what you should be asking is... why is it that the moon does not need awareness?.....

the answer to this is that the living creatures, plants and organisms have (a lifeforce) or conciousness ( holy wind ) put into them from tao ( holy wind ).
whereas, the moon is a lifeless entity like an artist creates a sculpture
but the artist is part of the whole picture that tao had made.

tao is the source of lifeforce that exists in all living things also - it is where the conciousness comes from - tao created creatures and their lifeforce was made to be in its own image.

this lifeforce is the distinction from living things and dead things.
it is also the reason why man cannot create life from the individual elements.
life comes from life, never has it been created from something dead.

your belief in tao has the same logic as believing that everything living comes from an unconcious origin - from nothing but potential

you seem to be suggesting dead things such as the moon has life even though it is dead.

there is no logic in "tao" being merely potential - its an active and co-existance presence with conciousness that has always been there and is the greatest one..

and that "i am" thing, actually if you were to read the original language you will find
that it was written in one word and not two words as you suggest.
"i am" is an english interpretation from one word.

tao is more than just a singularity of potential, it is also an active force - the supreme force - creator of all beauty and life.

have you ever heard of any event happening from potential alone?

tao is active also - not only potential - tao created a beginning. contines to create and will continue to create. tao is the alpha and omega - the beginning and the end.

by the way, i am a taoist, but maybe not with all of your perceptions...

but i cannot see any such difference between tao and god.

many people pursue faith in this way because they have a weak faith -

i find you as intelligent - more than of average intelligence, and i have very much enjoyed your views- maybe it is same view, just that we are not able to describe it the same way ?

This is assuming there is logic in tao in the first place and considering its an unproven theory, i guess this explanation goes right out the window....

God may not know the meaning of life, we may be the experiment to which the question gets answered.

sorry stonestingue but i dont agree...

you are getting god/ allah etc mixed up with tao.

tao is spirit, it does not consist of any created thing as water in a stream as such.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao

so there is no thing as tao as such as how you perceive it.

tao, god and allah, etc are the same thing, call it nothing if you will.....people created their own belief/non-belief, whether they believe in religion or not.
and tao does have awareness, tao is the conciousness of everything and where everything had originated.

beauty is perceived within the mind of living consciousness never by anything else.

so there is no thing as tao as such as how you perceive it

if it does, give me an example then.... how could tao ever possibly create the beauty in all things without awareness?

everything that exists actually cames from a single infintely powerful and creative conciousness (tao or god/allah or mysterious force).

the gods or deities you refer to are all created by man just as are all other spirits created by men to divert man from the one true spirit (tao, god, allah, etc).

Pssst.... When someone speaks to you inside your head... It's not always God and it might be time for your meds.

although what you have said suggests that all gods are created or born from tao.
this does not make any sense and is not logical.
if tao is so powerful to create all things, then why couldnt tao manifest itself as a single force of creation or entity as such described as god or allah or jesus (tao having given up power to exists as a human on earth).

According to Taoists we are all just physical manifestations of the Tao meaning Jesus was no more closer to the source than any of us.

what has birthed or created tao? this just isnt logical...

if tao is so powerful to create all things, then why couldnt tao manifest itself as a single force of creation or entity as such described as god or allah or jesus (tao having given up power to exists as a human on earth).

tao must be the same as god/allah - the creator of all things...

afterall, the one true god - if it exists - isnt supposed to be created.

how could any created god be anything else but a false one?

isnt tao the same as jesus christ - just that it is personalised?

according to christians jesus is the alpha and the omega - meaning the beginning and the end - is it the same as tao?

isnt tao what others call god, allah, etc?

or is it that tao is that common domain where mysterious force exists?

mostly, i find it frustrating not to be able to looking at things from the same perspective as others.
i think i probably have the same view of the whole thing as you, only from a different perspective.

however, there doesnt appear to be anything in this universe that has been discovered that exist in a cycle that is stable and without change.
for example the dinosaurs among other creatures are extinct.
they have no birth/life/death cycle anymore as part of the evolution of life on earth.

i also believe there is a multiverse, and only one. also that it exist as muliple universes.
if there is such a thing as perpetual motion, then it would exist in the multiverse as a whole i suppose.

but this is where i different somewhat to what you have presented, i believe that we are trapped in a single universe as part of the living human experience.

it is within that imaginary or pseudo dimension where the mysterious force or wind behind the beginning of the multiverse predominantly resides.

however i dont belive that the multiverse will continue to exist forever necessarily, it could end completely and then be rebirthed again.

THE LAW OF INFINITY
David Adamson


**Sameness and difference must be observed in all things absolutely from a perspective neither subjective or objective. In other words, you have to feel it.**

There must be something everything has in common. (uniqueness or change)
There can not be two things exactly alike. (snowflakes, sand grains, universes)

One must be able to accomplish all.
All must accommodate the one.

Every(one)thing eventually must become the one(sum of all things).
Every(one)thing eventually must become nothing (no thing).

No thing can dictate to the one or the all.
No thing can be better than anything else.
When one thing is added, everything must change.

As soon as there is change, there must be difference.
No thing may stay the same forever.

For all to be enlightened, one must stay in the dark.
For one to be enlightened, all must have been in the dark

There is always and will never be all paradoxes.
Paradox is the realization of absolute confusion or change of set patterns.(One is truly the loneliest number).
When confusion(chaos) is added, everything changes(moves, grows, ect…)

A new cycle continues for the new change as all accommodate the one and one accomplishes all.

The many universes equals one multiverse. Conservational laws are saved in a multiverse and do not apply to universes one by one.

Multi mutiverses are covered by the paradox.

Potential energy is the great constant (or "nothing" is absolute). It makes way for change (or space for time).

“Have fun and don’t hurt anyone, but let no one hurt you.

We have learned all we need to about the Age of Suffering."

if God made the earth and all ........Why was every thing that was made , was made so imperfect.

if everything is so cyclic, wheres is your proof?

give us a proven and tested example of perpetual motion then.....

The overbearing attitude of man continues, we basically have no idea how the Universe started, it's limits or it's purpose. We only know what we grasp or basis of fact as we understand at this given moment in time. Scientists have found only newer questions behind the answers to each problem.

We cannot comprehend nothing, we cannot comprehend existence before time, we struggle with the concept of time parsay.

If divine why a universe so vast just for us?

If accident, what was the cause?

If purpose, whose or what?

I agree on one thing, we in our lifetime are not going to know

I like my uniqueness and I wouldn't want to put my other self though the mind-f*** of being the cloned one, seems selfish.

Thats strange cuz I've been quoting from what I have been reading. I do agree with you about the ONE thing, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_in_Buddhism

Some consider that the concept of the unreality of "reality" is confusing. They posit that, in Buddhism, the perceived reality is considered illusory not in the sense that reality is a fantasy or unreal, but that our perceptions and preconditions mislead us to believe that we are separate from the elements that we are made of. Reality, in Buddhist thought, would be described as the manifestation of karma, part of the process of impermanence, similar to the Hindu concept of Maya.
Other schools of thought in Buddhism (e.g., Dzogchen), consider perceived reality literally unreal. As a prominent contemporary teacher puts it: "In a real sense, all the visions that we see in our lifetime are like a big dream [...]".[1] In this context, the term 'visions' denotes not only visual perceptions, but appearances perceived through all senses, including sounds, smells, tastes and tactile sensations.

According to the Buddhists reality as we see it is an illusion as everything same from nothing.

Our different views are simply I believe in a spiritual world and you do not, thus our different views on many issues.

I believe God is waiting on us to deal with it and not the other way around.

Many get up everyday with the attitude, "Maybe I can do something today to make it better for someone, anyone, for we all need better."

Hey, I used to deal with sexual abuse of children. If that is not evil, then I don't know what is.

Reminds me of something I read regarding lessons that Buddha gave his students.

I think Buddha's lesson with the lotus flower is tied to the nature of that flower's growth. It uses the resources of the mud deep below the pond to feed the strength it takes to reach it's stage of blossoming atop the surface of the pond.

"Good cannot exist without evil, and if one accepts the notion of God then, on the other hand, one must postulate a devil likewise. This is balance. This duality is my life... [I]t really is very simple: white and black, day and night - the artist lives on these."M.C. Escher.

The basic theory in yin-yang is that nothing is so permanent as never to change. In other words, when activity (yang) reaches the extreme point, it becomes inactivity and inactivity forms yin. Extreme inactivity will-in the same way-return to become activity, which is yang. Activity then is the cause of inactivity and vice versa. This system of complementary increasing and decreasing of the principle is continuous. From this one can see thhat the two forces, although they appear to be in conflict, in reality are mutually interdependant. Instead of opposition, there is cooperation and alternation.

The common mistake of the western world is to identify these two forces as dualistic; that is yang being the opposite of yin and vice versa. At best they see the two forces as cause and effect but not paired like light and shadow.

nothing comes from nothing.

It make no sense (to me) to think that we came from nothing or that we came from a Creator. And where did the Creator come from? Energy can only be transformed.

A circle has no beginning and no end. Neither does a square. And so on.

Space exists only as objects.

Time exists only as movement between objects.

An object alone cannot cannot exist, therefore a God cannot exist.

Infinite regression is.

I wouldn't be surprised that if an identity small enough is observed close enough, that it's behaviour is capable of existing using the fewest resources possible to exist in the most states at once and is existing in the 4th dimension quite efficiently. So efficiently that we can't even use the 4th dimension to properly observe it.

Another point to be made on expansion would be this. If the further out in space you look the further back in time you see, there for would not the acceleration be a result of the aftermath of the big bang itself and not, as scientist suggest, be the current state or the future state of the universe?

Which in turn brings about another interesting question, given that all of the matter in the known and unknown universe was all in this first and single singularity, what velocity was required for all of that matter to escape without it all falling back in on itself? Faster than light perhaps?

There are various interpretations of Quantum Physics. You're gonna have to be more clear with what you mean by "Matter is illusion".

most people are good people and encourage others so that is good enough for me.
perhaps its enough for the created god, not up to anyone to judge anyhow.

But everything has a starting point, right? The something must have come from something, but where did that something come from?

If you believe all we are is nothing more than physical bodies that evolved such that our brains have reach a state of ultimate understanding then you are coming up way short.

Good and evil have been around since the beginning and will be around until the end of our world as we know it.

How can one really exist in our world without the other?

So my point is there was an existence before our world as we know it and there will be an existence after our world as we know it. There is a reality called eternity and thus open ended on each side.

Unfortunately that will not happen until the end of this age. Of course buying into that depends on your beliefs about the Prince of Darkness.

So you are saying Hilter was not evil, he just lacked compassion.

Wasn't me that said it.... I'm with you

That your physical body will die and decay is an absolute truth. Again people differ as to what we consist of. Some think physical only, some think physical plus some continued existence after physical death and maybe coming back in some new physical form, some physical and eternally spiritual.

Do we ever reach a state where evil is no longer an issue?

[can you name me one thing that doesn't change ...}
Death

Comparing Wiki to the dictionary is absurd. I can post something on Wiki but the publishers of my dictionary somehow failed to consult me.

Wiki is someone out there's opinion and is subject to rebuttal. Check the Wiki guidelines.

"all is relative" denies absolute truth which by definite is anything but relative

I also believe it all really does come down to good vs evil. From my port-of-view, it appears evil is winning.

Not true, I am not aware of any scientific data validating Buddhist teachings or thought. Consider the "Noble Truths" and the "Eight-Fold Path."

Buddhism and science are generally considered to be compatible with each other, especially compared to the conflict between science and the Abrahamic religions. Buddhism itself, being generally neutral on the subject of the supernatural, is open to scientific discoveries. With its focus on the nature of mind and its implications for the concept of reality, Buddhism offers explanations for metaphysical issues within psychology and studies of consciousness. Some popular conceptions of Buddhism connect it to discourse regarding evolution, quantum theory, and cosmology, though most scientists see a separation between the religious and metaphysical statements of Buddhism and the methodology of science.[citation needed] Nevertheless, commonalities have been cited between scientific investigation and Buddhist thought. The Dalai Lama, in a speech at the meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, listed a "suspicion of absolutes" and a reliance on causality and empiricism as common philosophical principles shared between Buddhism and science.[1] As both Buddhism and science are open to criticism from within, there is some disagreement over whether one is being badly influenced by the other.

God himself cannot give life to a rock, eh? Hm.

I believe such a thing to be a crackpot statement due to the simply irrefutable laws of logic. Logic dictates that nothing can be created out of nothing and every event needs to have a starting point.

Einstein proved that matter and energy are one and the same, you cannot destroy energy, the energy just changes form.

Why do you need to use the speed of light as apart of the equation?

Ok...just try to follow me here, before you go screaming....
1st let's start with a mistranslation in the Bible...the part where is tells how God took a rib from Adam to create Eve....the actual translation of that says that God split Adam in half to create Eve...

soo....if God created us in his image.....& then before God split Adam in half....wouldn't he have been both male & female...aka...a morphodite?

Why is it that today the person would be deemed insane and in those days it was no so?

The only circumstance I can imagine that might cause psychiatric concern is one where the subjects' conversations with God were leading to antisocial behaviour, such as sharpening a long screwdriver and setting out for the red light district to clean the streets..

"That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below to do the miracles of one only thing"

"And as all things have been & arose from one by the meditation of one"

so all things have their birth from this one thing by adaptation.

I ment it as:
Does any have experiences where what we percieve as "GOD" actually came and contacted us in some way, shape or form?

If you really feel the need to disagree with Relativity (as I indicated in my last post, a concept that dates back to the Ancient Greeks, predating Christianity and medieval concepts of cosmology by centuries) you should probably read Einstein's own words on the subject for yourself:

1970's "scientists" scoffed at the idea life could exist in the deepest oceans. And I don't just mean by saying 'well it isn't proven so until we have evidence we won't believe it' the idea was ridiculed. (that's just one example of many).

Examples of the scientific community being dogmatic abound, and there are plenty that claim the label "atheist" who are dogmatic, and some who are more dogmatic than any "believer" I've ever met.

In an ideal world Science would be "zero dogmatic", but it's not an ideal world. The humans keep getting in the way.

I have chopped off and fwb relationships that I have had. Broken a heart or two as well. My friends totally think I'm lame now that I've found my "new found glory"

I've even bruised some friendships in the terms that "we shouldn't be unequally yoked with unbelievers" by telling them that I can't be friends or date someone who isn't a Christian.

With all of this new found glory, I feel like crap, my friends think I think that I am better than them. I'm depressed to the point where I stay at home, work out mon- friday, eat, paint, and lay down for hours.

The thing is, I've know most of the people in my church for years and I don't find pleasure in fellowshipping with any of them! There is nothing really going on in my church and I don't have a drive to start something.

And everyone knows that as a Christian, you aren't supposed to crave those things, that you are to take off your daily selves and take on the cross.

Personally, I don't believe in not associating with my friends just because they don't believe what I do, that just seems selfish to me.

I can offer my opinions in hopes to save their souls but why should I have to worry about the after life?

Do you think my beliefs caused my depression?

Could the creator make a rock, that they could not lift?

Which raises the question... is the prefix 'omni' a limitless limitation or an attribute?

Indeed, our experiments show that matter cannot be created, but we only need to see one experiment which shows that yes, it can be created, and if that experiment holds water (commonly replicable and showing consistent results) then we have to revise this truth we formed about matter and energy.

However, I meant it a bit differently. Imagine a three dimensional space; it contains an infinite number of two-dimensional spaces, which we call planes.

If a point is on Plane A, and we remove it from there and move the point to Plane B, then we can easily do it, as we have a three-dimensional space that allows us to effect such movement. The point then will not be created or destroyed, but moved from Plane A to Plane B.

Now imagine a three-dimensional space and matter in it. If reality consists of one four-dimensional space and an infinite number of three-dimensional spaces, then you can move matter from one three-dimensional space to another quite possibly, since the four-dimensional space that contains all three-dimensional spaces allows the movement because it provides interconnectedness between the three dimensional spaces.

The beauty of this model is that nobody is forced to be able to imagine a or visualize of conceptualize a four-dimensional space in order to see how the model works. All we need to do to understand this is to move the analogy of a three-dimensional space containing inifinite two-dimensional spaces, to another level, where a four-dimensional space contains an infinite amount of three-dimensional spaces. Once you establish that an N+1 dimensional space provides continuity between the N dimensional infinite number of spaces it contains, then you just need to see that and N+2 dimensional space provides continuity between N+1 dimensional spaces.

Existence is therefor the path along intersecting probabilities, along the threshold of potential brought into existence by its inevitability. That is to say, things happen.

There was no "before the Big Bang." Time didn't exist until after. Neither did Space, Matter, or Energy.

The Big Bang is the starting point for Everything.

Since faith and confidence are the necessary ingredients toward the realization of any ideal, how do you maintain faith and belief in your own potential as a human being ?

Do you believe that courage develops from faith? If so, in which way?

In a Pantheism it's the same thing. They believe THEIR gods are correct. For instance, the gods of Germanic myth don't fit into the hierarchy of the Greek pantheon and Pagans don't worship (or even believe in) Odin or Zeus.

So we could argue that everything is determined, but we are just not conscious of it nor do we know enough to explain "random" events.