Read my response to your attempts to redefine logic as to exclude the root meaning of the word which is derived from "Logos", where a rational system defined the way in which the universe operated but that rational system was believed to be spiritually based. This is why both Philo of Alexander and the author of the Gospel of John could use the word "logically" and so do I. Our definition being the root one of Logos and not the latter man-made idea of that "logic" excludes the spiritual dimension altogether.Interbane wrote:The last post on this page is where your questions were answered: http://www.booktalk.org/still-no-atheis ... 80-15.htmlTalk's cheap, Interbane. Please show the posts where they've answered my questions.
Check the thread now because I've just shown how you haven't answered any of my specific questions. Just thrown atheist propaganda that doesn't even address the issues I raise.
As for why humans invented all the metaphysical claptrap that's being discussed, there are many facets that converge on the answer. Why we believe in spirits, and how it happens "naturally":
Paradoelia - http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html
Irrelevant diversion. No one's seeing the Virgin Mary in a potato here. And every descriptor I've used for the Celestial Torah Christianity astrological iconic information is there for anyone to find and it obviously has nothing to do with seeing faces on Mars. If so, then Acharya too is projecting astrological meaning into ancient religious beliefs while you try to put them down here.
Apophenia - http://skepdic.com/apophenia.html
Again, atheist propaganda. I mean, really, do you think you can use an atheist website for "definitions" that are really just atheistic attack on theist beliefs? This one's really absurd because it doesn't seem to understand that it is precisely by mixing and matching that is otherwise called "creativity". I am reminded of the movie about Tucker, (I think its this movie) and his car, when Ford corp were trying to screw him out of patent for automatic windshield wipers and saying he invented nothing new, only put well-known parts together in a different way. To which the winning defense was that that is the way every new thing is invented. Books are written with well-known elements, words put together in novel ways and that is creativity, mixing this with that.
Agency Detection - http://www.icea.ox.ac.uk/fileadmin/CAM/HADD.pdf
Absurd logic as if optical illusionary mistakes are equal to humans belief in spiritual forces that become evermore complexly defined which no amount of reading into an optical illusion would ever do. I mean do any of you see new religions formed from those optical illusion pictures popular as posters? Another non-starter argument.
Magical Thinking - http://skepdic.com/magicalthinking.html
Now here's where it get real interesting, Interbane, because unknown to you and all atheists, these words I'm typing and the ones you use, the letters that make them up? Do you have any idea how they arose as symbolic communication? Well, here's how: They started off as magical thinking, symbolic representations of human beings and given what we know as religious meaning to the ancients who first developed them. This is why to Hebrews for example, the very letters have immense "magical thinking" properties. Human speech, human script, all developed from "magical thinking". You wouldn't be able to understand me if it weren't for magical thinking allowing you to believe that when I write "humankind" you know what I mean because originally the symbols for "many humans" was given magical qualities.
The combination of these psychological facets of the human mind answer all your follow-up questions. Let me know if you don't understand any of them. There are also books that explain, in detail, how these characteristics have caused us to believe in false metaphysical concepts. I've posted links to the books in previous responses. Let me know if you can't find them.
They are atheist propaganda answers. Would I go to Christian fundamentalist website to get authoritative answers to atheist doubts about God's existence? I don't think so. So we're back to you answering my questions.
__________________________________________________________
As for logic, I'll show you what you're unable to see.
First of all, 90% of what you post commits the Ipse Dixit Fallacy. So, the majority of the content of your posts can be dismissed for committing that fallacy.
Bs. My posts reflect my spiritual work and everything pertaining to my arguments supporting my work is laid out in logical steps. The conclusions reached are logical ones with the steps for understanding the logical historical patterns given.
However, you do support some of what you say, although the instances are few and far between. Here are some of your attempts to support your points.
First: Sonoman: "...you forget all about Jesus Christ Superstar and the Age of Aquarius and a whole New Age spiritual movement that outnumbers your atheist one I suspect. And you forget too how universal astrological interest is in the world. Horoscopes are much more read than any Bibles, or Qurans."
Your quote here commits the Argumentum Ad Populum fallacy.
Second: Sonoman: " Please read the Story of Paxcalibur at: http://biomystic.org/paxstory.htm, and see that it has its own complex history and remarkable spiritual power acknowledged now by hundreds of Palestinian Christians including top leaders like the Melkite Catholic Archbishop of the Holy Land Dioceses."
Your quote here commits the Argumentum Ad Verecundiam Fallacy.
Third: Sonoman: "Celestial Torah Christianity is not a new organized religion but only a historical pattern there for all to find and marvel at the consistency of the Messianic Idea coming down to us intact now through 4000 years of diabolical religious interference."
This quote here commits the Appeal to Tradition Fallacy.
More diversionary b.s. How on earth do you think Acharya or any author, historian, scientist, writer shows any historic pattern if not by referencing it to historical reports showing degrees of popularity? How does a sociologist for example come to arrive at social behavioral judgments without surveying the popularity of ideas in particular populations? That ancients believed and used astrology in their religious beliefs that were foundational to their social systems is based on the archeological evidence where non-astrological beliefs are not to be found.
I would have kept going, but as I said originally, the vast majority already commits the Ipse Dixit fallacy, it's simply unsupported assertion. Essentially, 100% of what you type is illogical. Not just by the layman's definition of the word, but truly illogical.
Crummy putdowns are still crummy putdowns and as anyone can see this one is particularly irrelevant because every item I've placed in logical sequence is a well-known item of history to those who look. I didn't invent the Zodiac, I didn't invent the Celestial Torah based on Taurowet spiritual meaning of establishing a Way, a Teaching, based on astrological meaning of Zodiac components, especially the Saturn and Aquarius ones for the Jewish/Christian belief systems. You are still using arguments that don't apply, e.g. this Ipse-Dixit one, because I'm not creating anything myself but only pointing out a clear historical pattern in which astrological elements and meaning are being transmitted through time and space in ancient religious instruction, the Christian branch of which has been reestablished with the Celestial Torah's recovery.
I believe it's because you have no idea what Logic actually means. You've misused and abused the word so many times, then go on to commit a fallacy in every other sentence you type.
Still waiting for answers to my questions starting with how human brains come to have spiritual reception capability hardwired into them if there's no spiritual phenomena there to process as you atheists claim.