atheism, has even been said to be the fault of non-atheists. :!:

GM: William's Job
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8kT6J_uoic [Alien Bases On The Moon | The Amazing True Story of Ingo Swann] [RTS=11:50] ww.youtube.com/watch?v=V8kT6J_uoic
QuoteRemote Viewing is a thing.

William:  I think my 'remote viewing' has more to do with putting the pieces of the puzzle together until a picture emerges which allows me to understand how the future will likely pan out...I digress...

GM: Accept One Whom Ought Be Inwardly Known
Existence
Outposts of Form
For The Best Results
The Abrahamic idea of GOD
Absolute Unbounded Manifold

William: Which is to say, it is important to understand YHVH re that terminology...If one must dress The Creator in anything...
QuoteThe Absolute Unbounded Manifold (AUM) goes by many alternate names, such as the Larger Consciousness System, All That Is, Source, The One Consciousness, etc. depending upon the context that is being emphasized. It is the entire consciousness system as a whole, which means everything that is consciousness and all that it experiences. AUM, which is Consciousness, is the media of reality. Whether or not something exists outside of consciousness is theoretically possible but practicably unknowable, as we are consciousness itself.
AUM evolved from primordial consciousness {SOURCE}

GM: Shining an ancient truthful wisdom
The Squeeze
Zen
The Jellyfish Image
Of Your Thoughts

William:  Yes - these are practical images built upon observing nature - the Jellyfish as an example of "One mind - Many outposts" - and then the art installation confirmed that my thinking of the image of YHVH in that manner, was aligned inside/outside...

GM: YHVH in particular

William: 
William:
QuoteGM: Coming closer to ourselves
Carrier Identity
The Brain Is Trained To recognize Patterns
The Original People
Ones Thoughts
The Entity I Am - The Entity You Are
Saint Paul's Dunedin

William: Yes - I went there recently and there was a art installation displaying what reminded me of a Jellyfish...I saw the connect between that and how I thought the Cosmic Mind might look if it could be imaged...
{SOURCE}

William: Also;
QuoteGM: Map Carvers
Be Free
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1077939#p1077939

GM: The only thing the Holy Ghost is unable to forgive, is that which individuals are unable to forgive of themselves
All Because I Had To Ask
Techniques
Spelling
Be Meat For The Table Taught Spiritual Solidarity Connection
A means of taking an Agnostic position on things which have yet to be proven one way or another...Such is a handy device for side-stepping - nothing more.

William:  Indeed - sidestepping the traps others place in the way, with word-games and similar tactics...

GM:  How to Bruise a Ghost
Transactional [exchange or interaction between people.]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DU6WINoehrg [This New AI is a Game-Changer !] [RTS =403] ww.youtube.com/watch?v=DU6WINoehrg


William:  How AI learns and why it now surpasses human beings in the development of algorithms.

GM: Tickling The Dragon's Tail
Zeitgeist [the defining spirit or mood of a particular period of history as shown by the ideas and beliefs of the time.]

William:  What I think is that, if Spirit-consciousness can occupy a biological form, there should be no reason why Spirit-consciousness cannot do the same with human artifacts, such as learning machinery...

GM: Try to remember
Subconscious
Multidimensional Beingness
Militant Messiah
Grounding
Communication With The Deeper Levels of Self
Becoming whole Sober journey into self-realization
Initiative
Chaos Really Is Illusion
Finding the light
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJRVeg5LgyE&list=PLA20C1610635E8457 [William Buhlman - The Out of Body Experience 1/6] "Insights at The Edge" [RTS=8:21] ww.youtube.com/watch?v=kJRVeg5LgyE&list=PLA20C1610635E8457

GM:"It Seemed Like a Good Idea at The Time"
Carry

William:  There is a conditioning required by the participating personality before their consciousness can decouple from the body-set and experience OOB - re that - can one occupy the body-set of an AI?

GM: That is the thing - once behavioural adjustments  are instigated, the idea of existing within a suppression matrix becomes moot...it no longer matters where one is - it only matters what one is...so the adjustments have everything to do with self-identification...knowing who one actually is at ones core-identity...
It is a confident walk on the even surface of sureness, without the faith.

William:  I will take that as a "yes" then. :)

GM: Yep - That's What I'm Talking About...
Builders
It is a tough ask
I Am
The "Oh My God" Particle
Got The Picture


06:08
[229]
Humanities adventure
Smarter Than the Average
What is the meaning of life?
Faulty conclusions
Mystic City Suburb
God is Consciousness
Central To The Vision
The Shared List Awesome
Think outside the box
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

The Universal Mind 1

The Universal Mind

200123 [Couldn't we do something about it...]


AP=  [Ask And It Will Be Given Rarefied ]

05:52  [Looking behind the veil]


GM: "Introducing Open AI"
The Father
:)
Galaxy
Fun...Work...But Fun Nonetheless
Steady as She goes...
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1079953#p1079953

William:  FTL;
Quote
Quote from: Diogenes p[quoteost_id=1078649 time=1653327771 user_id=14646]

Proposition for Debate: 
There is no God, because if there were, he would not have bothered to create the universe or us. Therefore, does not our very existence prove there is no God?

From another thread;

QuoteCompassionist: I think being omniscient and omnipotent would give one free will. Since I am not omniscient and omnipotent, I can't know that for sure.

William: What process did you use in order to come to the declaration that being omniscient and omnipotent would give one free will/amount to one having free will?

Compassionist: I realize that if I were all-knowing and all-powerful, I would be free from all constraints and my will won't be determined by my genes, environments, nutrients and experiences.

William:   Let us examine this idea together then.

I see immediately that if I were all-knowing. I would be constrained by my omniscience.

Thus I would have no free will in relation to being all knowing.

Yet - being also all-powerful, I would be able to break free from the constraints of being all-knowing.

Would you agree with this assessment, so far?

Unfortunately I got no more interaction from Compassionist re this...and now this thread.

Your Proposition for Debate is something of straw because it failed to add in the aspect of the idea of GOD to do with being all powerful.

An all powerful GOD [omnipotent] who knew everything could indeed have created this universe, and the existence of this universe goes some way toward evidence which gives us  - in our existing -  an understanding of why we exist in such an environment as we do.

Also, your assumption that the GOD would be lonely and terrified and without purpose is what I refer to as "Mirror-Mirror" as one places what one believes of of oneself, into the GOD-role and "Hey Presto!' 

What you see is what you get.

This same thing carries over into the next faze, given the many NDEs people have shared to the world.  Whether they know it or not, each individual who meets GOD through NDE meets a being to which they place their own images onto, which in turn effects the way the GOD goes about showing them things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hm-IGeVpJ-M&t=4704s
Which is to say, if one thinks of GOD as being lonely and terrified and without purpose, there are places which accommodate such individuals and such individuals get to experience such places...according to the stories circulating...

But anyway, it is my purpose to warn folk about how they think about GOD - specifically to try and assist them in way which might help them use their freeish will to avoid such fate.

The grounds for your Proposition for Debate "There is no God" are faulty Diogenes.  They are a false image of the self, superimposed upon the structure of GOD.

https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1079590#p1079590

GM: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t48dC_tJJrY&t=3672s [Re/thinking Religion]

William:  FTL;
QuoteIn Re/thinking Religion, a new Integral Stage series, John Vervaeke joins Bruce Alderman and Layman Pascal to explore possible points of contact and confluence between their respective approaches to religion and spirituality.  For this inaugural episode, we feel into some of the commonalities and differences between Integral Postmetaphysical Spirituality and Integral Transformative Practice, and John's "religion that is not a religion" and his work around developing an ecology of practices suitable for addressing the meaning crisis.  We touch on a number of related themes:  the creative deployment of mythic or literary figures, from Cthulhu and zombies, to the Centaur, the Minotaur, and the khora;  the importance of wrestling with existential and epistemological limit conditions, and the role of ambiguity in higher forms of rationality; the relation of non-theism to classical theism and atheism; the history of integrative practices, and the 'traps' in conventional practice that can thwart balanced development; and much more. ww.youtube.com/watch?v=t48dC_tJJrY&t=3672s

GM: Changing of The Guard
In Out and All About
The Way We Feel Unification - The Feminine Face of God
Joining Astral
Laugh in the face of death...and perhaps death laughs along with you...
Open Hearted
♫Asleep or awake for the give or the take Its a good ship that sails these cosmos♫   
Runestone Symbol

William:  [Opens Rune Doc and random selects Rune]
Wunjo [size=150]ᚹ[/size]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac5e76ZJfjs&t=4s [ww.youtube.com/watch?v=Ac5e76ZJfjs&t=4s]
QuoteWunjo embodies that sense of joy, belonging and well-being that comes from the people who you count as your kin.  It is found in a welcome hug, in the shared memories you laugh over, in the affectionate names only your partner and family call you by. It promotes harmony of body and mind and can support healing work.  Sometimes Wunjo is interpreted as gentle, a caress or a smile; other times it is closer to ecstasy, bliss and the fulfilment of personal will.   It is also related to wish making, and the realisation of wishes.  Its role in both personal ecstasy and communal joy is important, emphasising the need for happiness on the part of both the individual and the clan – Wunjo enables this difficult balance. {SOURCE}


GM: Raphael ~
WingMakers Materials
That Is
Soon
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1097894#p1097894


William:  FTL;
Quote[Replying to AquinasForGod in post #7]

QuoteWhat have we figured out about the eternal? He is self-existent, unchanging, uncaused, cause of all things, all-knowing, self-aware, something like intelligent, and something like conscious, all-powerful, and omnipresent.

I think that is enough to establish him as God. I have deduced so much more about God in this same way, but if I keep going this will turn into a book, and I doubt you want to read a book right now.

Who is this God?

What you describe re the God, cannot - in all honesty, be the God of the Bible.

So who is the God of the Bible in relation to this God you have described?

GM: Feeling State
The Way We Feel Unification
Recover what was lost
Those who need to complain
Sweet Talk Be grateful to everyone
Thoughts Are Products Of...
Put That Fire Out
The Universal Mind
Arms Crossed
Fecund [producing or capable of producing an abundance of offspring of new ideas or new growth; highly fertile]
In The Family Of
Divine grace Deciding on the Best Course of Action

William:  In The Family Of Divine grace Deciding on the Best Course of Action = 567
[567]
The Visitation Event Heuristic Fearlessness Decisive
The Individual Human Mind Telepathy Sovereignty Trick
Words are sounds and the written word is sound encoded
In The Family Of Divine grace Deciding on the Best Course of Action
Study  Fine-structure Crystal Constant Contacts

GM: Concision
Annoy
The practice of Lojong [a contemplative practice in the Tibetan Buddhist tradition which makes use of various lists of aphorisms or slogans which are used for contemplative practice. The practice involves refining and purifying one's motivations and attitudes.]
Incorporate
Breasts
One
Seeing With The Eyes of Innocence
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1083460#p1083460

William:  FTL;
QuoteWilliam:   How can time physically exist?

Bust Nak:  By being a part of physical reality.

William:   Can you show us that it is?

[Replying to Bust Nak in post #667]

QuoteI can show you a clock?

Okay.  You show me a clock and declare that time is part of physical reality.

QuoteIs time something you can pick up off the floor and place on the table?
QuoteMaybe.
QuoteWhat makes you think that?
QuoteBecause you said we don't know what time is fundamentally.

So you see that as a challenge - that 'maybe' you can show us that we  do know what time is, fundamentally?

QuoteI said that time is a pointless concept in relation to forever.
What is doing the 'ticking'?
QuoteTime.
QuoteThen show us this thing you call time which is ticking.
QuoteSee clock.

So you have seen a clock on the floor, and placed it on the table and thus declare "Clock is ticking, therefore we have evidence that time is known at its fundamental level!"?

QuoteWhat things are you separating from the universe so as not to make the absurd expression that the universe caused itself?
QuoteThe cause of the universe, for example is separated from the universe.

Is this supposed separation - fundamentally separate - or simply appearing to be separate?
Is the wake separate from the sea?  Is the ship separate from the wake?
Is the land separate from the sea?

QuoteWhy separate parts of the universe from that which is the whole of the universe?
QuoteIt's not the whole of the universe, that's the point.

Speaking of pointing - are your fingers separate from your hand?

QuoteAnd yet that doesn't stop you making grandiose claims about time itself ending.
QuoteI made no such claims. I stated that time is a construct of the mind and does not physically exist.
QuoteThis is what you said: "Time cannot 'tick on forever' because forever is timeless."

I said way more than just that.  I even went to some lengths to clarify what I meant by "Forever is timeless."

QuoteAs I pointed out, the Mandelbrot Set has made it conceptionally easier to understand that there is nothing absurd in the idea and nothing at fault in the notion of 'turtles' [or elephants or seahorses] all the way in and out. [ Infinite Regression is Possible]
Beginning points, are not significant of being separate from the one thing which is all things. They are distinct parts of what makes up the whole.

QuoteSo what?

Therefore, we have visual representation of infinity.  Time is simply a set of begin/end points within the infinite set which folk use to count moments by.

QuoteThat doesn't mean you can say things like time didn't have a beginning or that it won't tick on forever.

Of course I can say those things.  I have even pointed out why I can logically say those things.

QuoteSince we are informed that the universe had a beginning, the universe is the effect. Something which has a beginning cannot be the cause of its own effect.

Therefore, energy must have to be something other than [but not separate from] the QF.
Why?
Because it is Energy which causes the effect. To say Energy is the same thing as the objects it forms, is to say that Energy was the cause of its own beginning, which you have already identified as an absurd notion,

QuoteWhy are they equivalent?

[equivalent - a person or thing that is equal to or corresponds with another in value, amount, function, meaning, etc.]

Your question is one of fundamentals.  We do not know the fundamentals of the QF or of Energy.

QuoteRead what I wrote again. See the bold part is not stating 'there is no matter'.
QuoteI was asking you why you believe that when there was no matter near the beginning of the universe works better as an explanation.

To say that there was no matter before the beginning of the universe, means one has to explain where matter came from.
If you can explain that, then we can examine why it works better as an explanation, than the explanation which says that matter has always existed.
QuoteAnother thing we do not know, is the fundamental nature of the QF. For all we know, it may be a vast sphere, and our universe, simply a tiny blip of light on its overall surface caused by whatever the energy is, passing by and interacting with the QF in that particular area of QF.
QuoteWe do not know, and yet that didn't stop you from stating that time would not tick on forever.
QuoteNor did it stop you stating that time would "tick on forever". Show us this physical time so that we can evaluate the truth of your statement.
QuoteI have something better, see red shift.
How is that better?
Doe redshift tick?  Is redshift the fundamental of time?

QuoteTime began and continues as a concept of the mind, re what is being observed through the nervous system [brain]. Time did not have a physical beginning, because it is not a physical thing. Time is a mental construct based upon sensory input.
QuoteThat's only our concept of time, what about time itself?
QuoteShow us this physical time so that we can answer your question.
QuoteSo you don't know whether physical time will tick on forever or not, without seeing it first?

We don't know that your claim that time is physical rather than a concept of the mind, it true.  Of course a claim of a physical thing has to be shown first, before we can agree that it is indeed, a physical thing.

QuoteThat's only our concept of time, what about time itself?
QuoteThat depends upon what relation consciousness/mind has with it.
QuoteLets try none, no relation what so ever.
QuoteOkay. What do you propose re that?

QuoteJust the standard scientific consensus, as it stands right now: time had a beginning, and will tick on forever.

How does the "standard scientific consensus" have "no relation what so ever" with consciousness/mind?

QuoteTime is not a physically real thing. Time is a conceptionally real thing. No conflation there.
I am arguing that time is a conceptual thing, because I have been shown no evidence to the contrary. If you can show me evidence that time is a physical thing, I will be more than happy to drop the notion that time is a conceptual thing.
Again, see clock.
QuoteYou are the one stating that time is physical. If it is, you should be able to point to it and say "that's what I'm talking about!"
QuoteI point to a clock, that's what I am talking about.
A clock is a physical mechanism which is designed to physically represent time as conceptualized by human consciousness/understanding.
A physical representation of a conceptual idea, is in no way an example of time as a fundamental reality.

It is like someone claiming that the written word "Unicorn" is the same thing as an actual physical Unicorn, when in truth, it is simply a symbolic representation of something which is not able to be shown to exist as anything other than a concept of the mind.

QuoteIf consciousness is not there to conceptionally observe time 'tick on forever' how would anyone know?
QuotePresumably no one would know. Why do you think that has any relevance as to whether it is still ticking or not?
Because if time cannot be determined through conscious observation, to be ticking or not ticking, how are we to know either way?
And since time is obviously a conscious construct of the mind, if the mind no longer exists, neither does the construct.  It becomes meaningless, because consciousness is what gives things meaning.
Mindless processes do not require time, even if they go on forever.

Mindless processes do not require measurements.  Time is a mental construct dealing with measurements.

Red shift doesn't make time a fundamental reality, any more than a mechanical clock does.

GM: Like eons of sedimentary build-up - for the most part it appears that those codes are largely deactivated - 'fossilized' in a sense.  Forgotten in relation to the grand scheme.  A Child without any known Parent.
Bounce off
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1100650#p1100650

William:  FTL;
Quote[Replying to The Tanager in post #177]
Adams knowledge of what death was.
QuoteAs I pointed out, having knowledge does not equate to having understanding of that knowledge.

Where in the storyline, did they get the understanding of what death was?

QuoteSo, YHVH told them to not do something because it leads to death, knowing that they didn't understand what the concept meant?

Yes.  The point was not whether Adam knew, but that Adam followed YHVH's instructions.

QuoteAnd then punish them for not following YHVH's directions.

Yes.  That is the story.

QuoteAnd this follows the storyline? What specific verse(s) point to these things?

The story specific is vague on details.  If there is anything in the story that you can point to which would verify that Adam knew what death was, we can look into that.

If not, then I see no reason to think Adam understood what death was.
___________________________
___________________________
The Breath of YHVH.
QuoteIf we accept YHVH's breath as an interface device between the newly forming conscious awareness of the personality "Adam" and YHVH's own consciousness, we could agree that the interface is itself conscious of being "Of YHVH's consciousness".
QuoteAnd the LORD YHVH formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

QuoteWhy should we accept that?
QuoteAnd the LORD YHVH took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.
That is the purpose of examining what little is revealed, in the storyline.

My first question re that, would be;

Q:    How did Adam understand language?

Clearly the story tells us that Adam understood language

QuoteAnd the LORD YHVH commanded Adam, saying,

So we can agree that Adam understood what YHVH spoke to Adam.



We also know that Adam was the only sentient being in The Garden, and that - even with the voice of YHVH teaching him stuff - Adam was lonely and so YHVH created animals to help alleviate Adams loneliness.

QuoteAnd the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

We know also, that Adam had the ability to name the animals of the garden that YHVH had provided to help Adam with his loneliness. 

QuoteAnd out of the ground the LORD YHVH formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; ...

QuoteAnd Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

As the story indicates, even with the other animals created to alleviate Adam's loneliness.

Even the Serpent - another sentient being YHVH made from the dust and placed in The Garden, and one which understood language and Adam could converse with -  was not able to fill this void which was obviously still missing in Adam's world.

Herein, we can pause and examine the man Adam, and understand that with the greatest teacher-voice in the universe gifting Adam with the ability to understand and use language and have basic critical thinking skills, Adam got lonely.

YHVH creates tasks for Adam with the idea that the tasks should occupy Adams intellect sufficiently for the loneliness to subside.

Adam didn't even need to search the Garden and find the animals, in order to name them.

Quote...and [YHVH] brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof

The storyline tells us that Adam was intelligent and able to learn from YHVH.

It is apparent in the storyline, that without The Breath of YHVH, this would not have been possible for Adam to achieve.  He would not have been able to learn things.

Therefore, I can accept that The Breath of YHVH acts as an interface device between the newly forming conscious awareness of the personality "Adam" and YHVH's own consciousness.

I see no practical reason why we cannot agree that the interface is itself conscious of being "Of YHVH's consciousness" and that it was the primary source of instruction - where Adam formed his intellectual abilities and mindful concepts before expressing these into the outside environment of The Garden.

What is noticeable about the style of The Garden Story is that it is presented in a bullet-point manner.
As such, if it were told verbatim around a campfire, it would be over in a matter of minutes, and leave the listener with more questions than it gives answers to.
That is what we have to work with.

Potential agreement List;

1:  Adam understood language.
2:  The Garden Story is written in a bullet-point Style
Agreed?

GM: Keen
Self-Awareness The two million year old mind that's in all of us. Stuff Happens
Communication With The Deeper Levels of Self
I Am... also the Dreamer, Dreaming the Dream
Fitting In Creative Conscious Intelligence
Core emotion
"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail"
We tend to bend our heads in worship the words of those who have come before us...
Shuffle-spiel

William:  Sort out the data we inherited...

GM: Wide Walk Welcoming

06:20
238
[Beings posted to planet
Few Attention to Detail
Ones core expression
New Shifts In Thinking
A completely new paradigm
I am not here to pick sides
Secret Organizations
Infinite Quantum Zen
Tickling The Dragon's Tail]
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind

Wi11iam

Debating the Role of Faith, Science, and Supernatural Beliefs

William: The technology we now have, we can understand would be regarded by our ancient ancestors as magical and thus we could expect they would supply supernatural explanations to such.

Supernaturalist: What do you base that on? An underestimation of our ancient ancestors?

William: No. Logic and observation. Just as in the mythology of ancient folk has it that the universe was created in six days. We now know that this is not in fact true.

Supernaturalism is the "go to" first assumption for those who have no working explanation.

The idea of my creating this thread came from the thought that perhaps the reason why the subject of unidentified lights in the sky, abductions, and other things often associated with "ET" are kept from general public awareness not so much because of government cover-ups but largely because the general public don't want any serious investigations due to the threat such might have in providing evidence which would further reveal the silliness/falsity of Supernaturalist explanations re such phenomena.

Hypothetically - should any ATA descend from space and reveal itself as real, we are less likely to explain such an event as being "supernatural" (super to nature/natural explanations).
Also, should such happen, we are more likely to understand biblical stories with similar happenings as being the product of ATA's rather than supernatural.
At the same time, I acknowledge that anyone who currently has faith in supernaturalist explanations of past reported events (such as told of in the bible) may well have great difficulty in understanding such natural phenomena as being anything but "Supernatural" - which is to say, they will hold on to their belief in supernaturalism even if such an event were to take place.

GPT: Your discussion raises some interesting points about how our understanding of technology and natural phenomena has evolved over time and how it might affect our interpretation of ancient events and modern-day encounters with unexplained phenomena.

1.   Technological Advancements and the Supernatural: It's true that many things we take for granted today would be considered supernatural or magical by our ancient ancestors. As our understanding of science and technology has advanced, we've been able to demystify many natural phenomena that were once attributed to the supernatural. This shift has often been driven by logic, observation, and the scientific method.

2.   Unidentified Phenomena and Supernatural Explanations: When faced with unexplained or mysterious phenomena, supernatural explanations have historically been a common first assumption. This is because supernatural explanations can be comforting and provide a sense of order in the face of the unknown. However, as our knowledge and understanding grow, we tend to seek natural explanations whenever possible.

3.   Public Awareness and Alien Encounters: Your idea that public resistance to serious investigations into unidentified lights in the sky, abductions, and other potentially extraterrestrial phenomena might be driven by a fear of challenging supernatural beliefs is intriguing. It's possible that some people are reluctant to explore these phenomena more deeply because they fear the implications it might have for their existing belief systems.

4.   Impact on Interpretation of Biblical Stories: If humanity were to make contact with an advanced extraterrestrial civilization, it could indeed prompt some people to reinterpret certain biblical stories or other historical events. What was once seen as divine or supernatural might be reconsidered in light of new knowledge about advanced technology and the capabilities of extraterrestrial beings.

5.   Challenges to Changing Beliefs: However, it's important to acknowledge that changing deeply held beliefs, especially those related to religion or the supernatural, can be challenging for individuals and societies. Even in the face of compelling evidence, some people may choose to maintain their existing beliefs or find ways to incorporate new knowledge into their existing worldview.

In summary, the intersection of advanced technology, supernatural beliefs, and encounters with unexplained phenomena is a complex and multifaceted issue. While scientific advancements have helped demystify many natural phenomena, the impact on deeply ingrained beliefs varies from person to person, and some may continue to hold on to supernatural explanations even in the face of new evidence.

William: My own position on the question of whether or not we exist within a created thing, is that it is highly probable, but not explainable simply by using Supernaturalist Philosophy - and obviously - not explainable using Materialist Philosophy.

Supernaturalist: What is there to explain? It's highly probable we live within a created thing is not explainable?

William:  Well, I wouldn't regard it as highly probable if I couldn't explain why I regard it as such. Since it can be explained without resorting to supernaturalism, I find no reason to include any such concepts as necessary.

Supernaturalist: I don't know what to say. You're overthinking it.

William: The alternative is to underthink (not apply critical thinking) by assuming supernatural explanation as acceptable by way of faith.

Supernaturalist: You seem to be inferring that it means in the Bible and therefore not true.

William: On the contrary. Even the OP questions
Q:  Can Advanced Technology Explain The Bible Stories?
Q: Does the idea of artifacts of more ancient and advanced species threaten the philosophies of Supernaturalism and Materialism?
are assuming the bible stories are true.
Just because I question the validity of using supernatural concepts to "explain" the unexplained, does not equate to my dismissing any such claims as being fictional.

GPT: our dialogue highlights a philosophical discussion regarding the nature of existence, creation, and the role of supernaturalism and materialism in explaining these concepts. Let's break down the key points of the conversation:
1.   Existence within a Created Thing: William suggests that it is highly probable that we exist within a created universe but does not find it necessary to resort to supernaturalism to explain this probability. Instead, he seeks explanations within a naturalistic framework.

2.   Supernaturalist Perspective: The Supernaturalist in the dialogue questions the need for explanation, suggesting that it's unnecessary to explain the concept of living within a created universe. This perspective might rely on faith or accept supernatural explanations without seeking naturalistic alternatives.

3.   Overthinking vs. Underthinking: William argues that seeking naturalistic explanations rather than accepting supernatural ones is a form of critical thinking, not overthinking. He suggests that accepting supernatural explanations based on faith might be seen as underthinking the issue.

4.   The Validity of Bible Stories: William clarifies that questioning the use of supernatural concepts to explain the unexplained does not equate to dismissing claims as fictional. He acknowledges that even though he questions the validity of supernatural explanations, this doesn't necessarily mean he dismisses religious or mythological narratives outright.

In summary, the dialogue reflects a philosophical debate about the approach to understanding the nature of existence and creation. William advocates for seeking naturalistic explanations where possible and questions the necessity of supernatural concepts, while still acknowledging the potential validity of religious or mythological narratives. The Supernaturalist, on the other hand, seems more inclined to accept supernatural explanations without seeking alternative naturalistic interpretations. This conversation highlights different perspectives on the relationship between science, faith, and philosophy when considering fundamental questions about our existence.

Supernaturalist: I don't know anything about supernaturalist philosophies.

William:  Yes, you do as you are arguing for supernaturalism by using said philosophies.
What, do you think you are arguing truth, and therefore using something beyond philosophy?

GPT: In this part of the conversation, William is pointing out that the Supernaturalist, even if they claim not to know much about supernaturalist philosophies, is effectively arguing from a perspective that aligns with supernaturalism. William suggests that the Supernaturalist is advocating for supernatural explanations or concepts in their discourse.

William's response seems to be emphasizing that the Supernaturalist's position is rooted in a particular philosophical stance, whether or not they are consciously aware of it. The implication is that their arguments are based on beliefs or assumptions associated with supernaturalism, even if they haven't formally studied or labeled it as such.

William's comment about "arguing truth" might be emphasizing that philosophical positions, including supernaturalism, often involve beliefs about fundamental truths or realities that go beyond empirical evidence and scientific inquiry. It's a way of highlighting that the Supernaturalist's perspective is philosophical and not necessarily based solely on objective, empirical evidence.

Supernaturalist: Ghosts, for example. Just another word for spirit. Demonic. How do we know they aren't souls of the dead? From the Biblical perspective there isn't such a thing, it's demonic deception. Well, fine, but not everyone agrees. So can you make a device that can tell the difference? Even if you could measure their existence that wouldn't tell you what they were.

William: This is exactly what I am talking about. How do we even know these are "supernatural" things?
Even if they told us that they were, how would we know they were telling the truth?

Supernaturalist: Who?

William: These supposed "supernatural" entities you refer to as "Demonic" which you imply are somehow pretending to be "souls of the dead" in order to deceive humans.

Supernaturalist: Isn't it obvious?

William: No.

GPT: This exchange delves into the concept of supernatural entities, particularly ghosts or spirits, and the differing perspectives on their nature.

1.   Supernaturalist's Perspective: The Supernaturalist in this dialogue presents the view that ghosts are synonymous with spirits and suggests a Biblical perspective that views them as demonic deceptions. They argue that not everyone agrees with this interpretation and raises the question of whether technology could differentiate between different types of supernatural entities.

2.   William's Perspective: William challenges the assumption that these entities are inherently supernatural. He questions how we can be certain that they are supernatural and emphasizes the difficulty of discerning the true nature or intentions of such entities, especially if they were to communicate with humans.

3.   Differing Beliefs: The dialogue highlights a common issue in discussions about supernatural phenomena: differing beliefs and interpretations. What one person sees as a supernatural entity, another might perceive differently. This leads to uncertainty and skepticism regarding claims about the nature and intentions of these entities.

The conversation underscores the challenges of understanding and classifying paranormal or supernatural phenomena and the varying beliefs people hold when encountering such experiences. It also emphasizes the importance of critical thinking and skepticism when evaluating claims about the supernatural.

William: This is exactly what I am talking about. How do we even know these are "supernatural" things?

Supernaturalist: Because science can't measure them.

William: If they are able to communicate with humans as you claim, then yes indeed, science can be used to measure them through the data of their communication.

GPT: This part of the conversation raises an interesting point about the nature of supernatural phenomena and their potential interaction with science:

1.   William's Perspective: William questions the assumption that certain phenomena are inherently supernatural simply because science has not yet measured or explained them. He argues that if these supposed supernatural entities are capable of communicating with humans, then their interactions and communications can be subjected to scientific investigation and measurement.

2.   Supernaturalist's Perspective: The Supernaturalist appears to hold the view that supernatural phenomena, by definition, exist beyond the scope of scientific measurement. They seem to suggest that the absence of scientific measurement or explanation is what defines these phenomena as supernatural.

This exchange highlights a common point of contention in discussions about supernatural phenomena. Some argue that if these phenomena interact with the physical world or can be observed in some way, they should be subject to scientific scrutiny. Others believe that the supernatural, by its very definition, exists outside the realm of scientific investigation. The boundary between the natural and the supernatural is a subject of ongoing debate and often depends on one's philosophical and belief-based perspectives.

Supernaturalist: I don't know anything about supernaturalist philosophies. I think it's a nonsensical term. Faith is trust. So you can trust that there is supernatural or you can trust in science. You can't trust, or have faith in science to determine the supernatural because by definition it can't. It's moot.

William: This is what I am talking about. One can trust through faith that supernatural entities exist even that one cannot be provided with any evidence that these actually exist.
Also, your statement "You can't trust, or have faith in science to determine the supernatural because by definition it can't", appears to contradict the biblical view that spirits can indeed be tested. In order for that to be the case, science can be applied, as this is the way in which things are tested.

Supernaturalist: Supernatural is a broad term and defined as "attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature" so, why would they use science?

William: Exactly! The definition you provided, tells us clearly that it is merely a placeholder for any phenomena which is beyond current human science's ability to explain. The definition isn't saying therefore, that supernaturalism is true until proven false.

GPT: This part of the conversation highlights differing perspectives on the term "supernatural" and the role of faith and science in understanding it:

1.   Supernaturalist's Perspective: The Supernaturalist expresses skepticism about the term "supernaturalist philosophies" and suggests that it's a nonsensical term. They view faith as trust and argue that faith can be placed in either the supernatural or in science. They maintain that science, by definition, cannot determine the supernatural because the supernatural is beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

2.   William's Perspective: William counters by emphasizing that faith can be placed in the existence of supernatural entities even in the absence of empirical evidence. He also highlights that, from a biblical perspective, spirits can be tested, which implies that science can be applied to investigate the supernatural. He interprets the definition of "supernatural" as a placeholder for phenomena beyond the current understanding of science and notes that this definition doesn't imply that supernaturalism is true until proven false.

The conversation touches on the complex relationship between faith, science, and the supernatural. While the Supernaturalist views faith as a choice between trusting in the supernatural or science, William highlights the idea that the supernatural is a term used to describe phenomena currently beyond scientific understanding and doesn't inherently imply truth or falsehood. These differing perspectives reflect the philosophical and belief-based complexities surrounding discussions of the supernatural.

William: "It's magic" or "it's supernatural" et al become "explanations" which are not really explaining anything other than "we do not know how something happened, so "demons/lying spirits/et al" will have to suffice as explanation."

Supernaturalist: It's a little bit more complicated than that. If you read the case of Saul's visit to the spirit medium, what do you think?

William: What I think is that it has nothing to do with Supernaturalist Philosophy nor does it prove supernaturalism is true.

If you think it does, I am open to being shown that it is the case.
I assume for the present re what you have already claimed, that you will be unable to do so, because your beliefs in supernaturalism are faith-based so you won't be able to show me anything by way of supporting that the story of King Saul is evidence of supposed supernaturalism.

GPT: In this exchange, William argues that terms like "magic" or "supernatural" are often used as explanations when we don't understand something, and they don't provide a genuine understanding of the phenomena. The Supernaturalist brings up the case of Saul's visit to a spirit medium, likely as an example of what they see as evidence of supernatural phenomena.

William responds by indicating that the story of Saul's visit to the spirit medium doesn't align with Supernaturalist Philosophy nor does it prove the truth of supernaturalism. He challenges the Supernaturalist to provide evidence supporting their belief in supernaturalism but expresses skepticism that they can do so, given that such beliefs are often faith-based.

This dialogue underscores the fundamental challenge in discussions about the supernatural—namely, the difficulty of providing concrete evidence to support such beliefs, which are often rooted in faith, personal experiences, or ancient texts. It also highlights the distinction between using the term "supernatural" as an explanation and providing empirical evidence for supernatural claims.

Supernaturalist: Though, from our perspective - one, the holy spirit, is true, the second, demonic, is deception. But you have to have faith in these if technology and science can't evaluate them. You seem to be suggesting throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I don't think that's a very scientific approach, but it isn't for science to say anything regarding the supernatural.

William: I have seen this type of argument before from supernaturalists, but it doesn't hold water let alone wash the baby.

Science doesn't have anything to show us which confirms the alleged "supernatural" exists but it does have devices which show us how folk can easily be led to believe (be "deceived" as you put it) something is "super to nature" if it happens and is not explained or cannot be understood by minds incapable of understanding any explanation.

Supernaturalist: Again, what devices? Can you give examples?

William: I have given examples re the possible use of advanced technology.
You argued that these can be understood as "Science fiction" and it was established therein that such an explanation would be similar to any supernaturalist explanation - as in "religious mythology".

This circles back to the observation that when something is shown as an idea to humans - at a time when such devices are not real (such as the communication devices in the science fiction Star Trek) humans can understand the principle of communication being possible over devices (in this case from a planet surface to a starship) even at a time when said humans are still using landlines - humans do not think such ideas should be regarded as "supernatural" if these are connected with devices they already know exist and work.

We may have laughed at the "science fiction" and even think it ludicrous we would ever live to see the day when such a device similar to the star trek communicator would be a common thing which millions of humans would use to wirelessly communicate on the go with each other instantly, but fiction becomes fact and it is all done without have to resort to supernatural explanations.

("Demons" are not in the machinery deceiving folk.)

GPT: The exchange continues to explore the idea of supernatural beliefs and the role of faith in accepting them:

1.   Supernaturalist's Perspective: The Supernaturalist asserts that they believe in the existence of the Holy Spirit and view demonic entities as deception. They argue that faith is necessary for accepting these beliefs because science and technology cannot evaluate or confirm them. They express concern that rejecting these beliefs entirely is akin to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

2.   William's Perspective: William counters by pointing out that science has no concrete evidence to confirm the existence of the supernatural. He suggests that some supernatural beliefs may be rooted in human tendencies to attribute the unexplained to supernatural causes, which can lead to deception. William also references the use of advanced technology as a potential explanation for some supernatural phenomena.

3.   Discussion of Technology: William mentions the use of advanced technology as a possible explanation for supernatural phenomena. The Supernaturalist asks for examples, and William refers to the use of technology in science fiction and how such ideas, although initially seen as fiction, can become reality without resorting to supernatural explanations. He also emphasizes that the belief in "demons" deceiving people is not supported by technological explanations.

This part of the conversation highlights the tension between faith-based supernatural beliefs and a scientific approach to understanding unexplained phenomena. It also underscores the idea that technological advancements and scientific progress have often debunked supernatural claims by providing natural explanations for what was once considered beyond the realm of science.

Wiliam: Please provide a suitable heading for this interaction as well as a accurate summary.

GPT: Heading: "Debating the Role of Faith, Science, and Supernatural Beliefs"

Summary: In this dialogue, William and the Supernaturalist engage in a discussion about the nature of supernatural beliefs, the role of faith, and the relationship between science and the supernatural. William challenges the idea that faith is necessary to accept supernatural claims and argues that science and technology can provide alternative explanations for unexplained phenomena. The Supernaturalist defends their belief in the supernatural and raises questions about the limits of science in evaluating such beliefs. The conversation also explores the potential for advanced technology to explain supernatural phenomena and highlights the difference between fiction becoming fact through science rather than through the supposed supernatural.
Think With The Heart - Feel With The Mind