• 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.

Believer vs. Believer

If you read it, you noticed the idea that no one thought of before: the assigning of numbers to logical formulas. Of course, there was a number assignment done to words before, such as the common binary substitute,

absence = 1
presence = 0

closed = 1
opened = 0

or any opposites such as those below:

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation

But GODel, (I can also mutilate other personal nouns when I feel like it) came with his own numbering system (a numerology for the lay) that involved natural numbers that he assigned to various logical formulas. It was like the Bible. There was no system of numbering and then came the Geneva Bible, and you can now assign numbers to the opposites

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation 22:13

So what?

Well, remember once again who was GODel.


Dude, you're showing me the wetness at the edge of a puddle, while I'm swimming in the World Ocean. The passage in Revelation is an early crude understanding of the power of the juxtaposition of opposites, but beginning/end A/Z first/last up/down black/white aren't really the right kind of opposites. They each oppose on only one axis. The only true opposites in the universe are the Vortex and the Void. The Vortex is the force that exists by reflexively asserting its own existence; symbolized by the Ouroboros, the I AM, and the turtles that go all the way down. The Void is in every respects the opposite, the element without which the Vortex's assertion would be in vain; but it is not nothingness, not nonexistence, and is captured by no symbol. If you look carefully you can find the opposition of the Vortex and the Void not only in Gödel's proof but in the whirling generativity of every meaningful axiom system, every living thing, and every thought.

You say that the O in Gödel represents the totality of the center of God, and yet the umlaut is outside the O. What you haven't taken into account is that Gödel is a German name, and the umlauted O is pronounced in a way that in English is most closely represented by "er." "Er" is in "Er, I don't know," or "err," as in "you're wrong." Nothing is outside the Vortex, not even the Void; yet nothing can escape the Void, not even the Vortex.

But I don't want to talk about that elementary school stuff. I just want to know what you mean by "inherited theism." This is obviously something you care a lot about, something you vehemently oppose, so why not say what it is?

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Last edited:
Do you feel that your inability to form coherent sentences and your total lack of logic stems from your atheism about Odin? Or is it more because of Athena? Which of your other deficiencies can you trace directly to your atheism about various God(s) and which ones in particular?
I'd like to offer My writing as a counter-example to [eE]pix's writing style. Athena was the first Goddess who made My acquaintance, circa 1969-70, and Dad is quite proud of the work I've done as the Goddess of Punctuation.

As for the wily umlaut and the pronunciation thereof, have you never heard of Aphrodite's magic Gödel? ;)
 
Dude, you're showing me the wetness at the edge of a puddle, while I'm swimming in the World Ocean. The passage in Revelation is an early crude understanding of the power of the juxtaposition of opposites, but beginning/end A/Z first/last up/down black/white aren't really the right kind of opposites. They each oppose on only one axis. The only true opposites in the universe are the Vortex and the Void. The Vortex is the force that exists by reflexively asserting its own existence; symbolized by the Ouroboros, the I AM, and the turtles that go all the way down. The Void is in every respects the opposite, the element without which the Vortex's assertion would be in vain; but it is not nothingness, not nonexistence, and is captured by no symbol. If you look carefully you can find the opposition of the Vortex and the Void not only in Gödel's proof but in the whirling generativity of every meaningful axiom system, every living thing, and every thought.
Quite so, the art of seeing the wood for the trees.

Add to this duality a third and everything is encompassed. The trinity, trimurti, father mother son, spirit matter mind.

Nothing is outside the Vortex, not even the Void; yet nothing can escape the Void, not even the Vortex.
Or the human mind/ego

But I don't want to talk about that elementary school stuff.
It would be nice to rise above the basics once in a while.
 
Add to this duality a third and everything is encompassed. The trinity, trimurti, father mother son, spirit matter mind.


Mystical gibberish.Can you explain to us what this thread is about? Does the O in Godel mean anything to you?
 
Your incoherent "Beyond the event horizon of the formless" ramblings are barely above the level of epixs, and neither of you even come close to even reaching the level of, to say nothing of rising above, "elementary school stuff."
 

Rise above the basics by actually answering a question without dragging very basic and primitive mysticism into it. Do you have any idea what the word salad in the OP is supposed to mean? Do you agree with epix about the O in Godel?
 
Last edited:
Your incoherent "Beyond the event horizon of the formless" ramblings are barely above the level of epixs, and neither of you even come close to even reaching the level of, to say nothing of rising above, "elementary school stuff."

Well said.
 
Add to this duality a third and everything is encompassed. The trinity, trimurti, father mother son, spirit matter mind.

Or the human mind/ego
Why do you think this is meaningful at all? Two or three or seven, it doesn't really matter as it's all just humans with arbitrary dividing lines.


It would be nice to rise above the basics once in a while.
I wish you would.
 
It would be nice to rise above the basics once in a while.


Understood, but right now this (thread) is not the place. I really want epix to answer my question. I've been trying for months to figure out what he's on about (besides anti-strong-atheism), and the key seems to be in the phrase "inherited theism."

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Understood, but right now this (thread) is not the place. I really want epix to answer my question. I've been trying for months to figure out what he's on about (besides anti-strong-atheism), and the key seems to be in the phrase "inherited theism."

Respectfully,
Myriad

Yes, I think he's referring to theism conditioned from birth and not genetically inherited.
 
Why do you think this is meaningful at all? Two or three or seven, it doesn't really matter as it's all just humans with arbitrary dividing lines.
Yes it is just human waffle.

What I was alluding to with the trinity is a theological axiom. It is a very useful theological and philosophical tool.



I wish you would.
So do I, but it takes two to tango. I require someone to debate with.
 
Yes it is just human waffle.

What I was alluding to with the trinity is a theological axiom. It is a very useful theological and philosophical tool.

What is the function of this tool? Gods are human waffle too.
 
Last edited:
Yes it is just human waffle.

What I was alluding to with the trinity is a theological axiom. It is a very useful theological and philosophical tool.
It's a theological axiom according to some, sure. I'm curious as to how it is useful, though. I suppose if people can agree that Sauron forged the One Ring, then people can agree on the idea of the Christian trinity.
 
It's a theological axiom according to some, sure. I'm curious as to how it is useful, though. I suppose if people can agree that Sauron forged the One Ring, then people can agree on the idea of the Christian trinity.

Still no answer from punshhh about how the imaginary holy trinity can be used as a useful tool.
 

Back
Top Bottom