The New Science of God

Status
Not open for further replies.
James R said:
Apostic777:

I'm not seeing much science in your "science of God", so far. Do you have any?

You said that "everything is in consciousness". What, then, is "reality"? Is it distinct from consciousness, or part of it?

Whose consciousness is everything in? Yours? Or is that where the God comes in?

Is it a thing, or an abstract mathematical model of a thing?

That's not at all obvious to me, just from thinking about it. Can you prove it?

So, the source of, say, Mount Everest is within all of us.

How did Mount Everest get out of all of us?

Also, it seems to me that individual human beings don't last forever. In fact, science thinks that Mount Everest was here before there were any human beings. So, where was the source of Mount Everest when there was no "all of us"?

Are you able to access it? Do you experience Christ consciousness? What is it?

What's an endomorphism?

And I take it you're not going to show me the actual math. Why not? Have you actually done any math for your "science of God"?

Are reality and consciousness both the same thing, then? Why two words for the same thing?

Doee the math show this?

You don't know you're correct, then? Your "science of God" is incomplete and/or untested?

How do you know? Does the math show that?

What do you mean by "entangled", in this context?

Isn't it your claim that the mind and reality are the same thing?

Can you please link me to the logical proof, then?

Thanks.

I can't find any agreement by scientists than the universe is like a computer. Can you help?

Who discovered it? Was the discovery published? Where can I read about this discovery?

Who proved that the universe has a boundary? Where is the boundary? Where can I read about this?

I asked you how you define it. You don't need to worry about how I can define it, for now.

What do you mean by "within". Is there something outside consciousness? Or did you mean to say that everything is consciousness? Your meaning is not very clear.

Please post the relevant empirical data (or links to it) and the chain of logical that proves your claim.

Thanks.

So you're yet to find an actual logical argument. You're just trying to find one?

Nah. I prefer to think of frequency in the usual scientific way. Frequency isn't energy.

You didn't tell me the frequency of reality in Hertz. Why not? Did you forget? Or haven't you worked it out yet?

I look forward to seeing some actual science in your next reply, Apostic777. Because, so far, you haven't posted any.

Also, when are you going to explain your science of God? So far, you've talked about minds and consciousness and "reality" (whatever that is), but not at all about God, although you did mention something you called "Christ consciousness".

Where's your science of God?
Click to expand...


Greetings James R!

I apologize if my response left a lot to be desired. I do not currently possess the requisite intelligence to support my 3 claims in the OP. But at some point I shall, mark my words. I want to clear the air of any distortions of truth. I think I will free everyone of my graceless demands and sit this one out for the time being. I can admit to the error of my ways.

Thank you everyone, and James R for humoring me,

Nick.
 
Apostic777 said:
Greetings James R!

I apologize if my response left a lot to be desired. I do not currently possess the requisite intelligence to support my 3 claims in the OP. But at some point I shall, mark my words. I want to clear the air of any distortions of truth. I think I will free everyone of my graceless demands and sit this one out for the time being. I can admit to the error of my ways.

Thank you everyone, and James R for humoring me,

Nick.
Click to expand...

I think this should be carved in marble, framed, and hung on the front page for all to see as an exemplar of good faith posting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C C
Apostic777 said:
I think I will free everyone of my graceless demands and sit this one out for the time being. I can admit to the error of my ways.
Click to expand...
"for the time being" My bold above.
After saying that, the very next post is you still going on about it...

Apostic777 said:
P.S. The higher dimension contains the separation. Effecting the non-separation.
Click to expand...
So, even though your socks have been banned here numerous times, you still intend to post sometime here again as Apostic777 or as another sock?
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
I think this should be carved in marble, framed, and hung on the front page for all to see as an exemplar of good faith posting.
Click to expand...
That's water off a duck's back to Spellbound, lying for Spellbound's personal model of a god is morally justified in his books.
The impulses are just too strong in this one.
How many impulses, count the socks.
 
Last edited:
DaveC426913 said:
I think this should be carved in marble, framed, and hung on the front page for all to see as an exemplar of good faith posting.
Click to expand...

Would be a meritorious accomplishment for a genuine newbie to SF. But unless "Nick" is purely coincidence, humility is probably a very necessary first step that a "veteran banee" has to demonstrate in a gradual process of achieving redemption at SF.
_
 
Apostic777/Spellbound/Nick:
Apostic777 said:
Greetings James R!

I apologize if my response left a lot to be desired. I do not currently possess the requisite intelligence to support my 3 claims in the OP. But at some point I shall, mark my words. I want to clear the air of any distortions of truth. I think I will free everyone of my graceless demands and sit this one out for the time being. I can admit to the error of my ways.

Thank you everyone, and James R for humoring me,

Nick.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, you blew your chances on this forum quite a while ago. You acted up until you got yourself permanently banned. Permanent usually means forever.

Much as I might like to give you the benefit of the doubt when you claim you want to clear the air of any distortions of truth, it's very difficult when you turn up here yet again, attempting to hide under yet another sock puppet name, and pretend you're new here. Distortions of truth never seem to bother you each time you do that.

Actions speak louder than words, Nick (if that's your name). If you really can admit to the error of your ways, I suggest you start with that next time, if there is a next time.

This is not your first rodeo here. Maybe you should finally accept that this is not the place for you. Move on. Try to start with honesty on some new forum somewhere, if you really want to change your ways.

Good luck and goodbye, again.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top