You can compare. Logically and in routine, there has to be a mother to everything & being. If called indescribable [to commons], one can simply match the qualities. Don't science do many such things?
You can compare. Logically and in routine, there has to be a mother to everything & being. If called indescribable [to commons], one can simply match the qualities. Don't science do many such things?
Mojo
Mostly harmless
No. Science does not assume the existence of entities for which there is no evidence.
What evidence can you provide for the existence of this "mother to everything"? And how can you "simply match the qualities" if you are unable to describe them?
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2009
- Messages
- 23,111
So your response to being accused of posting nonsense was to observe that the word "nonsense" contains the word "sense", because the property it defines is the absence of sense.
I imagined you read the dictionary to help express your own ideas, but it appears you just want to tell us what your dictionary tells you about a word.
Hello all,
We discussed a lot here on very senstive & prime entity. I am not sure whether I or you could describe HIM to commons OR HE still would like to remain indescribale[to commons].
Probably I gone bit against HIM so...may...?
Since we have discussed a lot or most & I don't feel need to discuss further & waste yoiur & my time and also get unpleasentness.
May HE bless you all, who contributed or not contributed in any way.
Best wishes.
THIS TOPIC IS CLOSED FROM MY SIDE, YOU MAY CONTINUE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND.
We discussed a lot here on very senstive & prime entity. I am not sure whether I or you could describe HIM to commons OR HE still would like to remain indescribale[to commons].
Probably I gone bit against HIM so...may...?
Since we have discussed a lot or most & I don't feel need to discuss further & waste yoiur & my time and also get unpleasentness.
May HE bless you all, who contributed or not contributed in any way.
Best wishes.
THIS TOPIC IS CLOSED FROM MY SIDE, YOU MAY CONTINUE TO BETTER UNDERSTAND.
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Kumar, if you had been left to heal yourself 'normally' you would be dead a long time ago. You are alive thanks to modern medicine, and don't pretend otherwise.
Hans
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Filippo Lippi
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2002
- Messages
- 5,354
The name escapes me too, bloke supposedly from the Philippines? MO is strikingly similar. I challenged him and/or Kumar to present their ideas in their native tongue just in case we had another speaker who could translate for us. The suggestion was ignored, because, I suspect, confusion and time wasting is the reason for the threads.
From the title, I thought this thread was going to be about interest on bank accounts.
Yrreg; he's been quiet recently. I'm hope that if he returns, so will Fiona with her painted wagon.
Yrreg; he's been quiet recently. I'm hope that if he returns, so will Fiona with her painted wagon.
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
It's a real shame Aniof doesn't post here any more, I'm sure she'd remember the name.
Last edited:
Filippo Lippi
Philosopher
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2002
- Messages
- 5,354
Of course, Yrreg.
Top troll, perhaps Kumar's after the title?
Top troll, perhaps Kumar's after the title?
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
dlorde
Philosopher
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2007
- Messages
- 6,864
I have no idea what you're talking about. I understand common English and most variations of it. To me, you appear to be talking random nonsense.
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
What are the odds we could get some clever old Jesuit or perhaps the Archbishop of Canterbury in here? It would be nice not to get the farm leagues all the time.
Translation: I lost yet another discussion, so I'll now go away and pretend I won.
Hans
Nothing is winning & loss under equanimity.Bye here.
Simply, I thought here that while buying a new car, we should look its material(to cover its basic thing) and its latest features(to cover its gross/current). If we ignore any one or if we look intermediatory models from basic to gross, we can be a loser.
Last edited:
devnull
Philosopher
I still dont know what gross/current means.
C'est la vie.
C'est la vie.
Kumar even less so.
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Kumar, to follow your analogy, you are someone who has collected two spark plugs, a bicycle tube, a defective toaster, and an old windscreen wiper, and you are now demanding that we explain to you how they can make your new car fly.
When evaluating a new car (or anything else), you have three options:
1) Trust the salesperson and the brochure (not much recommended).
2) Ask more knowledgeable people and trust their judgment (recommended).
3) Acquire sufficient knowledge to evaluate the thing yourself (highly recommended).
What you DO is that you have no knowledge, so you ask more knowledgeable people, but you reject our judgment, and you also reject the salesperson's knowledge, which effectively leaves you at level #0.
Hans
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
No, it is some Kumarism, like 'Absolute & Final'. I haven't bothered to try to find out what it's supposed to mean.
Hans
Kumar, to follow your analogy, you are someone who has collected two spark plugs, a bicycle tube, a defective toaster, and an old windscreen wiper, and you are now demanding that we explain to you how they can make your new car fly.
When evaluating a new car (or anything else), you have three options:
1) Trust the salesperson and the brochure (not much recommended).
2) Ask more knowledgeable people and trust their judgment (recommended).
3) Acquire sufficient knowledge to evaluate the thing yourself (highly recommended).
What you DO is that you have no knowledge, so you ask more knowledgeable people, but you reject our judgment, and you also reject the salesperson's knowledge, which effectively leaves you at level #0.
Hans
I think I am at no.3 but I do mix current knowledges+logics or tend to match available/told knowledges with God's omniscience knowlege in me. Therefore many time you may feel odd. Simply whatever don't satisfy me from my inside, I tend to satisfy first. Such satisfaction may or may not be based on books. I do respect God in me, his omniscience or instict knowledge in me acquired by me since my evolution.
I think, you couldn't grasp the basic idea from the car example I have given. Even God & God like, some can be prime God, other intermediatory Godlike still other latest Godlike. Godlike mean holding godlike properties. However, Prime is without adjustment of current changed environment, intermediators are neither prime nor latest whereas current is latest. In my feeling, only prime & current should be more valid to follow(worshi) others just respected. I think, it also indicates somewhat Adam/eve & we as of now OR may be genotype & phenotype--for example.
Sorry, I can't go beyond it. You can just try to link properties.
Last edited:
Though It is direct, clear & simple to understand, but if God want still to be INDESCRIBABLE(to commons), I can't go beyong than it.