God must be a Homosexual,Retard,Cripple,....

[Mystic]

1 - if the outer beauty is a parable of the inner, doesnt that mean the more beautiful you are externally the more beautiful you are internally?

No it means the opposite, you can look good on the outside but be ugly in the inside or you can be ugly on the outside but be beautiful in the inside.

2 - If outer beauty is a parable then this is one shitty story.

I wouldn't know about that. We are attracted to beauty, God is Ultimate beauty, and we should want an intimate experience with ultimate beauty that is of a spiritual nature.

And ultimately, our spiritual desires are manifested in our material desires. We want richness, but true happiness and peace lies inside. True richness is inward, yet we seek it outwardly. We want beauty, but neglect the beauty of the soul. We are attracted to beauty, but ignore the ultimate beauty and higher exalted beauty. We see glory and honor in athletic but higher strength and higher skill lies spiritually.

It's a telling story, because, we seek what is lower then to what is higher form, in which the lower is a parable descent from of.

3 - what is this 'inside' you speak of?

The personhood/soul of the person.

[liam]

I'm labelling your points to keep it under control, hope you dont mind.

1 No it means the opposite, you can look on the outside but be ugly in the inside or you can be ugly on the outside but be beautiful in the inside.

Well that is all fine and dandy, except this assumes that beauty is a thing in the object itself, which it is not. Therefore what reason is there to suppose that in each individual there is beauty? Its a more compelling argument that supports no beauty than any. Therefore, to summarise, what is this property you call beauty?

2I wouldn't know about that. We are attracted to beauty, God is Ultimate beauty, and we want an intimate experience with ultimate beauty that is of a spiritual nature.

- Implies god's existence as first proposition
- Why must a creator be ultimately beautiful?
- Why must we seek this intimacy?
- How are we to interact with a transcendental entity, if god is and is so?
You're presupposing your own view of god is correct, which is dumb.

We want richness, but true happiness and peace lies inside. True richness is inward, yet we seek it outwardly. We want beauty, but neglect the beauty of the soul. We are attracted to beauty, but ignore the ultimate beauty and higher exalted beauty.

- You say we want richness but you're simply imposing your own desires onto others. How can you ever say what I, or anyone else, wants?
- The soul? What is that?
- What is this quality you keep speaking of, called 'beauty'?

a parable descent from of.

wut?

3The personhood/soul of the person.

Excuse me? what is a personhood/soul? I have no idea what you're referring to. This 'inside' escapes me, what is it the inside of?

[Mystic]

If God is ultimate beauty, do you think it's possible we have some knowledge of that beauty and of different levels of descent/forms of it?

[liam]

If God is ultimate beauty, do you think it's possible we have some knowledge of that beauty and in different levels of descent/forms of it?

If you avoid my criticisms, do you think I'm going to ignore your baseless assertions? Because I'm not.
In response to your question, I'm going to have to actually deconstruct further (too early/late for this shit).

"If god is ultimate beauty"
Then God is subjective and not perfect.

"...possible we have some knowledge of that beauty"
Once more, what is this beauty thing you keep speaking of? Knowledge of anything relating to god is either imperfect or transcendental, so no.

"levels or descent/forms of it?"
First, what is it? Secondly, how can it have different forms except in terms of magnitude? if it exists then how can it be greater or lesser, or possess form, as it is a subjective judgement.

[Ryantology]

If God is ultimate beauty, do you think it's possible we have some knowledge of that beauty and of different levels of descent/forms of it?

Why does it seem as if every assertion you ever make starts with the assumption that subjective qualifiers have some objective and ultimate form?

Seems to me that anything which can be subjective must be. 'Ultimate beauty' is a nonsense term. It could only not be nonsense if we could never even imagine that anyone could ever not find it beautiful.

God, therefore, cannot have ultimate beauty because there are plenty of people who find no beauty in the concept of God.

[Mystic]

Well the issue whether morality/beauty/glory/honour is ALL subjective, I can't argue with that. Also, this sort of topic is mystic/spiritual in nature. If you are going to deny we have soul/spirit...then I can't argue with that. If you are going to say it's impossible that we get any knowledge of ultimate beauty because all beauty is subjective or wrong to label God as beautiful because beauty is subjective, then again, we have different views of what beauty is.

We eat different foods with different taste, and we call many of them "pleasurable" tastes. At the same time, we call sex pleasurable as well as playing sports. This all fine, but if a person talks about higher spiritual pleasures, it is assumed it's all together of a different nature. However, to me, it seems there is a world of multiplicity and a world of unity (God), and there is relationship between the two, in which God is the Ultimate form of all positive aspects without their polar negative aspects. The relationship is essential to give a basis to our experience and other experiences of different life forms.

I can't prove this. It's not to be argued by an argument from my point of view. It's rather to be witnessed. God is Ultimate Value, and all value descends from him. This perspective cannot be argued from, because a person can even deny the existence of "value" saying it's all a subjective delusion.

Likewise, a person can dismiss beauty as a delusion. And it cannot be argued for. At the end, this is all very personal.

But let me say this. When we are proud of ourselves, we do so believing we have value and praise. If it's all subjective, then it is totally a delusion. On the other hand, if we have a ball park subjective experience that has some sort of relationship with the objective reality (God), then it's not a delusion.

The question is why do nihilist have pride? You see it seems like they are intellectual convinced all praise/value is non-existent, yet they are proud of whom they are.

This tells me they have two opposing beliefs within them.

[liam]

If you are going to deny we have soul/spirit...then I can't argue with that.

we have no soul or spirit.

We eat different foods with different taste, and we call many of them "pleasurable" tastes. At the same time, we call sex pleasurable as well as playing sports. This all fine, but if a person talks about higher spiritual pleasures, it is assumed it's all together of a different nature. However, to me, it seems there is a world of multiplicity and a world of unity (God), and there is relationship between the two, in which God is the Ultimate form of all positive aspects without their polar negative aspects. The relationship is essential to give a basis to our experience and other experiences of different life forms.

this is just fluff without any real message, please clarify, because its not really making much sense

I can't prove this...God is Ultimate Value, and all value descends from him.

If you can't prove it then why are you making assertions based on its truth?

[Mystic]

Well I assert it because I believe I know it to be true and believe others can also witness it to be true.

As for clarification, the world of unity is that, is that all praise unites into one essence and one quality in reality. This transcendent living existence is where all (objective) praise and value descends from, and it get's it existence from. The lowest descent form is that which is praised simply by the our material senses or valued by it. Pride is a right belief that there exists some praise, worthiness, and value within us. We don't know the exact amount, but the ultimate being does know the ultimate value we have. Although we are veiled from the objective perspective, we have a belief there is an objective value to our existence. Although we don't know how "good" we are exactly, humans do believe there is objective measurement of how "good" they are. I say this in general, I don't mean every human, I mean humans in general. This belief is ultimately linked with our properly basic belief in God. Our perception is rather an imperfect one, believing there is a perfect view, and trying to get as close as possible to this perfect view. We tend to have ball park understanding, but the ball park belief only makes sense if you believe there is an exact objective measurement.

To me this seems obvious to me, as obvious as (objective) morality/praise/value existing. The truth is obviously a person can say they know no such thing as morality, praise, beauty, value having objective existence, and there can be no argument, but a person can remind the person that he believes it's obvious that such a thing exists as well has most of humanity. Likewise a person can deny the need of objective/ultimate basis, but most people agree upon the need of this. Most people don't prove it either, but, this is not something I'm claiming to have that no one else feels they have.

Long story short, this is not a unique experience, and is shared by most of humanity.

[Ryantology]

Long story short, this is not a unique experience, and is shared by most of humanity.

I do not believe that most people get into this in the transcendental manner you describe. A few claim to have experiences like that. Most of the rest of us merely accept it at face value to varying degrees because we are brought up to do so.

Let atheists run the world for five generations and I would guarantee a dramatic decrease in 'spiritual experiences' in that fifth generation.

[Mystic]

Well, if the world ever is without religions, I do wonder what would win, Deism or Atheism.