Blog Stats
429Total Entries
223Total Comments
Search Blogs

Advanced search (keyword or author)
Random Blog Entries
Connection between Language and concept by Anonymous on April 3rd, 2012, 6:50 pm
"Love, Happiness, Truth" perhaps even the word "God" can be understood on many levels. Considering the levels at which "Love" can be understood, the highest understanding of love in our English language seems to be "Union." Perhaps there is a higher understanding (state) of love but there is no word in our language to describe that state. Do we need a word to describe this higher state of love before we can understand it and experience that state? If so, what do you believe the word should be? Is it "subjective expansion" as one person suggests, and, if so, what does that mean?

"Happiness" is also difficult to describe cause it means different things to different people, from a sense of mild contentment to ecstatic joy. Is there a word that describes (not temporary sense of satisfaction, well being) a state pf pervasive, ongoing "Happiness" that permeate the feeling of "All is well?"

I recently composed...

1 Comment Viewed 954 times

Letter 8 by Anonymous on January 19th, 2012, 9:56 am
I ended the last letter by saying that I wanted to move on in this letter to a piece of the puzzle that would bring my Matrix analogy out of the movies and into reality. However, that is going to have to wait. I’m getting ahead of myself.

I revealed an incidence in the last letter about when I questioned God regarding his making of the Earth. He told me that he purposely made it in such a manner that there would be viable evidence on both sides of the debate so as to allow for faith to be tested (one choice is no choice). What I want to do now is analyze the major theories of Science with respect to the origin of the Universe and Nature against this concept and my Matrix analogy. The theories I will analyze are, The Theory of Evolution, The Big Bang Theory, and the theories that come from Quantum Mechanics (I can’t find have been given proper names yet). I will address these theories one at a time.

To set the stage, let me review a bit. Adding what I learned from God into my Matrix ana...

0 Comments Viewed 428 times

Quantum Gravity Part 1 by Anonymous on December 14th, 2012, 6:13 am
1. Where did we go wrong?

This quantum gravity model of the universe proceeds from some basic principles of fundamental logic. In that sense I regard the problem of quantum gravity as a conceptual one, as opposed to a physical one, but this conceptual approach has profound consequences for the laws of physics.

A quantum theory of gravity cannot be contained within the current conceptual framework of physics. General relativity and quantum mechanics both make predictions about our universe which violate the most fundamental law of reality. Matters must proceed in an orderly fashion. An event can only occur if it has been made to occur by a previous event. This chain of causality must be traceable all the way back to the most fundamental units of reality. A random occurrence, anywhere in this causal chain, is a conceptual absurdity, because this broken chain of causality thus renders the universe incomprehensible. Yet we comprehend it. The philosophy of the bloody...

5 Comments Viewed 4778 times

Glenn Beck's "Restoring Honor" Rally - Interviews by Sisyphus on September 2nd, 2010, 8:07 pm
0 Comments Viewed 5817 times

The Problem of Heaven by Anonymous on April 28th, 2010, 1:27 pm
Alvin Plantinga gloats that he illuminates how the free will defense overcomes what Epicurus states about the logical problem of evil that God and evil are incompatible. No, because the problem of Heaven eviscerates his solution. With my friend, David Ramsay Steele, I inquires how can it be consistent not to have free will on Earth and a guarantee not to do wrong as t'is the way of Heaven? This poses no hobgoblin of little minds.
This eviscerates John Hick's guesswork of free will and soul-making. He uses the straw men of the all or nothing fallacy and the slippery slope one to prattle that we insist that one be like the other. We atheologians find that his guess boomerangs onto him as he defines Heaven as bliss, so we insist that if that is so , then why not here also?
He claims that we must perforce have free will and be able to do wrong so as to form our characters freely, soul-making thereby.
Nelson Pike expatiates in an essay in "God and...


0 Comments Viewed 348 times

Who is online

Registered users currently online: Google Adsense [Bot], Google [Bot]