You condemn yourself with your own argument against me. haha have a good day
Printable View
You condemn yourself with your own argument against me. haha have a good day
Why the hate? I think it's great when I run into people who even care about philosophy. Most people are too shallow to get into this kind of topic. You should be thankful for people who have philosophical ideas other than what was crammed into them as kids and who care about more than what their social image and wall paper look like.
Sorry for my message earlier... I was in a really bad mood that day. Thats really not much of an excuse but anyway...
Its not the fact that you have a philosophy like that that bugs me. Its the presentation, where it seems that you claim to have it all figured out that makes me a little irritated.
But I'll keep out, and let you get back to your discussing.
The Creator is nothing. The creator has all power. The creator is the cause of reality. The creator does not need God or Satan or Lucifer or the light or the dark or the truth or the lie. The creator does not need you or me or you name it. The creator does not need it.
Alright.
I'm not sure in which direction this discussion can go from here.
Though, your first sentence confuses me to an extent. How can this creator be nothing, but also all powerful? Would you except that a creator who is nothing is non-existent? It seems that any outside force of creation could not be labeled as "nothing," since they'd inherently have to be "something" in order to exist.
I have a blog with lots more words. Nothing at all is what this reality is.
Is this serious mate? Or did you mean to post it in senseless banter?
Nothing is serious. LOL My creator is nothing and is all powerful I am free and totaly dependent on the sacred creator. love is here.
Love can be quite serious indeed
Love can be senseless banter so...
haha at least you've made me laugh. Are you high?
I have been clean and sober for 13 years. I graduated AA LOL I don't need em
Steven, your threads are pretty pointless. Each one that you've made here in R/S are essentially the same. They say similar things and they are similarly lacking in anything discussable. Why don't you stick to just one thread of pointless rambling, huh?
Your last three threads have been merged into one. In the future, try to decide if a thread you want to post is really just a reiteration of what is in here. If you find that this is the case, just post it in this thread. If you do have a new topic of discussion in mind, feel free to start a new thread for it.
What is a thing in itself? Bells theorem becuse of contrafactual definiteness or non locality failing suggets that all is one or better yet all is none.