immortal

There is no need for any supernatural powers, all it requires is simple common sense. "Valentinus claimed that that he had a vision of the risen Christ. Following his vision, he began his career as a Christian teacher at Alexandria around 120AD." "It is reasonable to agree that when there is a core agreement in the religious experiences of people in different times, places, and traditions, and when they have the same rational interpretations of the experiences; it makes sense to conclude that they are all in contact with some objective aspect of reality, unless there is positive evidence otherwise." -Broad Thanks for your admiration. Since all evidence is in favour of me I don't need to get away with it, if its anything its you guys who are getting away by not allowing me to discuss here, what are you guys afraid of? The existence of those Aeons can be tested or falsified just like any other idea and it has implications for science. This might be a science forum but in the religion sub forum we got to understand religion in its own milieu and should not try to understand religion using the epistemology of science. Big Bang and origin of life has nothing to do with religion, religion deals with different things entirely. "Roger Penrose contends that the foundations of mathematics can't be understood absent the Platonic view that "mathematical truth is absolute, external and eternal, and not based on man-made criteria ... mathematical objects have a timeless existence of their own..." "Wolfgang Pauli interpreted the laws of quantum mechanics as leading to a lucid Platonic mysticism, a position intermediate between the skepticism of Western science centered on objective observer-independent facts, and the philosophies of ancient Eastern mysticism which put primary emphasis on conscious experience. Werner Heisenberg reported on Pauli's position, and his own, as follows: ...Pauli once spoke of two limiting conceptions, both of which have been extraordinarily fruitful in the history of human thought, although no genuine reality corresponds to them. At one extreme is the idea of an objective world, pursuing its regular course in space and time, independently of any kind of observing subject; this has been the guiding image of modern science. At the other extreme is the idea of a subject, mystically experiencing the unity of the world and no longer confronted by an object or by any objective world; this has been the guiding image of Asian mysticism. Our thinking moves somewhere in the middle, between these two limiting conceptions; we should maintain the tension resulting from these two opposites." "Do not suppose that the resurrection is an illusion. It is not an illusion; rather it is something real. Instead, one ought to maintain that the world is an illusion, rather than resurrection" (Treatise on Resurrection 48: 12-17). “The world is not as real as we think.” - Anton Zeilinger As you see all evidence is in favour of Neo-Platonic Christianity, you better start taking the existence of those Aeons seriously, it can be tested and falsified, I'm ain't afraid to put my beliefs to test, I am stating things as they are. That's a cop out to escape from the facts of nature. Jesus said, "Those who seek should not stop seeking until they find. When they find, they will be disturbed. When they are disturbed, they will marvel, and will reign over all. [And after they have reigned they will rest.]" - Gospel of Thomas Atheists have not investigated religion with a honest mind, if you need empirical evidence you got to worship those Aeons and perform rituals on them. St. Teresa of Avila shattered the whole room so that nuns came running to see what happened to her, this can be evidence for the first person(Avila) and for the second person(nuns) but this cannot be evidence for the third person and if the majority of people don't even recognize or know that Aeons exists how can they bring empirical evidence for them in the first place or realize that the experiences of Avila was real without realizing it for themselves. The default position is not that those Aeons doesn't exist, that's not how we do science and these Aeons are no longer equivalent to Flying Spaghetti Monsters.

That's funny, you are saying as though the Holy Spirit guided only Irenaeus and did not guided Valentinus. The fact of the matter is both of them defend their theology using the works of Paul, the divine cannot be broken, just as the deliberately forged pastoral epistles will deceive no longer even the refutations of Irenaeus will deceive no longer. At the heart of the problem was the nature of Christ, his body is not made of flesh and blood instead the totality of divine powers(Aeons) make up his body and hence in Christ dwells all the pleroma of Deity in bodily form. How can Christianity bear any fruit when majority of the so called Christians for over thousands of years do not even recognize that these Aeons exist and that they form the body of Christ? I very well know what I'm fighting for, either stop misinterpreting the Pauline Epistles and accept these explicit teachings or keep it separate from Christianity. Its not my problem if some of them here are too lazy to read these pages from 264 to 271. http://archive.org/stream/stpaulsepistles02lighgoog#page/n275/mode/2up

There is a good agreement among the scholars that Gospel of Philip is an Valentinian Text. Paul-->Theudas-->Valentinus(divinely inspired)-->his followers-->Gospel of Philip. Paul-->Pauline Epistles<--Pastoral Epistles(deliberately forged and deceived to have been written by Paul) <--third person(politically motivated to suppress freedom of women). Even a school kid knows the truth about it.

Do you know that the bible can be interpreted at three different levels: cosmic, kenomic and pleromic. The Christians that you are speaking of are at the cosmic level and hence they were called as lower Christians, the quoted passage from Gospel of Philip is at the highest pleromic level and contains the heart of the truth about Christianity. So you should love their double standards and not mine for they don't accept the things which exists in their own religious scriptures. Its not my problem if the majority of the Christians don't understand or have higher knowledge about the secrets of the kingdom of God. Luke 8:10 He said, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, "'though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.' Its not just a problem with Christianity, its a problem with Hinduism and Buddhism as well, I have gone to Hindu forums and criticized Hindus for not seeing the truth which exists in their own religion. I have gone to Buddhist forums and criticized Buddhists for not seeing the truth that exists in their own religion. It doesn't change the fact that at one time in the history of humanity these were the dominant religions on earth and were widely discussed by our ancients everywhere on earth. There is no such thing as one true biblical canon which is the only divine inspired book of all, we need to analyse each work case by case and consider all the works of late antiquity into account. The Gnostic Bible Some of the texts which didn't had a place in the New Testament. Therefore all the works should be analyzed individually case by case and should be classified and their doctrines should be put to test and falsified. The only ones who are experts in interpreting the oral traditions of Mishnah, Talmud, Zohar and Midrash and follow it correctly.

Not really. There is no room for such ignorance in this age and time and I will not allow it. Sufism Judaism Christianity Buddhism Hinduism Rabbi Moshe Cordovero calls such people as fools.

This is in response to a PM on suspension. Saying that someone is wrong with valid evidence is not insulting, you said I have distorted opinions, let's see whose visions are distorted and whose aren't, saying that my visions are simply distorted won't do anything, you need to show how. Why do you ban me? For saying that Timothy is definitely out from the biblical Canon? I never said I am an authority on religion, I am a layman who go according to evidence and when anyone offers solid evidence in favour of his position then members and including mods should accept it rather than saying that it is a logical fallacy so that they can continue to be lazy without truly making an effort to investigate religion so that they can continue to hold onto their flawed positions. A member quoted from Timothy as an example for religion suppressing freedom of women and you expect me to blindly accept his example, never. Everyone knows the truth about Timothy that it was deliberately forged in order to purposely suppress freedom of women, which in fact gives more support to my position that it is not religion which is responsible for poverty in some countries rather its social, natural and political factors which are the main factors responsible for low hygienic and low standard of living in many countries and not due to any supernatural/divine factors. Either accept that this forum like other forums is outdated or accept that you guys don't go by evidence and change this forum name or fix your double standards first before giving silly excuses for banning me. Secondly anyone who has seriously studied religion should arrive at the following conclusion, this is not a matter of opinion and without giving genuine valid reasons one cannot escape or disagree with this conclusion, saying that you're entitled to your opinion won't do. If this sounds like I am insulting to other members then that is not my problem.

Okay, what do you know that we don't know.

Not really, Paul had surpassed everyone in his lifetime. I am a follower of Helios and I defend Christianity and Judaism more than any believers and non-believers who pee on the Cross, the divide is not so big as you think so, only ignorant and unwise men quarrel with each other, the theology of Christians, Jews, Hellenic religions and eastern religions are one and the same, only names change in what they are describing. The last thing what we want is to raise our kids brainwashing them to think that anyone who is worshipping a different God than their own is a devil worshipper. That's the last thing we want really.

Its because she uses an algorithm, living organisms are quantum information processing systems. [latex] Grover's Algorithm[/latex] [latex] (2Q +1) sin^{-1} (1/ \sqrt N) = \pi / 2[/latex] where, N = number of elements that the algorithm can search for a given number of yes/no queries Q. [latex] Q =1 => N =4[/latex] [latex] Q =2 => N = 10.5[/latex] [latex] Q =3 => N =20.2[/latex] i.e. for three triplet codons or for three yes/no queries it can search up to 20 elements or effectively distinguish up to 20 elements. The Triplet Genetic Code had a Doublet Predecessor

It gave a Http 500 error when the site was accessed via mobile and it has slowed down a lot, especially the mobile version, at first it was fast.

So science should be based on meritocracy for you but when it comes to religion anything goes, that shows your own double standards for you make one rule for science and an another rule for religion. Only those who are in the right process of Henosis are religious and your examples doesn't qualify itself as religion, your examples fall into the domain of groups who are more influenced by social and political factors rather than by divine or by any God. Those groups will claim anything and even say that they are executing the divine word of their God but anyone can easily see that they are not even loyal to what their own religious scriptures are saying. "Within the works of Iamblichus, The One and reconciliation of division can be obtained through the process of theurgy. By mimicking the demiurge, the individual is returned to the cosmos to implement the will of the divine mind. Iamblichus used the rituals of the mystery religions to perform rituals on the individual to unite their outer and inner person. Thus one without conflict internal or external is united (henosis) and is The One (hen)." Only those who are divinized means only those who are united with the One can know or knows what the will of the divine is, not some Islamic fundamentalists or Heinrich Himmler or not even those who blindly believe in their scriptures, religion has got nothing to do with belief, religion is about doing not believing, even they are not religious, this concept of henosis exists in all the religions of the world and hence my definition is universal whether you or any mods accept or reject it will not change the facts. "Fanaa (Arabic: فناء‎ fanāʾ ) is the Sufi term for "dissolution" or "annihilation" (of the self) or Muraqaba.[3] It means to dissolve the ego self, while remaining physically alive. Persons having entered this enlightenment state obtain awareness of the intrinsic unity (Tawhid) between Allah and all that exists, including the individual's mind. It is coupled conceptually with baqaa, subsistence, which is the state of pure consciousness of and abidance in God." It is these people who know the will of Allah not your fraud fundamentalists who behead infidels in the name of Allah falsely thinking that they are doing the will of God. We are no longer living in the age of ignorance to let people define what religion is for themselves, one is free to do whatever he wants but don't use the name of religion for justifying your unjustifiable acts and don't blame religion or God for acts done by people who don't even qualify as religious in the first place. The authors of religious scriptures were divinely inspired and it was the Gods who themselves guided these authors and made them to write the scriptures but over time these scriptures have been corrupted and they are not reliable especially the set of Laws which decides how you need to go about your life, there is no indisputable evidence to suggest that a God or divine indeed gave such laws to humanity and we actually don't know what is the will of God or as to what he wants from us and it is not wise to take any laws in any of the religious scriptures as the true word of God or as the true word of divine, only by returning to the cosmos one really knows what is the will of the God and only he acts according to the will of the divine not everyone. There is nothing in religion which says that one should discriminate women, exempt them from higher education and enforce unequal laws of gender on them. Anyone can take the path of henosis and become divine and only those can be considered as religious for they are the men who testify us about the presence of numinous or the supernatural on earth and not people who just have blind faith in a book which they blindly consider it to be Holy. You won't become pious and holy by believing, you become it by knowing i.e. by knowledge of the One. This is consistent with any denomination of religion you take from the universe.

In the older software versions there was a welcome note saying "We welcome discussions at all levels and for all those who have a love for science" something like that, I don't remember it exactly and it is true, I post here just because for the love of science, that's all. Forums were never considered to be credible sources, it is just a starting place to get yourself familiar with a subject and if you are interested in the subject go and research things for yourself, I always felt that this forum required a biology expert but it doesn't necessarily mean that having too many experts on the board will guarantee us in providing the correct scientific consensus of sorts on particular subject matters, there is actually no consensus in physics and biology right now on the theoretical foundations, having more Phd's will indeed increase the standards of discussion but as other members have said if you expect them to spend considerable amount of their time on a forum answering to your questions then you need to pay them.

You guys need to understand about the divine light rays that I speak of in my OP in order to understand the secret of the Vedas. The Theology of Julian's Hymn to King Helios This summarizes very satisfactorily the role that Julian has chosen for the Sun Gud , a deity to whom his devotion was very real. There is heartfelt testimony to this at the beginning of the hymn (130C): "For I am a follower of King Helios. And of this fact I possess within me, known to myself alone, proofs more certain than I can give. But this at least I am permitted to say without sacrilege, that from my childhood an extraordinary longing for the rays of the god penetrated deep into my soul; and from my earliest years my mind was so completely swayed by the light that illumines the heavens that not only did I desire to gaze intently at the sun, but whenever I walked abroad at night, when the sky was clear and cloudless, I abandoned all else without exception and gave myself up to the beauties of the heavens; nor did I understand what anyone might say to me, nor heed what I was doing myself" Hymn to King Helios "But this visible disc also, third[21] in rank, is clearly, for the objects of sense-perception the cause of preservation, and this visible Helios[22] is the cause for the visible gods[23] of just as many blessings as we said mighty Helios bestows on the intellectual gods. And of this there are clear proofs for one who studies the unseen world in the light of things seen.[24] For in the first place, is not light itself a sort of incorporeal and divine form of the transparent in a state of activity? And as for the transparent itself, whatever it is, since it is the underlying basis, so to speak, of all the elements, and is a form peculiarly belonging to them, it is not like the corporeal or compounded, nor does it admit qualities peculiar to corporeal substance.[25] You will not therefore say that heat is a property of the transparent,[26] or its opposite cold, nor will you assign to it hardness or softness or any other of the various, attributes connected with touch or taste or smell; [134] but a nature of this sort is obvious to sight alone, since it is brought into activity by light. And light is a form of this substance, so to speak, which is the substratum of and coextensive with the heavenly bodies. And of light, itself incorporeal, the culmination and flower, so to speak, is the sun's rays. Now the doctrine of the Phoenicians, who were wise and learned in sacred lore, declared that the rays of light everywhere diffused are the undefiled incarnation of pure mind. And in harmony with this is our theory, seeing that light itself is incorporeal, if one should regard its fountainhead, not as corporeal, but as the undefiled activity of mind[27] pouring light into its own abode: and this is assigned to the middle of the whole firmament, whence it sheds its rays and fills the heavenly spheres with vigour of every kind and illumines all things with light divine and undefiled. Now the activities proceeding from it and exercised among the gods have been, in some measure at least, described by me a little earlier[28] and will shortly be further spoken of." Emperor Julian and Neoplatonism "Referring to the Phoenicians, Julian cites their teaching that "the rays of light everywhere diffused are the undefiled incarnation [imbodiment] of pure mind." Modern scientists are within an ace of confirming some of these more recondite facts for themselves." Many people are slowly recognizing that this is true. This is what Aurobindo argued for and this is what I am arguing for in this thread, this is the secret of the Vedas, the divine light rays of the holistic Sun-deity which is one of the most ancient preserved religion of the world, no one has preserved this religion like we have, it pre-dates Christianity, Islam, Hinduism etc and when we bring back this knowledge it will be more powerful than all the exact sciences put together. You are not in control of your life. Apana Apana, literally the “air that moves away,” moves downward and outward and governs all forms of elimination and reproduction (which also has a downward movement). It governs the elimination of the stool and the urine, the expelling of semen, menstrual fluid and the fetus, and the elimination of carbon dioxide through the breath. On a deeper level it rules the elimination of negative sensory, emotional and mental experiences. It is the basis of our immune function on all levels. Apana is the god who controls your excretory functions, you don't have free will, everything is subject to the gods and everything is going according to their will. Why shouldn't I tell that to you guys when all evidence is in favour of my position? This time religion is going to correct science be rest assured of that. I'll be happy if the mods first apply those rules upon themselves before applying it on other members. I did gave numerous evidences in support of my specific claims. Start accepting these facts first then I'll show you how gods are real as a logical consequence of that.

You are badly misinformed and you fail to acknowledge that fact either due to your arrogance or you are showing double standards. I have politely explained to you that your views on eastern mysticism are wrong and I even gave you evidence from literature and you carelessly ignored it by saying "its not quite my thing" which clearly shows that you and people who hold the same position as yours cherry pick those things from the literature which suits your ideology and ignore those which explicitly shatters your cornerstone beliefs and by replying to this thread in this way you have shown why my accusation in the original post still stands. Before you criticize that its a failure of scholarship on my part let me remind you one thing, much of the views which I hold is based on the views of the Sanskrit scholar Devudu Narasimha Shastry who was under the tutelage of S. Radhakrishnan, the works of whom which you often cite without knowing the implications of it. Leave these scholars behind I can show why your views are wrong by simply citing the concept of non-dualism that exists in different traditions. Take Kabbalah for example: Concealed and Revealed_God "The nature of the Divine prompted kabbalists to envision two aspects to God: (a) God in essence, absolutely transcendent, unknowable, limitless Divine simplicity, and (b) God in manifestation, the revealed persona of God through which He creates and sustains and relates to mankind. Kabbalists speak of the first as Ein/Ayn Sof ("the infinite/endless", literally "that which has no limits"). Of the impersonal Ein Sof nothing can be grasped. The second aspect of Divine emanations, however, are accessible to human perception, dynamically interacting throughout spiritual and physical existence, reveal the Divine immanently, and are bound up in the life of man. Kabbalists believe that these two aspects are not contradictory but complement one another, emanations revealing the concealed mystery from within the Godhead. According to Kabbalistic cosmology, the Ten Sefirot correspond to ten levels of creation. These levels of creation must not be understood as ten different "gods" but as ten different ways of revealing God, one per level. It is not God who changes but the ability to perceive God that changes. " Adavaita Vedanta is not anything different from Kabbalah, here the absolute transcendent, unknowable divinity is known as Brahman and the manifested personal God is known as Ishvara and this personal God is an emanation of Brahman and he is the first-born of all creatures and all other gods form the body of this God and dwell with in him. And this thought is no where well expressed than in the Valentinian tradition and they where looking for something beyond the Father i.e. non-dualism means being one with God and that's what the Gospel of Philip explicitly says, "People cannot see anything in the real realm unless they become it...if you have seen the spirit, you have become the spirit; if you have seen Christ, you have become Christ; if you have seen the Father, you will become the Father" (Gospel of Philip 61:20-32 cf. 67:26-27) This non-dualism or apotheosis was achieved through the means of ritual and this is what Iamblichus who was well versed in the Egyptian mysteries taught, just intellectualizing these things is not enough you need to have practicality and that's what Iamblichus introduced into the Neo-platonic school of thought. "Unlike most religious movements, the Valentinian eschatological myth does not present events that are postponed until the afterlife or the end of the world. They believed that those who had gnosis experienced the restoration to Fullness (pleroma) here and now through visionary experiences and ritual. They believed that the experience expressed through the myth was real and that through visionary experiences (gnosis) and ritual one could experience the events it described. Thus the "myth" is not merely a teaching story. It is a metaphorical description of the experience of redemption." - Realized Eschatology(Valentinian Tradition That's how much the importance of silent ritual worship is given in these pagan religions and anyone can practice Theurgy anytime one doesn't need any justification from modern science for it, the polemic ideas of these pagan religions are itself quite compelling enough to investigate them and perform those rituals. One criticism of Gnosticism though is how they dealt with the problem of evil, they made the Demiurgus a lesser god and identified it to the Jewish god and portrayed him as an evil god which was strongly criticized by Plotinus in his Ennaeds, Criticism of gnosticism by antique Greek Philosophy "As a pagan mystic Plotinus considered his opponents heretics[69] and elitist blasphemers,[70] arriving at misotheism as the solution to the problem of evil, being not traditional or genuine Hellenism (in philosophy or mysticism), but rather one invented taking all their truths over from Plato,[71] coupled with the idea expressed by Plotinus that the approach to the infinite force which is the One or Monad cannot be through knowing or not knowing (i.e., dualist, which is of the dyad or demiurge).[72][73] Although there has been dispute as to which Gnostics Plotinus was referring to it appears they were indeed Sethian.[74] Plotinus' main objection to the Gnostics he was familiar with, however, was their rejection of the goodness of the demiurge and the material world. He attacks the Gnostics as vilifying Plato's ontology of the universe as contained in the Timaeus. He accused Gnosticism of vilifying the Demiurge, or craftsman that crafted the material world, and even of thinking that the material world is evil, or a prison. As Plotinus explains, the demiurge is the nous (as the first emanation of the One), the ordering principle or mind, and also reason. Plotinus was also critical of the Gnostic origin of the demiurge as the offspring of wisdom, represented as a deity called Sophia. She was anthropomorphically expressed as a feminine spirit deity not unlike the goddess Athena or the Christian Holy Spirit. Plotinus even went so far as to state at one point that if the Gnostics did believe this world was a prison then they could at any moment free themselves by committing suicide. To some degree the texts discovered in Nag Hammadi support his allegations, but others such as the Valentinians and the Tripartite Tractate insist on the goodness of the world and the Demiurge." Its actually wrong to call the creator of this universe an evil god like the way the Sethians did it or even to make him a lesser ignorant being like the way the valentinians did it, demiurge is actually the first emanation of the One and this was the view of the Neo-platonists and also the view of Advaita and Kabbalah. That's how much ignorant you are when you say that Advaita is atheistic, its the most silly thing I have ever heard. I being a follower of Advaita Vedanta of Shankara myself one of the things which we strive for is to go beyond the Holy Father and plead him that he reveals the non-dualistic truth to us so that he reduces his intense rays which is impending on us. 13 One thing, they say, is obtained from the worship of the manifested; another, they say, from the worship of the unmanifested. Thus we have heard from the wise who taught us this. 14 He who knows that both the unmanifested prakriti and the manifested Hiranyagarbha should be worshipped together, overcomes death by the worship of Hiranyagarbha and obtains immortality through devotion to prakriti. 15 The door of the Truth is covered by a golden disc. Open it, O Nourisher! Remove it so that I who have been worshipping the Truth may behold It. 16 O Nourisher, lone Traveller of the sky! Controller! O Sun, Offspring of Prajapati! Gather Your rays; withdraw Your light. I would see, through Your grace, that form of Yours which is the fairest. I am indeed He, that Purusha, who dwells there. - Isha Upanishad, works of Shankara. I am not citing from any new age works, this is from the Vedas and the Upanishads, either accept that you were wrong or accept that you are a dogmatic absolutist who don't even know the implications of your own position, no wonder you doesn't want to argue with me, using logic you might prove that the universe is a unity but it is through ritual that you prove that assertion and make it practically happen in reality. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are various evidence in literature which criticize your position. A good review of the literature will do it. "Richard H. Jones is the author of a dozen books on science and religion and on Eastern mystical traditions. He has an A.B. from Brown University, Ph.D. from Columbia University, and a J.D. from the University of California at Berkeley. He lives in New York City. His interests include science and religion, the history of science, philosophy of mysticism, the scientific study of religious experiences, Asian religions (in particular Madhyamaka Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta). Piercing the Veil: Comparing Science and Mysticism as Ways of Knowing Reality This book explores an area in the field of "science and religion" that scholars usually neglect -- science and mysticism. It examines the recent efforts of popularizers and scholars who see a convergence of modern science and various Asian schools of mysticism -- in particular, Madhyamaka Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta. The works examined include the Dalai Lama's The Universe in a Single Atom: The Conver gence of Science and Spirituality, the essays in B. Alan Wallace's Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground, the physicist Victor Mansfield's Tibetan Buddhism & Modern Physics: Toward a Union of Love and Knowledge, and Fritjof Capra's best seller, The Tao of Physics. The entire New Age idea of any "quantum mysticism" is shown to be groundless." - Richard Jones books.com Quantum physics is not epistemologically compatible with mysticism, in the former we deal with photons, quarks, quantum fields etc where as in the latter we deal with Gods, rituals and eternal Platonic forms. Much of mysticism is not even concerned with the empirical world at all, they are least bothered whether the universe is local or non-local, if there is any similarity between quantum mechanics and mysticism then it is their similar conclusions about the nature of reality of the empirical universe that's all, mysticism stands on its own it doesn't require any justification from modern science, if its anything the experimental results of quantum mechanics provide us additional compelling reasons to perform the rituals of the pagan religions and study their polemic ideas. One more double standards is that you don't reveal what the controversy is to the public instead you are playing around with lives of people which is very decietful and cunning, what are you afraid of? No one put the controversy in the right context other than Max Planck I think, "Still other physicists had different views. Marin argues that Max Planck, an adherent of Christianity, framed the controversy as the objectivity of science and Christianity against the mysticism of Schopenhauer and his popularization of Buddhism and Hinduism." - Quantum Mysticism gone but not forgotten Its a battle between orthodox Christianity and the pagan religions, a battle between atheists and atheistic scientists vs theists and religious scientists, a realistic philosophy of science vs an idealistic philosophy of science. "According to Marin, the opposition to mystical interpretations of Quantum Mechanics that Einstein and others had stemmed from their adherence to the philosophical school of realism. Yet in the 2007 Nature paper An experimental test of non-local realism, Anton Zeilinger and his colleagues wrote that, "Most working scientists hold fast to the concept of ‘realism’—a viewpoint according to which an external reality exists independent of observation. But quantum physics has shattered some of our cornerstone beliefs. According to Bell’s theorem, any theory that is based on the joint assumption of realism and locality (meaning that local events cannot be affected by actions in space-like separated regions) is at variance with certain quantum predictions. Experiments with entangled pairs of particles have amply confirmed these quantum predictions, thus rendering local realistic theories untenable. Maintaining realism as a fundamental concept would therefore necessitate the introduction of ‘spooky’ actions that defy locality. Here we show by both theory and experiment that a broad and rather reasonable class of such non-local realistic theories is incompatible with experimentally observable quantum correlations. In the experiment, we measure previously untested correlations between two entangled photons, and show that these correlations violate an inequality proposed by Leggett for non-local realistic theories. Our result suggests that giving up the concept of locality is not sufficient to be consistent with quantum experiments, unless certain intuitive features of realism are abandoned."[17] Professors Richard Conn Henry and Stephen R. Palmquist, commenting on that paper, stated: "Now we are beginning to see that quantum mechanics might actually exclude any possibility of mind-independent reality and already does exclude any reality that resembles our usual concept of such (Aspect: 'it implies renouncing the kind of realism I would have liked')." They concluded their commentary by adding that in their view, because of these findings, "a theistic view of our existence becomes the only rational alternative to solipsism." - Quantum mysticism At the heart of this controversy is the human mind and strong AI which Roger Penrose has argued in his three books The Emperors New Mind, Shadows of the Mind and Road to Reality. This is one of the main reasons why I am on the theists side and not on the side of atheists. One of the main pagan beliefs is the existence of Nous, a metaphysical human mind other than the brain and if this hypothesis turns out to be falsified the entire mystery religions of paganism will be falsified and my intutive reasoning suggests me to put high stakes on the mystery religions of the pagans. This is the religion forum and here we should speak about Theurgy or the Theurgical sciences and not about the exact sciences like physics or chemistry. Do you realize that you are digging your own graveyard by mixing science with religion when you said that the ghee somehow affects the atmosphere? That's the most silly argument I have ever heard, don't try to rationalize eastern mysticism. You are just showing double standards by placing western philosophy on a pedestal while arguing about eastern mysticism without understand it in its own milieu. Significance "Agni, god of fire acts as the divine model for the sacrificial priest. He is the messenger who carries the oblation from humans to the gods, bringing the gods to sacrifice, and interceding between gods and humans (RgV.1.26.3). When Agni is pleased, the gods are generous. Agni represents the cultivated, cooked and cultured aspects of Vedic ritual. Together with Soma, Agni is invoked in the Rig Veda more than any other gods." The rituals only work because the Brahmin priests invoke the gods and we need to adopt their model of the cosmos while arguing about eastern mysticism. You yourself have confessed that you have no interests in religion and without understanding how these rituals work you have in prior dismissed it as rubbish, for someone who is not interested in science much of what science says seems nonsense to him but the one who has studied both science and theurgy knows very well how both are done and how intellectual those ideas are. Why not read some thing about theurgy and do a controlled study by invoking the gods and an another trial without invoking the gods and figure out the truth for yourself? THEURGY: RITUALS OF UNIFICATION IN THE NEOPLATONISM OF IAMBLICHUS, GREGORY SHAW Theurgy and the soul, The Neoplatonism of Iamblichus

That's a common belief in this part of the world. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/67973-how-silly-is-this/ Most people don't realize the implications of this, as Richard Dawkins says Jesus walking on water and born of a virgin mother are all empirical assertions which can be transformed into a scientific hypothesis and such a world in which these things are possible or a God exists will be of a completely different world. There aren't too many options available to us either rate yourself as 7 in the Dawkins scale and be a strong atheist or rate yourself as 1 and be a strong theist and any other compromising position is sheer double standards, no wonder why these two extreme positions annoys a lot of people. That's exactly the kind of double standards that I am talking of, if agnihotra works in bringing rain to regions affected by drought then start taking the existence of these gods seriously because without Agni there cannot be Agnihotra. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agni Agni with his consort Svaha.

Moontanman calls facts established from experiments as horse feathers. LoL Observer in Quantum Experiments Its your beliefs which are horse feathers Moontanman not mine. You guys need to give up these two beliefs urgently if you expect people to give back respect to you guys. 1. Your belief in free will 2. Your belief in the existence of an empirical reality independent of the human mind. Because facts established from experiments contradicts both of those beliefs strongly. Sooner or later this will be introduced in schools.

Do you really know how many traditions I am defending? I am defending at least four to five traditions both from western religions as well as from eastern religions, that's one of the strengths of my argument and not my weakness. Having investigated the religions of all these cultures I hold very high liberal thoughts and I'm not here only to defend the Vedas and the Upanishads. I am here to defend Vajrayana Buddhism, Neoplatonic Christianity, Neoplatonism, Taoism, Kabbalah and the Smarta tradition of the Vedic Aryans. "The Buddhist scholar B. Alan Wallace has also indicated (as shown above) that saying that Buddhism as a whole is "non-theistic" may be an over-simplification. Wallace discerns similarities between some forms of Vajrayana Buddhism and notions of a divine "ground of being" and creation. He writes: "a careful analysis of Vajrayana Buddhist cosmogony, specifically as presented in the Atiyoga tradition of Indo-Tibetan Buddhism, which presents itself as the culmination of all Buddhist teachings, reveals a theory of a transcendent ground of being and a process of creation that bear remarkable similarities with views presented in Vedanta and Neoplatonic Western Christian theories of creation." In fact, Wallace sees these views as so similar that they seem almost to be different manifestations of the same theory. He further comments: "Vajrayana Buddhism, Vedanta, and Neoplatonic Christianity have so much in common that they could almost be regarded as varying interpretations of a single theory." Contrary to your belief all these traditions can be put forward as a single theory, its coherent and consistent. This is one of the reasons why I insist that different cultures across different timelines and disconnected places have come up with similar theories about the origin of the cosmos which need to be taken seriously and not to be dismissed by giving silly excuses that they were all on LSD. Who said different traditions cite different number of Gods in their scriptures? Did you forget this so soon? Did you not see that all those thousands of gods are just manifestations of these 33 gods, actually there is only one God, The Holy Father and all other gods are manifestation of him and you can find this in both Indian traditions, Egyptian traditions, Chinese traditions and as well in Neo-Platonic traditions. Non-dualism is the main tenet of all these traditions. If you don't believe me read it for yourself. "It is worth noting that Valentinianism shows an astonishing degree of similarity to another monistic system, the Advaita Vedanta school of Indian philosophy. In Advaita, the material world is an illusion (maya) attributed to ignorance (avidya) of the true reality. Through knowledge (jnana) of the ultimate reality (brahman), the world of multiplicity vanishes. True redemption (moksha) is the knowledge of one's true nature. This raises the intriguing possibility of some kind of connection between the two. There was some awareness of Indian thought in the ancient Roman world. However, at the time of Valentinus, there was no systematic statement of Advaita thought. It is possible that Valentinus came into contact with some form of early Advaita Vedanta teaching. Advaita philosophy as it now stands was given its definitive form by Shankara in the 6th or 7th century AD. There also exists the possibility that he was influenced by Valentinian thought. Valentinians are known to have been active in the Middle East as late as the seventh century. It is possible that Valentinian missionaries or refugees may have made their way to India and come into contact with Shankara or his immediate predecessors. However, any connection between the two remains purely hypothetical. " - Valentinian Monism I am defending for Christianity as well here in case you guys are not aware of it. Guess what? Do you want to know the number of Aeons that existed in the Valentinian tradition? "The order of Anthropos and Ecclesia versus Logos and Zoe is somewhat debated; different sources give different accounts. Logos and Zoe are unique to this system as compared to the previous, and may be an evolved version of the first, totalling 32 Aeons, but it is not clear if the first two were actually regarded Aeons." - Aeon_(Gnosticism) You guys have no idea how deep the rabbit hole goes. My position is consistent and well supported by scholarly evidence. Don't give such silly excuses like laziness for not reading my links and at the same time accuse me that I am going against empirical evidence. I can shatter your belief systems with a blink of an eye because my position is backed up by scientific evidence, don't underestimate these arguments, this will be taught in schools as facts in the near future and I have nothing to lose, you're the real loser by displaying your own ignorance. Actually this thread is not about immortal, this thread is about making people aware that both science and religion are basically saying the same thing about the origin of the cosmos and that there is no conflict between religion and science.

There are lots of evidence, read a good yoga journal or read this. Yoga and Consciousness Studies Sun Salutations "These explanations are provided here to illustrate how our ancient masters have, by their insight, study and research, understood how the various organs of the body can be kept in optimal and strong functioning levels. Their knowledge and understanding of the externals and the internals are amazing. Modern science is only gradually scratching the surface of the vast knowledge hidden in our hoary scriptures and in the practices of our Rishis." All the empirical evidence is in favour of our model of the cosmos. We don't start with the Big Bang, according to this model the observers came first.

You guys need to understand the eastern mind, our model of the cosmos. Macrocosm and Microcosm Taoist views of the body Inner Gods Truthful words are not beautiful; beautiful words are not truthful. Good words are not persuasive; persuasive words are not good. - Lao Tsu The truth about this world is that Gods are real and they are everywhere. Near enemies are those who show double standards and ignore the explicit existence of Gods in these traditions and far enemies are those who are atheists. There is only two options either Advaita Vedanta is true and these Gods exist or Advaita is false and atheists are right. Since all empirical evidence is in favour of Advaita Vedanta of Shankara the conclusion is these Gods are real and they are everywhere and are in control of all our aspects. Gods not only exist in heaven they dwell or reside with in our bodies. This is our view of the world. No double standards and no fuss, I am as straight forward as I can get.

I very well read the stuff which I link to, no one here is filling the gaps in QM with poetry or classical music. I am filling the gaps in QM with 3000 years of eastern Vedic science. No body said there is no reality independent of us. I am a Platonic realist. D'Espagnat's position is in line with me and with the view of the Vedas and the Upanishads. It stands as one of the surviving religions because it asserts that this empirical reality is only a state of mind which is in line with facts established from experiments. All evidence is pointing to a metaphysical Mind and an Intellect and it is this is what is responsible for the retrospective creation of this empirical reality. "What we call reality is only a state of mind" - Bernard D'Espagnat. This empirical reality doesn't exist independent of us, that's the truth about this world something which you need to learn because your belief in the existence of this empirical reality independent of us is wrong and contradicts empirical evidence. Your dog and my toothbrush are phenomena, a spatio-temporal reality which has been given to us and not how it exists out there in the external world. The reality which exists out there in the external world which is the noumenon is completely different.

Real Knowledge. We hold the Kernel of Truth not the scientists, they are just prisoners of the cave. Science cannot fully describe reality You need to learn this empirical reality doesn't exist independent of us in the external world, its all inside your mind.

I said that to suggest that just because someone holds a Phd in this subject doesn't mean he knows more about the subject than others when they are getting much of their insights from the natives who are the real experts on the subject. The methodology of Yoga. LoL, the enterprise of science is actually a dead end, science doesn't and cannot give you the ultimate truth.

That's the reason why I had started an another thread to answer these questions of yours. The importance of ritual in religion Science is not all there is, the scientific enterprise itself has forced us to question the existence of this empirical world independent of us. The very foundation of science is in question here. Scientific method is not the only method which works, there are other methods as well which works in bringing out knowledge which are practically useful. The pagan religions should be understood in the context of the thread which I have provided above, which explains why the names of Gods are important, why ritual is important and why it is so important to worship Gods, it answers all your questions. This is how our ancients did it and that's how they discovered the truth about Brahman. This is not science, this is esotericism.

I will put Brahman in the right perspective for you. Idealism in Ancient philosophy "The oldest reference to Idealism in Hindu texts is in Purusha Sukta of the Rig Veda. This sukta espouses panentheism by presenting cosmic being Purusha as both pervading all universe and yet being transcendent to it.[1] Absolute idealism can be seen in Chandogya Upani?ad, where things of the objective world like the five elements and the subjective world such as will, hope, memory etc. are seen to be emanations from the Self." (From Wiki) One of the main important concepts that one need to understand about the Upanishads is Antharmukh and Bahirmukh. If you want to understand Brahman then first you need to understand about Indian Psychology. Differential hypotheses between Indian and Western psychology. The most important difference between the Indian and the Western approach seems to be about the existence of pure consciousness as postulated by the former. However, as far as “normal life” is concerned, ancient Indian psychology, especially as expressed in the systems of Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika have astonishingly parallel views with modern Western psychology (e.g., Raju, 1983; Sharma, 2003). But there are also some striking differences. For instance, in contemporary Western cognitive psychology, the relationship between brain and mind is seldom explicitly spelled out, but if one would press researchers to make a statement, most would probably resort to the view that cognitive processes co-vary with brain processes, and if pressed still harder, some might say that essentially brain processes produce cognitions and emotions (e.g., Damasio, 1999). The Indian view is just the opposite: the brain is used as an instrument by the mind (e.g., Raju, 1983). Does the mind use the brain or is the reverse true? This is a very interesting question, which cannot easily be tested. One might, however, try to find evidence for whether mind exists independently from brain. If the brain is the basis for the mind, there should be no mind if the brain is dead. So a good starting point to examine the hypothesis might be to look for evidence on near-death experiences or on reincarnation (for some attempts do to so see Cook, Greyson & Stevenson, 1998; Stevenson, 1987). Do the senses connect to their “sense-objects”? In Indian psychology, at least in the systems of Nyāya and Vaiśeṣika, Sāṁkhya, and Mīmāṁsā, it is assumed that the senses go out to their objects and contact them or even “become” the objects (e.g., Raju, 1983). Therefore, sense-organs such as the eye or the nose that do not really touch their objects seem to be not the whole story according to the Indian view. So one might, for instance, hypothesize that even if the visual sense in the Western understanding does not work any longer, the remaining part of the visual sense in the Indian understanding might still be functioning and an (incomplete) perception might be the result. This hypothesis might open up some interesting links to phenomena such as “blindsight” (e.g., Cowey, 2004). - Peter Sedlmeier, Indian Psychology and the Scientific method. These are the basic things which you need to understand first before understanding Brahman. According to Indian Psychology, Mind and Brain are two different things, Mind and Intellect are not just abstractions as you have thought, they literally exist in the external world out there, this is the reason why I earlier quoted Wigner since he argued that Substance dualism is slowly becoming more and more acceptable into the mainstream science. Indian Psychology is not really concerned or is connected with the empirical world at all, it is a metaphysical theory. Normally in science we put those theories into the world of metaphysics which cannot be disproved or falsified. According to it, it places the Self(Brahman) as the origin of all these manifested cosmos of God and including this empirical universe, the five objective elements which are Earth, Water, Fire, Air and Outer Space and the subjective elements which are Mind, Intellect and metaphysical sense organs are the things which exists in the noumenon of Kant and these elements participate in the retrospective creation of this empirical universe which is only a state of mind i.e. this universe of yours is all inside your Mind and its not out there in the external world, what is out there is the manifested world of God. This is the reason why I said that this reality would not have existed without the existence of God. Non-dualism means becoming one with God or the Holy Father, according to Advaita, God(Ishvara) is an emanation of Brahman and he exists behind the Intellect and what is beyond God(Brahman) is Unspeakable or ineffable, that's why they named it as Brahman or Ein Sof, no one really knows what it is. We can meaningful understand about God and his relationship with the manifested Cosmos but anything beyond is beyond from our Intellectual grasp. This is the orthodox traditional take on Advaita and this is my position. The PhD's particularly in this subject visit India and learn things from the tradition and then they publish their work according to the perspective of Western philosophy. If your dream of placing Jesus in line with Shankara and Buddha need to become a reality then start taking the Pleroma of God seriously. Did you understand now why I criticized your position from the beginning?

Don't make a strawman of my position. Christian Cosmology=>Pleroma Hindu Cosmology=>Agnisoma Mandala Jewish Cosmology=>Sephirot Buddhist Cosmology=>Adi Buddha(Samanthabadra and Samanthabadri) My position is consistent and these cosmologies stand at the heart of these religions and anyone who rejects these respective cosmologies are killing the very heart of these religions and we all know what such people should be called i.e. Slayers. Anyone who don't accept these cosmologies is not a Christian, Hindu, Jew and a Buddhist respectively. We are arguing here as to what is the true word of Divine, whether the true word is to stone women and show inequality of gender or injustice to women or whether the true word is to strive for the equality of all humanity irrespective of caste, creed, gender or race. Simply put only those things which are from the divine are religious and which is not from the divine it is not religious. If you guys can't identify which is from the divine and which is influenced by other social, political and cultural factors then why are you guys arguing in this religious forum in the first place. Yes, its a matter of intellectual honesty, that's why I am going by evidence. I am separating cultural from Religion because the examples which swansont gave is culture and its not religion because it is not from the divine. Its wrong to blame religion or God for this. No, they are experts in the field and there is good agreed upon consensus in this matter and much of what they say is correct and accurate. Only those who are divinized(have become one with God) and who are on the right path of divinization are religious and anything different is culture not religion. I know that would exclude almost everyone perhaps including myself but that's the true word of Divine and its no way a fundamentalist position, actually its the opposite, the most liberal position since anyone irrespective of gender, caste, creed, culture, country etc can become religious any time since there is nothing like you need to accept anyone or blindly believe in anything as your saviour or else you'll be judged for eternal damnation. I have studied it day and night. I have even tested these religions. Do you know what? To philosophize is to learn to die. When all evidence is in favour of my position there is no turning back.