"God is not inside things in the sense of physical penetration and is not outside them in the sense of physical exclusion. Times do not keep company with Him, and implements do not help Him. His Being precedes times. His Existence precedes non-existence and His eternity precedes beginning. By His creating the senses it is known that He has no senses. By the contraries in various matters it is known that He has no contrary, and by the similarity between things it is known that there is nothing similar to Him. He has made light the contrary of darkness, brightness that of gloom, dryness that of moisture and heat that of cold. He produces affection among inimical things." - Ali (pbuh)
Thought. Thought, itself, being something metaphysical.. and something which enables our cognizant reality.
There is nothing indicating that thought has any basis in anything but the physical word. Your response was a complete nonanswer.
Thought is energy... as well as the physical; yet, thought doesn't confrom to the rigid structure of 3 dimensional time and space, but, what's "physical" does. And, again, "Man" is a metaphysical idea, and more than physical flesh, i.e., energy slowed downed to a more rigid vibration...
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? - Epicurus
Energy is physical as well, they are not seperate... What is your basis in saying that thought does not conform to the physical world?
That makes a little sense to me since i believe everything that is spiritual is in a world without space and time. Don't really need space and time in the afterlife do we?
I know of this quote... for I used to admire Epicurus' philosophy... and I still do, in some respects. Now, to ur point about Good and Evil -- It's like a parent allowing his or her child to get burned, so that they can a learn a real lesson for them-self. Now, some will turn around and ask, with an arrogant scorn, why a parent, or God, would allow His child, who He loves so much, to get burnt? He's a terrible parent for letting the child endure this pain when He could of prevented it in the first place. Yet, the very people who make this objection are the very same people who demand freedom, and will spit on anyone who dares to question their autonomy. I want freedom, but I'm mad at God for allowing me to be free... smh! U should of been kept in the darkness in the first place; wait, u still are. A parent allowing his or her child to experience things which aren't "conducive" to its existence, when in reality they are, isn't a bad thing -- For pleasure is highlighted by pain, i.e., opposites give definition to each other! How can u know what darkness is without also experiencing the light? To know the good, we must experience the bad, i.e., this world of perceptual deception (yet, God has given us the faculty of the reflective mind to discern, intricately, right from wrong, left from right, black from white, etc.., so it's not too bad).
Can u not imagine urself sitting on the sun? and then, cognitively, beam ur self to the moon with a donkey who smokes the ganja? Thought moves at the speed of light... and DOES NOT EXTEND, AND IS NOT EXTEDNED, WITH 3 DIMENSIONAL FORM LIKE THIS COMPUTER BEFORE ME! i.e., thoughts AREN'T "physical".
Thought does not move at the speed of light, though it is pretty damn fast. There is nothing to indicate that thought is anything more than physical reactions from internal and external stimuli. By your logic, grasscity is metaphysical phenomenon and not simply a program on a computer.
1.) Yes, but what is autonomously galvanizing these thoughts... such as me smoking with a donkey? It surely isn't a physical reaction to extenral stimuli.. 2.) Yes, u could say that... the thoughts and energy which we exchange, i.e., the info and thoughts we exchange, isn't occuring in the physical, but they are enabled by the physical, i.e., the program on the computer and me empirically experiencing the computer.
What if you were to apply the same concept to a larger scale. Rather than a child simply getting burnt, how about that same child being burnt to the point of disfigurement or even death? Why would God allow such a tragedy to occur when he could easily have prevented it from ever happening? There can really only be two possible answers; either he is not omnipotent, or he is malevolent. I would never wish this upon my own child for the sake of him or her experiencing what it would be like.
1.) Exactly... u would demand that ur child should view what's good in the sense u see fit; my parents think it's bad for me to smoke, but is it really? U want freedom... but aren't ready to understand true freedom yet, i.e., the freedom to discern what's right and what's wrong FOR URSELF.--Without pain, pleasure has no real meaning or depth... 2.) This goes into a whole different subject... if experience isn't all about the flesh, then God can grant those subject's of injustice eternal bliss; again, eternal bliss' true worth was enabled by the subject's prior experience of injustice.