• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Infinite! In Search of The Ultimate Truth.

All that can change.

Nope. As there are already thousands of papers, dissertations, websites and dictionary definitions on standard philosophical infinitism, you may as call your new religion "Taz Anastazioism". At least you might get a hit for your "radioactive angels" religion in the future.

:big:
 
Nope. As there are already thousands of papers, dissertations, websites and dictionary definitions on standard philosophical infinitism, you may as call your new religion "Taz Anastazioism". At least you might get a hit for your "radioactive angels" religion in the future.

:big:

You can futilely attempt to undermine my philosophy, Infinitism, all you like. Even if the term "radioactive angels" was not just a product of your fancy, there is still 99.999% of material within MY philosophy of Infinitism, or a 99.999.999 % if you consider the material interwoven. If you also consider that my philosophy deals with the Infinite, the term of your fancy "radioactive angels" would infinitesimally fail in comparison, had it been a term I even used; and not, yet a sorry effort on your part to create doubt about the soundness of my reasoning, and the use of expressions to refer to biblical allegories.

Luke 10:18: "He replied, 'I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.'"

I know the Bible; do you?

The study of the Judeo-Christian religion is part of the standard public school curriculum, of the primary and the secondary education levels in Greece (last 4 classes of elementary school to highschool).
 
Last edited:
You can futilely attempt to undermine my philosophy, Infinitism, all you like.
Nope. I've totally pulled it apart. The conflicting claims, the total lack of evidence, the insane claims denying evolution, mathematics and science.

I have a better idea for you. Rather than you stealing the existing name philosophical infinitism to trick people into reading your garbage, you should call your work "the Bible." It's not as though Matthew. Mark Luke and John are going to sue you, is it? You will simply burn in hell. :big:

I know the Bible; do you?
Yes. I had to inform you the verses and chapters of the Bible were called verses and chapters. You thought they were called "clauses":crazy:
 
The study of the Judeo-Christian religion is part of the standard public school curriculum, of the primary and the secondary education levels in Greece (last 4 classes of elementary school to highschool).
Well good luck to you when you finally start primary school then. :p
 
Infinite minute particles; perhaps spherical (no other shape would provide for better combinations to form matter, and no other shape of matter would provide for better fluidity within the infinite than the spherical), bring about every action and reaction, and all phenomena within the Infinite; such as matter, energy and intelligence; along with gravity, light and sound.

Can you finally tell us how "bouncing balls" creates gravity, light and intelligence?

You never seem to ever explain that and we are all ready for a jolly good laugh.
:p
 
Can you finally tell us how "bouncing balls" creates gravity, light and intelligence?

You never seem to ever explain that and we are all ready for a jolly good laugh.
:p

"Bouncing Balls" term of your fancy again, I spoke of particles forming from energy and in turn causing everything else to occur by interacting with each other. If you have a better theory other than a singularity popping up in a non-dimentional nothingness and then expanding to become the Universe which continues to expand within this non-dimentional nothingness, do tell! But do tell instead of referring to links.

Your response total Bullflakes, as usual.
 
Last edited:
Nope. I've totally pulled it apart. The conflicting claims, the total lack of evidence, the insane claims denying evolution, mathematics and science.

The only thing you have been pulling apart, for 10 years, is your hair; for failing to refute my philosophy. You want proof to that? You are still trying 10 years later, ever since you first tried!

I have a better idea for you. Rather than you stealing the existing name philosophical infinitism to trick people into reading your garbage, you should call your work "the Bible." It's not as though Matthew. Mark Luke and John are going to sue you, is it? You will simply burn in hell. :big:

I could call my philosophy "Matthew Ellard's Cause of Insomnia" if I liked, but "Infinitism", I like better. Yet, it would make for a catchy title, at least within the circles of discussion among the international skeptics' forum members and among the members of the other skeptic forum too! :big: :big: :big:

1574066929091.jpg

Yes. I had to inform you the verseths and chapters of the Bible were called verses and chapters. You thought they were called "clauses":crazy:

No I didn't. I was referring to what I've written; but even if I had, what is called "verses" in Biblical terms, is grammatically called "sentences", which in turn comprise clauses with subjects and predicates. The link with the definition of the word "clause", again:

https://www.google.com/search?clien...inition&oq=clause+definition&aqs=heirloom-srp..

and Webster's:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/clause
 
Last edited:
Well good luck to you when you finally start primary school then. :p

You have bragged about your educational level numerous times, yet for over 10 years now you continue to rack your brain to "debunk" my philosophy, "Infinitism", and continue to fail, but you will always be too stubborn and egotistical to admit it.
 
Last edited:
What verse and chapter was that in? You keep running away when I ask you.:big:


"His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it." Rev. 12:9

"And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him." Rev. 12:4

"He replied, 'I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.'" Luke 10:18

The above are all either clauses (ex. "He replied", ) or sentences (ex. "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven."). The only difference is that they are numbered and the biblical term for that is a "verse." The standard meaning of verse, however is, as per Google: "writing arranged with a metrical rhythm, typically having a rhyme."

Here is the link with the full definition of the word, by Webster's:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/verse

The "radioactive" part is your term; the product of your fancy and creative liberties. And at any rate, that was a post from back around 2013 posted on a forum of a different website altogether. Can't you find anything in this thread (Sep-Nov 2019) within your ability to refute, and you got yourself hung by your nails on something I wrote, about 7 years ago?
 
Last edited:
It is obvious, I think, that I would be glad if my philosophy was publicized. As for whether it is "nuttery" or "has no basis", I suppose the same you think for any theory or philosophy; which accepts an idea, or allows for the existence of a phenomenon, that would be perceived as "God."

Suppose all you like. But be aware that supposing is not evidence. I will believe in any god right when evidence for such a being is demonstrated. And that is your problem. All you have are rambling suppositions and meandering thoughts, many of which we know to be wrong. You have no evidence.
 
Suppose all you like. But be aware that supposing is not evidence. I will believe in any god right when evidence for such a being is demonstrated. And that is your problem. All you have are rambling suppositions and meandering thoughts, many of which we know to be wrong. You have no evidence.

Whether I have proved beyond reasonable doubt, to a hypothetical jury of scientists whether the concept of the Infinite stands; that is a matter, as I have already mentioned, of perception and perspective.

What I have proved, beyond reasonable doubt, is that the idea of "God" could stand along our scientific knowledge, understanding and proof; and that the two are not contradictory. We could have evolution stand as proven scientific fact; and that that evolution is not limited to our planet, but a Universal fact; a fact even that takes place throughout the Infinite (as is devolution; formations and deformations).

We don't necessarily have to discard the writings of the Bible; for it perhaps refers to God in an allegorical manner, by people who may had sometimes divine inspiration, as the faithful believe; and wrote down what they understood from that inspiration, with their finite minds; taking in consideration the level of understanding of the times; or may have not, and just wrote down a framework of faith, that they believed it would help in keeping their society in order; perhaps both.

Unless in our generation we have the appearance of a superior entity that presents itself to us, with the characteristic of immortality through the millinia and complete power over nature and our visible space beyond Earth, we will never have scientific proof of the existence of God. Only indications deriving from philosophical suppositions, in our logical reasoning and endeavors to find explanations and reasons for existence.

Yet, if the Infinite was what I presented it to be, and from my perspective it could not be otherwise, then if it did indeed and for whatever the reason choose to present itself in the subtle way it did, through other people's writings, and not directly to the future generations as it is said to have in the stories described in those writings; how could we ever know! Would we ever believe any such display of superior existence? A supernatural being could make its presence yes! But would it be the Infinite? Would it be God? How could the Infinite ever present Itself to a finite being and be understood as such; other than perhaps through the cumulative writing and references throughout the experience of human existence?

"But He said, "You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!" Exodus: 33-20

"No one has seen God at any time; if we love one another, God abides in us, and His love is perfected in us." John 4:12

"Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father." John 6:46

"And the Father who sent Me, He has testified of Me. You have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His form." John 5:37

"...who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see To Him be honor and eternal dominion!" Timothy 6:15-16

"For from days of old they have not heard or perceived by ear, Nor has the eye seen a God besides You, Who acts in behalf of the one who waits for Him. Isaiah 64:4

"Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen." Exodus 33-21

" He said also, "I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob " Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God."Exodus 3:6

I have already stated in the beginning of my original post, that I am not a scientist but a philosopher, any contemplation that I made based on deductive reasoning, and extrapolations based on recognized patterns and scientific theories I am aware of, were just that; contemplations. Some may be correct, some may not; for others it may yet to be proven and it is still therefore, debatable.
 
Last edited:
"Bouncing Balls" term of your fancy again, I spoke of particles
You said round particles. Did you forget?
perhaps spherical (no other shape would provide for better combinations to form matter, and no other shape of matter would provide for better fluidity within the infinite than the spherical)


We then destroyed your religious claim that light was particles as particles have mass and if they travelled at the speed of light they would have infinite mass due to special relativity. :p

You then denied the evidence for special relativity from the Large Hadron Collider.:p
 
....failing to refute my philosophy.
Your God is infinites alternative religion has been totally destroyed. You cannot produce one experiment to support this religion, yet we have linked you to endless experiments that prove light is not particles. :p

what is called "verses" in Biblical terms, is grammatically called "sentences"
Why do you lie so much? :p

Chapters and verses of the Bible
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapters_and_verses_of_the_Bible
 
1/3 of the Angels who rebelled against God and were cast out from heaven shows), they could of course evolve an altered image by means of misusing technology (radioactivity),

"His tail swept down a third of the stars of heaven and cast them to the earth. And the dragon stood before the woman who was about to give birth, so that when she bore her child he might devour it." Rev. 12:9

"And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him." Rev. 12:4

"He replied, 'I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.'" Luke 10:18
Not one of those verses from the bible mentions angels misusing technology or radiation. You simply made up an entire Biblical story, to justify your hilarious alternative religion.
:p

Do you think you will burn is hell for faking Bible stories?:p


The above are all either clauses.
There are no "clauses" in the Bible" . Show us one Biblical scholar who calls the Biblical verses "clauses".:p
 
I have already stated in the beginning of my original post, that I am not a scientist but a philosopher
Nope. A philosopher would have already been aware of 19th century philosophical infinitism. You simply stole the name to trick people, to read your alternative "God is Infinities" religion. :p

Infinitism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinitism
"Infinitism is the view that knowledge may be justified by an infinite chain of reasons. It belongs to epistemology, the branch of philosophy"
 
Not one of those verses from the bible mentions angels misusing technology or radiation. You simply made up an entire Biblical story, to justify your hilarious alternative religion.
:p

Do you think you will burn is in hell for faking Bible stories?:p


There are no "clauses" in the Bible" . Show us one Biblical scholar who calls the Biblical verses "clauses".:p

Chamaquito, enough with the repetitive, childish arguments on your part; let others place a comment to which I'll get the time and the chance to respond, for a change.:p
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom