Ohh spare rod?  Where in the world are you sir?

On Mar 2, 7:57 pm, Clayton Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> I got a six pack and a fishing rod ready to go!
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:32 PM, [email protected] <
>
>
>
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > Hahah I'll drink tothat, and indeed fish to it too.
>
> > On Mar 2, 2:35 pm, Clayton Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Well, with what I've said and what others have said. I feel that it is
> > best
> > > to just give thanks that were here. It is obvious that there is infinite
> > > complexity in some way or another. God could come down tomorrow and say
> > that
> > > he created everything, but who created God and so on and so forth. I
> > think
> > > I'm just going to say to hell with it and  BBQ and go catfishing for the
> > > rest of my life. Oh yeah, and build a model for self sustainability that
> > I
> > > plan to share with the world so others can free themselves from
> > unnecessary
> > > stress and meaningless work and actually enjoy life.
>
> > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 3:03 PM, [email protected] <
>
> > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Also go get any book by that nutcase William Grey, if you want to read
> > > > more on the qabblah.
>
> > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_G._Gray
>
> > > > Umm Clayton that was addressed to
>
> > > > On Mar 2, 1:32 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > On Mar 1, 2:46 pm, Clayton Taylor <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > I wish I had a more advanced language to work with. I use words
> > like
> > > > > > conscience and energy but these words just don't cut it. Perhaps I
> > > > should
> > > > > > create my own words and define them.
>
> > > > > Clayton, I was thinking more about this last night and I think I've
> > > > > come up with a neologism for you.  You describe a 'limitless nothing'
> > > > > from which everything came.  Taking a recent neologism and tweaking
> > it
> > > > > a bit for your intention, why not call it "Cypherspace"--derived from
> > > > > tweaking 'Cyberspace' and conflating it with the nothingness intended
> > > > > by the term 'cypher'?  It's very catchy, well, at least I thought it
> > > > > was...but I could be a bit biased at my own creation.  ;-)
>
> > > > > Also, this concept of a 'limitless nothing' is not a new concept.  In
> > > > > fact, it's millenia old.  It's a functional aspect of
> > Kabbalah--Jewish
> > > > > mysticism.  Their term for it is "Ain Soph" (the 'ai' in Ain is
> > > > > pronounced like 'eye' the 'Soph' is pronounced exactly like sofa
> > > > > without the final 'a'; alternatively, it's spelled "Ein Sof", which
> > > > > appeals better to those who speak German, as it leads to the proper
> > > > > pronunciation.)  Ain, literally, means 'nothing' and 'Soph' means
> > > > > 'limitless'.  In the Kabbalah, the Creation of the universe is
> > > > > symbolised by the Tree of Life with its 10 emanations; however, there
> > > > > are 3 pre-emanations that precede the 'substantial' emanations.  They
> > > > > are
> > > > >   0) Ain = Nothing
> > > > >   00) Ain Soph = Limitless nothing
> > > > >   000) Ain Soph Aur = Limitless light
>
> > > > > Here's a link that you might find interesting, as it will give more
> > > > > information on both the Ain Soph and the Tree of Life in general:
>
> > > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ein_sof
>
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:43 PM, Clayton Taylor <
> > > > [email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I have a hard time believing that energy cant be created. In my
> > > > theory, new
> > > > > > > energy is always constantly created where there is nothing.
>
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Pat <
> > [email protected]
> > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> On Mar 1, 2:00 pm, "[email protected]" <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > Hey Pat,
>
> > > > > > >> > I did wonder when you would put in an apperance.
>
> > > > > > >> Out of the past 59 days, I've had about 42 of them with
> > migraines.
> > > > > > >> I've had loads of time off and, thus, haven't had access to the
> > > > > > >> internet.
>
> > > > > > >> > Yep I had the same thought you know.  When we talk of human
> > > > > > >> > conciousness we are talking basicly an electrical impulse, can
> > the
> > > > > > >> > same be said of a bodyless God?  What then is meant by the
> > > > > > >> > conciousness of God?
>
> > > > > > >> A different 'form' of energy (spiritual energy).  In my theory,
> > its
> > > > > > >> the form that appears in 3 out of the 6 Calabi-Yau dimensions.
>
> > > > > > >> > Myself I sometimes use this word (conciousness) when talking
> > about
> > > > > > >> > Gods 'essance' or 'spirit'.  In order to show that whatever it
> > is,
> > > > it
> > > > > > >> > needs to be understood that it does not consit of matter, and
> > when
> > > > I
> > > > > > >> > say matter I also mean energy, that is nothing that was not
> > > > present
> > > > > > >> > before the creation.
>
> > > > > > >> Exactly!  Whilst matter is a form of energy, so, too, is spirit.
> > > >  But
> > > > > > >> it's not found in this 4-D world.  Although, because the
> > spirito-
> > > > > > >> physical interface (our nervous system) is so good, we tend to
> > think
> > > > > > >> we see it whem in reality, what we are seeing is only the
> > physical
> > > > > > >> aspect of the interface.  Remember, when it comes to energy,
> > > > > > >> 'potential energy' has no appearance whatsoever.  It doesn't
> > look
> > > > like
> > > > > > >> anything, yet it has complete potential FOR everything.  And
> > THAT is
> > > > > > >> the key to solving the conundrum.  All energy was, at some
> > point,
> > > > > > >> purely potential.  At that point, the only thing it COULD do was
> > to
> > > > > > >> try to reach that potential and the show began.
>
> > > > > > >> > Again personaly speaking I have no problems seeing God as the
> > > > original
> > > > > > >> > cause.  To ask what then caused God is meaningless, to my
> > mind.
>
> > > > > > >> Especially when science is clearly happy that energy is neither
> > > > > > >> created nor destroyed!!
>
> > > > > > >> > On Mar 1, 1:32 pm, Pat <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > On Mar 1, 11:27 am, "[email protected]" <
> > > > [email protected]
>
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > > Have you ever read the 'Conversations with God' Books?
>
> > > > > > >> > > > It's auother suggests much the same and gives a reason fro
> > the
> > > > > > >> > > > creation.  Thusly:
>
> > > > > > >> > > > Gods knowledge is perfect but what is knowledge without
> > > > experiance,
> > > > > > >> > > > and so 'let there be light' and the creation was created.
> >  For
> > > > God
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> > > > experiance.
>
> > > > > > >> > > While, in principle, I agree, the proposition states no
> > > > methodology--
> > > > > > >> > > no mechanism--for getting from point A (nothing) to point B
> > > > > > >> > > (something).  There needs to be a mechanism, even for a God,
> > to
> > > > get
> > > > > > >> > > something from nothing.  Alternatively, Clayton's
> > proposition is
> > > > > > >> > > slightly better in that it doesn't propose that there WAS a
> > > > nothing,
> > > > > > >> > > per se, rather , that the nothing was, in fact, a something.
> > > > > > >> > > Nevertheless, what is lacking THERE is what IS this
> > something
> > > > that was
> > > > > > >> > > nothing?  I already know the answer myself, but I thought
> > I'd
> > > > throw
> > > > > > >> > > out the questions to help eke it out of Clayton.
> >  Consciousness
> > > > is a
> > > > > > >> > > great fall back, but  of what does it consist?  What is the
> > > > underlying
> > > > > > >> > > 'substance'?  Again, I already know the answer, but would
> > like
> > > > Clayton
> > > > > > >> > > to give it some thought.
>
> > > > > > >> > > > On Feb 27, 9:51 pm, Clayton <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > >> > > > > Before there was anything in our universe there was
> > nothing,
> > > > but
> > > > > > >> how
> > > > > > >> > > > > could something come to exist from nothing. Nothing must
> > be
> > > > > > >> something
> > > > > > >> > > > > right?
>
> > > > > > >> > > > > Not in my theory.
>
> > > > > > >> > > > > My theory is that there is always an infinite amount of
> > > > nothing
> > > > > > >> > > > > outside of something and that something is continually
> > > > produced
> > > > > > >> > > > > wherever there is nothing. What that something is, is
> > the
> > > > > > >> conscience
> > > > > > >> > > > > of an unborn universe, and these consciences are also
> > > > continually
> > > > > > >> > > > > being produced. Our universe was at one time one of
> > those
> > > > unborn
> > > > > > >> > > > > universes, but something happened. Just as it does for
> > all
> > > > unborn
> > > > > > >> > > > > universes. It’s conscience began to think, but what
> > would
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> > > > > conscience of nothing think about? It would think about
> > what
> > > > it
> > > > > > >> is,
> > > > > > >> > > > > because it wouldn't know, and this thought would
> > continually
> > > > build
> > > > > > >> up
> > > > > > >> > > > > in the conscience until it was so compressed that the
> > > > pressure
> > > > > > >> would
> > > > > > >> > > > > cause the conscience to explode into a big bang. What I
> > am
> > > > saying
> > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > >> > > > > that thought is the first form of energy that has ever
> > > > existed,
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> > > > > that everything in our universe is just another form of
> > this
> > > > > > >> energy.
>
> > > > > > >> > > > > I believe that the energy, that is everything in our
> > > > Universe is
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > > > > God of our universe, and that God has always known
> > > > everything
> > > > > > >> there is
> > > > > > >> > > > > to know about the universe. In the beginning God’s
> > knowledge
> > > > was
> > > > > > >> very
> > > > > > >> > > > > limited, but now it is very complex because everything
> > that
> > > > has
> > > > > > >> been
> > > > > > >> > > > > created from that original thought energy is an
> > extension of
> > > > Gods
> > > > > > >> > > > > consciousness, even ourselves. However, I believe that
> > all
> > > > things
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >> > > > > exists also have their own
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to