|
Post by jonbain on Oct 2, 2019 16:16:46 GMT
Consider that at some point, that The God was omnipotent.
But being able to do anything is worthless without doing everything. So The God decides to give up being omnipotent as being something that he has not done up until that point.
Woops.
Too late.
Cannot go back now because that would contradict his decision to give up being omnipotent. Breaking his consciousness into pieces and giving his power to other Souls at the same time therefore goes against his being omnipotent, in order to affirm that very same feature of his being.
ps The term 'The God' was used by Socrates, and thus is symbolic of a discussion of The God of philosophy, not that of religion. The Socratic 'religion/philosophy' is thus properly monotheistic.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Oct 2, 2019 18:02:07 GMT
Consider that at some point, that The God was omnipotent. But being able to do anything is worthless without doing everything. So The God decides to give up being omnipotent as being something that he has not done up until that point. Woops. Too late. Cannot go back now because that would contradict his decision to give up being omnipotent. Breaking his consciousness into pieces and giving his power to other Souls at the same time therefore goes against his being omnipotent, in order to affirm that very same feature of his being. ps The term 'The God' was used by Socrates, and thus is symbolic of a discussion of The God of philosophy, not that of religion. The Socratic 'religion/philosophy' is thus properly monotheistic. 1. God is an indefinite term, contradictory by nature and non contradictive. Contradictory in the respect the term is divisive as it progresses to other terms. Non contradictory as it is a self sustained singular context. 2. As indefinite, God as a term is empty and formless thus not only assumed but is assumptive by nature considering both God and assumption are inherently formless. 3. Formlessness cannot be compared to formlessness without some dividing context which in itself is formless. The division of any formlessness results it form. For example the variable P is formless as it is subject to equivocation. It is divided into a repeated variable through P=P where the repition allows the form of a loop. But "=" is the inherent middle of the "form", and in turn is formless. 4. God as both formless and form reflects through assumption where assumption is an image of God as both a static form and dynamic quality. All assumptions exist through further assumption, thus assumption as fundamentally formless negates itself as a loop which as empty reassures itself through a progression of loops. This statement may sound "deep" so here is a simple example. A blank sand dunes assumes a rock dropped on to it. This Rock is assumed by the sand and becomes embedded in the sand, where through the course of time it breaks down into the sand while the sand turns to rocks. One empty state assumes a form, this form becomes an empty state but this form continues through the inherent empty state. An observer may have no opinion, be imprinted by an experience and this experience acts as the pattern that the person further assumes existence...much like filter where a circular context assumes further circular contexts. All phenomena, as existing through repeated movements, are circular. 5. This nature of contexts assuming further contexts through an intrinsic emptiness necessitates the 24 philosophers definition of God while being extended to God as Assuming himself through all things as himself but not limited to such assumptions. This self assumption, a connection of all in all through all, necessitates God as love for love is connection as an absense of seperation reflected through omnipresent contexts of the loop. 6. God is omnipresent through infinite contexts as loops for God is a sphere (recursion of circles) "whose center is everywhere but circumference is nowhere". This is reflected, repeated through the assumption of assumptions, that is characteristic of man's rational qualities embodied through self reflection as the assumption of assumptions. This assumption of assumptions is a loop with a circumference that is nowhere and assumption intrinsically present as an inherent center. 7. "God is not mocked, for what a man sows so shall he reap" embodies the Golden rule, which reflects itself through a variety of contexts in which the subject object dichotomy is eradicate by a loop between the subject and object. This "action", where the subject forms the object and the object forms the subject, is intrinsically self judging much in the same manner a man forms the house and the house which is formed forms the mans life. This loop is further reflected in the nature of existence as intrinsically empty, "from the dust man is formed and to the dust man shall return", and a perpetual middle reflected in Christian theology where God becomes a mediator, that "became empty and took form", while encapsulating sin without become sin through a self sacrifice of the self to the self (which is a loop).
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Oct 2, 2019 18:09:04 GMT
Consider that at some point, that The God was omnipotent. But being able to do anything is worthless without doing everything. So The God decides to give up being omnipotent as being something that he has not done up until that point. Woops. Too late. Cannot go back now because that would contradict his decision to give up being omnipotent. Breaking his consciousness into pieces and giving his power to other Souls at the same time therefore goes against his being omnipotent, in order to affirm that very same feature of his being. ps The term 'The God' was used by Socrates, and thus is symbolic of a discussion of The God of philosophy, not that of religion. The Socratic 'religion/philosophy' is thus properly monotheistic. Triadic. God existing through materiality and beyond materiality. Socrates stance diverging to the dualism of Platonic Unity and Socratic "manyness" observes God as both one and many, thus necessitating a triadic stance akin to the pythagorean concept of 3 being the first number. 1 existing through 1 observes 2 as three, with all quantities existing through 1, 2 and 3. 1 dualism observes three numbers. 1 set of 2 sets. All quantities are recurssion of sets much in the the same manner 1 orange and 1 orange observes 2 They're nasty and evil as 1 set of They're nasty and evil with each orange being a set. Each set as a loop, much in the same manner counting is the looping of a phenomenon observes 1 as an intrinsically empty context equivalent to zero. Applying this to the definition of God we can observe this as God being the beginning and end (a loop) and all and nothing. This triadic nature can be observed in Socrates dialogues with phaedrus where "the gods" (anthropomorphized cycles of existence ranging from natural laws to the rhythmic perspectives of mans reason and intuition (war, economy, family, etc.)) revolve and "drink" around the formless "one" which not only sustains the "many" gods (contexts as cycles of exidtence) but exists through them.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Oct 2, 2019 18:20:16 GMT
In shorter more direct terms: God is both omnipotent and beyond omnipotence as omnipotence is a context that both as a term and actuality is intrinsically empty.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Oct 2, 2019 18:40:23 GMT
gibbly gobbly bobbly nobbly
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Oct 2, 2019 18:49:54 GMT
gibbly gobbly bobbly nobbly If one steps back and looks at this situation, you are the one making up words now...by all appearances if one steps back one can see a man making random grumbling sounds. So who is the real sophist? Or are you going to respond with the "made up": "gibbly, gobble, bubbly, nobbly"? Rofl! Predictable madman, alway grunting and growning... nothing new but gibberish and accusations. A loop of obscure thinking perpetually revolving around what? Wait...he gives a lucid answer to his state of being: "spiritual anarchy". Keep stuttering away, I am still waiting for how you reconcile newton's laws with aristotelian identity properties while calling yourself rational. And then you will complain this post is too long and is a filibuster...but the word I believe you are looking for is "polemic".
|
|