|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,788 Year: 4,045/9,624 Month: 916/974 Week: 243/286 Day: 4/46 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3575 days) Posts: 70 From: Raleigh NC Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The God Hypothesis | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
You need to brush up on your aleph beth a little better.
Looks like you are arbitrarily assigning letters to names and to doubles and mothers with no rhyme or reason. The three mothers are Aleph, then Shin and Mem. Air, fire, water. Doubles are named so because each letter has two pronounciations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
Not even close.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
Your picture and whatever non sequitors attached to it have neither to do with Buddhism or physics.
Can you take your discussion with yourself elsewhere?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
Whay does that have to do with subject? You are just imagining some link between what you want to talk about and what the subject is.
Do you have any evidence of what you are claiming? Of course not. Go muse elsewhere. The things you imagine are not relevant to this thread.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
There is no "Great Monogram" for YHWH
YHWH is a tetragram, not a monogram. YHWH cannot be reduced or diminished, so YHWH cannot be reduced to a monogram. The triangulation is an expounding on the word, in which one could derive different words, but there is no reduction down to the number 8 or a single letter. The gematria of YHWH is 26. You don't reduce gematric translations down to their furthest reduction. That would mean that every Hebrew word ultimately has one of nine meanings and makes almost every word on equal footing with every other word and impossible to find hidden relationships. You really only take about 2 paragraphs from every discipline and make up the rest. You don't know this subject. YHWH is not 8. Drawing triangles around letters does not make it 8 or relate to Buckminster Fuller. The people "who say" that 7 relates to the name YHWH are not referring to gematria, because THOSE people know that 7 is not a gematric derivation of YHWH. Appealling to the vague does not make your false claims any more relevant to buddhism or physics than they were when you first posted in this thread. You simply don't know what you are talking about.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
You aren't offering information, nor are you educating.
I am not responding with doubts about your claims. I am reponding with certainty that you are wrong based on substanbtial knowledge of the subject. You are not conforming to or creating any "image" of the reality of this subject. ie: you are not invoking "Truth" in regard to your claims. You are not a teacher. You have no depth in your experience to tell anyone about any kaballah. Your "depth" of knowledge about kaballah is superficial. Any high school freshman wiccan knows as much about permutations of YHWH as you. You think you are revealing something? You're not. This is kindergardner shit and you are still only getting only about 30% of it right. Everything else you just make up, including what you wrote in the caption of your picture. Lame.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined:
|
You haven't made it clear because you aaren't representing Kant or Plato's cave. Your deviation comes from mislabeling perception as "truth." Furthermore, you capitalize "truth" which for all intents and purposes denotes absolute truth.
So the result is that you are muddying what you are saying by referring to subjective perception and not only wrongfully calling a point of view "truth", but "Truth" (absolute reality). No one is avoiding your statement. Your statement as you present it is conflicting to the point of nonsensibleness. And since you imply that individual thoughts dictate what actually exists, your point of view does not conform to Kant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
If we say that what we perceive is "truth," we would be wrong.
Perception is not truth. Perception is perception.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
A perception can be modeled after a truth in which our beliefs about that perception are justified and that we can derive approximate predictions.
That is not the same as claiming that what we "image in our minds" IS truth. At least not a complete truth or pure truth. Perception is not reality. Nor through our finite sensory inputs can we derive any full truth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
Stop posting that bs.
First, it isn't true. Secondly, it is off topic. Third, you've wallpapered many other threads with the exact same post. Stop spamming or you will be reported.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
No one was criticizing Genesis. No one asked about hominids. You are spamming.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
Your chemical patterns image was wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eli Member (Idle past 3518 days) Posts: 274 Joined: |
Which part of the topic are you addressing with this post?
Buddhism or physics?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024