Why is there anything at all?

[shunyadragon]

A "religious claim of belief" is of necessity is false?

No, but it may be false considering the many conflicting claims based on subjective assumptions of religious beliefs.

In your next post could you explain how rationale thought leads to truth without
using circular reasoning?

Rational thought does not necessarily lead to truth(?), given subjective conflicting claims of religious beliefs it is unlikely. In fact in even with objective independent verifiable evidence there is only an increase in knowledge not truth,

 

[PureX]

My answer still applies to the question why does anything exist at all.

Well, you seem to be conversing with yourself at this point, so I will leave you to that.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

Some ask, “Why is there anything at all?”

Easy question simple answer.
We know we have to see all mankind as Sons' of God.

To me, it is in rational logic and backed through The Faith of Abraham that we understand from created mortal and corrupt becoming transformed immortal and incorruptible becoming again, glorified and transfigured into the image of the Creator God for The Father.

As rational beings, the scientists of the world have thrown up their hands and all say, “I do not know how He does it.” Or perhaps they ask “Where is Stephen Andrew to help us?” No? Yes? Yes! Think about it, say in the 11th, 15th and 19th centuries they didn’t have my cell number. St. Thomas Aquinas was explained the Trinity by child Mystic in the sand on a beach in France using a pink seashell in the 15th century. I wonder where the child mystic ever went. St. Thomas turned around and looked again and the little mystic just disappeared. To me logically, and physically the little mystic is still with us and among us today running around, trying to explain creation and the Trinity itself. And also to me and logic, the manifestation of the new creation is logically and faithfully from the spirit through the flesh for the soul of the being becoming the New Body. In logic what is created is what becomes and becomes again into the image of fulfilled creation united in being, logically, rationally, and Faithfully. We know the finite disciplines can never explain the becoming of eternal forever life.

In thought, one has to think about three things at one time to understand the Trinity of the Godhead as The Trinity also applies to the Body of The Christ, becoming again glorified and transfigured, the "Firstborn of all Creation" reborn from immortal and incorruptible, Baptized, becoming again glorified and transfigured back to Heaven from where He came. And we are all adopted brothers and sisters of the Christ from the Cross, in rational logic and through the Faith of Abraham. As a guide, my IQ may be 107 perhaps as high as 109, did some algebra, and introduced to pre-calculus, a little hard for me in discipline, tried Chemistry and understand ocean acidification in basis chemistry in process, but I get the logic, rationally. It's enough, not too much though, I am not that smart, no, and I say it's not in the intelligence we see, but through the rational logic that we can see God with new eyes. Yes, logically and rationally and faithfully, The Christ becomes in all mankind the Mind of God, The Holy Spirit Person in the flesh of the person of all mankind in being is what becomes shared as becoming one in being to become again, glorified and transformed. Becoming the Will of Creation in the flesh of Humans becoming again. In all rationality and logic and through faith, we know we have to see all mankind as Sons' of God.

To me in logic and rationale, The “RI” real intelligence of eternity is the one and only way logic that manifests creation without failure that we become again. No artificial intelligence “AI” allowed.

In logic, rationally and through faith, to me The Trinity is three separate persons in being and each equal in power, one Person to create, mortal and corrupt through Adam and Eve created by The Person of The Father and God and one person to transform, the Person of Jesus and God, immortal and incorruptible and one person to glorify and transfigure, the Person of The Holy Spirit and God for all becoming again the image of The Creator God for the Father becoming united as one God in Being.

To me and fulfilled creation using rational logic is how we can see God with new eyes, new everything.

To me and logic no one understands to this day and perhaps forward the greatest gift ever created is love.

Rational scientist have thrown in the towel on proving the static state of eternity and trying to explain eternity using the finite sciences and disciplines known to man. To me in logic, no one is able to understand static eternity. But to me also in logic, eternity becomes static and unfailing and void of the choice to fail and yet dynamic in fulfilled, eternal love, from His Passion through the unfailing eternal heartbeat for the Mother's Love.

Peace always,
Stephen Andrew

 

[Feedmysheep]

No, but it may be false considering the many conflicting claims based on subjective assumptions of religious beliefs.

All of which is equally possible with "non-religious" philosophies - conflicting claims, subjective assumptions, all that good stuff.

Rational thought does not necessarily lead to truth(?), given subjective conflicting claims of religious beliefs it is unlikely. In fact in even with objective independent verifiable evidence there is only an increase in knowledge not truth,

That's right. To know with absolute proof we would have to know everything absolutely.
Often to have some confidence that we are at least on the right track is adaquate.

May I ask you concerning my faith - Christian. Give me if you would your two biggest "conflicting claims"
which you think invalidates the life and claims of Jesus Christ.

I'm out here on a limb. So give me your, let's say, two biggest contradictory claims about Christ.

 

[shunyadragon]

All of which is equally possible with "non-religious" philosophies - conflicting claims, subjective assumptions, all that good stuff.

It is far more in conflict among religions and their divisions that non-religious philosophies. ALL ancient religions and philosophies are subjective based. and not factual. In fact mythology is far more prevalent among ancient religions than philosophies,

That's right. To know with absolute proof we would have to know everything absolutely.

There is nothing in fallible human religions, philosophies or science that meets this criteria or standard of truth, though some religions and their dividions do make this claim of the level of truth..

Often to have some confidence that we are at least on the right track is adaquate.

That is more whare the evolving knowledge of the sciences stands as the knowledge of science increases with discoveries and research.

May I ask you concerning my faith - Christian. Give me if you would your two biggest "conflicting claims"
which you think invalidates the life and claims of Jesus Christ.

First the conflicting claims of the Divisions of Christianity do not in and of themselves invalidate the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.

The problems of conflicts in understanding scriptures first involves the conflicting understanding of the Old Testament and the nature of God, even within the Divisions of Christianity in the claims of a Trinitarian God.

The next elephant in the room is the question of how the different religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam consider the sciences and the sciences of evolution and the history of the universe when they are divided over the interpretation of the Pentateuch, and wide spread rejection of science. The authors of the Pentateuch, New Testament and the Church Fathers believed it is a literal history of our physical universe and humanity, which is an ancient worldview in total conflict with science.

I'm out here on a limb. So give me your, let's say, two biggest contradictory claims about Christ.

The Trinity

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

And we know the more science advances, the more science throws in the towel on understanding static creation. With no more divisions, Fulfilled Creation becomes static in unfailing and free of corruption with choice removed not allowing any chance of failure to exist and yet dynamic in the fulfilled eternal love through His Passion, to unite all mankind as one in being together with The Son, glorified and transfigured into the image of The Creator God for The Father.

Rationalism, The idea that knowledge is a priori (Latin, from the former), or something that is already known when you think about it.
To me in logic and rationality Jesus came to unite, to bring together, undivided as one in being, all mankind, to remove mental hate and mental anger and fear for the opposite of fear is love and love is fulfilled as eternal and to open the church of God to all mankind becoming again.

We know Moses wrote the Pentateuch and Moses was raised in Egyptian royalty in a Castle and Moses was found by the Pharaoh’s daughter by her motherly instincts from the voice of a crying baby found in an ark by the river and Moses was reunited with His mother by the same Pharoah's daughter who found a wet nurse at the local village who happened to be Moses's Mother. In logic, what are the chances. In logic and all rationality, the Exodus is Greek for The Road Out and Moses turned the water into blood, and logically and rationally the New Exodus becomes Jesus who turns the water into wine then to blood, the blood and water becomes the New Exodus, the New Living Sacrifice that transforms and transfigures by contact of all or any of the senses. God always said, “I will provide the Living Sacrifice."

In logic and rationale, Just as the identification of the actual location of the Garden of Eden also remains a mystery the new location becomes logically and rationally the New Temple of the Living God through the New Eve for all mankind, together, and undivided.

Thanks for the update, to all.

TO me, and as rational and logical beings, the scientists of the world have thrown up their hands and all say, “I do not know how He does it.” Or perhaps they ask “Where is Stephen Andrew to help us?” No? Yes? Yes! Think about it, say in the 11th, 15th and 19th centuries they didn’t have my cell number. St. Thomas Aquinas was explained the Trinity by child Mystic in the sand on a beach in France using a pink seashell in the 15th century. I wonder where the child mystic ever went. St. Thomas turned around and looked again and the little mystic just disappeared. To me logically, and physically the little mystic is still with us and among us today running around, trying to explain creation and the Trinity itself. And also to me and logic, the manifestation of the new creation is logically and faithfully from the spirit through the flesh for the soul of the being becoming the New Body. In logic what is created is what becomes and becomes again into the image of fulfilled creation united in being, logically, rationally, and Faithfully. We know the finite disciplines can never explain the becoming of eternal forever life.

In thought and in logic, one has to think about three things at one time to understand the Trinity of the Godhead as The Trinity also applies to the Body of The Christ, becoming again glorified and transfigured, the "Firstborn of all Creation" reborn from immortal and incorruptible, Baptized, becoming again through Penance and Sacrifice re-Sanctified and in Communion with Him all mankind becomes again glorified and transfigured back to Heaven from where He came. And we are all adopted brothers and sisters of the Christ from the Cross, in rational logic and through the Faith of Abraham. As a guide, my IQ may be 107 perhaps as high as 109, did some algebra, and introduced to pre-calculus, a little hard for me in discipline, tried Chemistry and understand ocean acidification in basis chemistry in process, but I get the logic, rationally. It's enough, not too much though, I am not that smart, no, and I say it's not in the intelligence we see, but through the rational logic that we can see God with new eyes. Yes, logically and rationally The Christ becomes in all mankind the Mind of God, The Holy Spirit Person in the flesh of the person of all mankind in being is what becomes shared as becoming one in being to become again, glorified and transformed. Becoming the Will of Creation in the flesh of Humans becoming again. In all rationality and logic we know we have to see all mankind as Sons' of God.

Mihi in logica rationali et per fidem Abrahae vera conscientia est intelligentia Creationis et Voluntas Creatoris et Verbum quod caro fit, ex creato, transformato et transfigured intelligentia et mens Dei In persona Iesu ut Christus in omni homine iterum fit imago Creatoris Dei ad Patrem.

To me rationally and in logic, What’s always been alive before creation was ever created was even created is the intelligence that manifests without failure.

In rational logic and through faith, God exist as three separate persons in being and equal in power, and together as one God in being to deliver created life, from the Father transformed life from the Son and transfigured life from the Holy Spirit becoming again as One God in being together and life eternal.

In logic, the rationality of The Trinity of the Godhead leads to the trinity of the body, where the Father creates and the Son transforms, and the Holy Spirit glorifies and transfigures all mankind united together as a one in being into the image of the creator God for all mankind.

To me and logic, the intelligence of creation seems to be referred to as the Word and basically it is the intelligence of creation as a spirit person in being shared for all mankind from the cross when He said, "It is finished." And also referred to as "He gave up The Ghost" and God, The Holy Spirit for all mankind to share united as one in being together with the Son and God to become again glorified and transfigured into the image of The Creator God, for The Father, God.

To me and logic, the “RI” real intelligence is what becomes and is the intelligence that will never fail in all of creation and no artificial intelligence “AI” is allowed.

For God to not be alone, is to create flesh, and have it become immortal in the intelligence of creation to become again transfigured into the image of the creator God for the Father to have love.

If the logic follows, God gave us the choice, Adam and Eve chose it, we all would’ve done the same thing and all mankind becomes eternal fulfilled love.

We know we do not preach and we know not to judge others and through the gifts of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil we are able to judge ourselves. The Autonomy of The Intelligence of creation is to be able to stand justified and self-righteous before God for Glorious transfiguration, just like His Son, Jesus, Our Brother. Love is created by Adam and Eve and fulfilled by the New Adam, conceived by the Will of The Father from the Person of The Holy Spirit through Immaculate Conception in the Virgin Birth of The Christ born sanctified immortal and incorruptible and Baptised unto death and resurrection for all mankind becoming again Confirmed and re-Sanctified and gloriously transfigured in fulfilled eternal love through His Passion.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[Aupmanyav]

Existence and non-existence are related. What exists today can be non-existent tomorrow and non-existence can give rise of existence at any point of time.
Existence is defined by time and coordinates. It can and may not exist. Existence is a chameleon.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

So true,

The term "chameleon" is often used as a metaphor to describe a person who frequently changes their beliefs or behaviors to please others or be successful.

To me in logic and rationality the beginning of church time is when Mary said “Let it be done to me according to Your Will” when in perhaps 03-08-0000 AD the will of creation first came to the flesh of a human from the power of the Holy Spirit through the Immaculate Conception for the Virgin Birth of the Christ in perhaps 12-25-0000 AD Anno Domini, Latin for the beginning of church time.

To me, in logic and all rationality the end of church time will become from our death and resurrection through the second coming re-Sanctified transfigured and glorified new life.

To become again.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[Colt]

Yeah, an old question, but I found this short clip interesting.

IMOP

"In order to facilitate mortal comprehension of the universe of universes, the diverse levels of cosmic reality have been designated as finite, absonite, and absolute. Of these only the absolute is unqualifiedly eternal, truly existential. Absonites and finites are derivatives, modifications, qualifications, and attenuations of the original and primordial absolute reality of infinity.

The realms of the finite exist by virtue of the eternal purpose of God. Finite creatures, high and low, may propound theories, and have done so, as to the necessity of the finite in the cosmic economy, but in the last analysis it exists because God so willed. The universe cannot be explained, neither can a finite creature offer a rational reason for his own individual existence without appealing to the prior acts and pre-existent volition of ancestral beings, Creators or procreators."

 

[plodding inarticulateness]

Strictly, premises are true or false. Arguments are valid (if the conclusion logically follows from the premises), or invalid (if it doesn't), or sound (if a valid argument is based on true premises).

A valid argument may conclude something that is factually false. Invalidity is all you need to dismiss an argument with no further consideration. A sound argument is required if you want to say something true about the real world.

Sorry to nit pick.

Please, feel free to nit pick.

I accept and agree with all of the above. I think it is fair to recognize that the academic field of Logic is a broad one with variations that differ in applicability and suitability. Given the breadth of what falls within the field of Logic, it would seem ridiculous to ever suggest that Logic doesn’t apply as our very act of thinking requires exercising neurochemical algorithms, which qualify as complex logic circuits in my view.

What exactly, then, is being referred to when folks on RF invoke the terms ‘logic’, ‘logical’, and ‘logically’ into the opinions they express, given the breadth of the field of Logic? These terms are often used in conjunction with some conclusion being made by the speaker. My overwhelming impression is that they are used in a formal sense to assert that the argument and its conclusion is “sound” as you describe above. In fact, specifically within this thread was said: "’Deducing valid inferences from presumably [ to presume in this case I take to mean: to take for granted as being true in the absence of proof to the contrary.] valid premises’ is the intellectual process that we call ‘logic’.”

I recognize the applicability and validity of formal logic within strictly analytic systems or domains that are well defined. I am highly skeptical, however, that such formal logic is useful within the domain of the real world in making meaningful headway into those areas that are beyond our current understanding. What constitutes the core definitional or foundational axioms of reality are not known. Much of our knowledge about reality, beyond the everyday, is held conditionally, that is to say that it is held with varying levels of confidence. It is therefore my contention that the domain of the real world, reality, can not be known by virtue of any form of logic alone and certainly not formal logic, nor, given our state of ignorance, can we dare to presume what is true regarding reality.

So it is with these considerations that I say logic as invoked on RF, does not apply in answering the OP question, “Why is there anything at all?”

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

Yet, some still ask. Why is there anything at all?

Logically and rationally we can understand the becoming from created mortal to transformed immortal and incorruptible and becoming again glorified and transfigured eternal but through the finite sciences nothing could ever explain static creation as unfailing, yet dynamic in fulfilled, eternal love without rational logic to become from failed created, mortal, and corrupt spirit and flesh to become transformed immortal and incorruptible become again glorified and transfigured.

To me I see Peace all ways of logically becoming again through the “RI” real intelligence of creation,
Stephen

 

[PureX]

I find this obsession with "knowing" fascinating. As it's positively cult-like in it's universal tenacity, while it remains completely invisible to the adherent.

I also worry about the spread of this dogma. Because it will not have a positive outcome if it's not somehow checked.

Back at the turn of the last century "modern" societies succumbed to a similar obsession with knowledge-as-control being newly afforded to mankind by the industrialized application of scientific discovery. And it resulted in a global war that killed nearly 80 million people. In the midst of which was a eugenically rationalized industrial scale holocost that killed over 6 million just by itself. And all because we humans got the idea that the God of science had killed the gods of religion and that henseforth mankind would be it's own God.

And the similarities with this more recent rise in a materialist science-worshiping ideology are too striking to ignore. Especially as the whole world seems to be experiencing another rise in the popularity of fascism (forced control by a "superior" elite). And especially, too, as I am aware that I am 'spitting in the wind' here, so to speak, as the danger is invisible to those that have already drunk in the dogma, and are now become 'true believers'.

I'm glad I'm old because I do truly fear for the future of humanity.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

He has already said, “Fear not”.

Logically and rationally to me Mortal and corrupt humanity’s future becomes transformed immortal and incorruptible to become again glorified and transfigured and united from eternal fulfilled love as one in being together through the Son glorified and transfigured becoming the image of the creator God for the Father.

Truly, what is your fear? For we know the opposite of fear is love.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[plodding inarticulateness]

No, needs clarification. Empirical processes require objective independently verifiable objective evidence.

My comment was in response to this comment:

​

Again, this is what logic is for, since we humans never have "sufficient information". We have to try and assemble what little information we do have into a picture of "the truth", and then trust that this will be accurate enough to function for us. And that's what logic is used for ... cognitively questioning and testing that assemblage as we're putting it together in our minds.​

I used the term 'empirical' in the broadest possible sense, to include simply our experiences. In other words, our reasonings and our expectations that derive from them are not tested by logic but by our experience of them having held true. If you reserve the use of the term 'empiracl' as a synonym for proper scientific inquiry, that is fine and duly noted.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

'empirical' in the broadest possible sense, to include simply our experiences. In other words, our reasoning's and our expectations that derive from them are not tested by logic but by our experience of them having held true.

Peace to all,

To me in logic and rationality, the real intelligence of creation will not contain “empirical data”. In logic and rationality The infallible intelligence of creation will not contain the chance to fail. The logic in the intelligence of fulfilled creation will not contain choice or any internal temptation to fail. What becomes from the failed intelligence is in the failed spirit only to have the freedom to choose love or not. Fulfilled creation and the intelligence of creation delivered from the Holy Spirit Person through the Person of Jesus becoming the Christ in logic, rationally and through the faith in all mankind in being and is what becomes shared in all mankind. In logic and rationality, The Holy Spirit Will of creation becomes unfailing fulfilled eternal love through His Passion.

Removing any chance to fail removes all mental hate and mental anger and fear, replacing with only the shared as one in being through the only chance existing to "only" love eternally fulfilled in all of mankind becoming again one God in being and we become well through the freedom of choice of the correct "Holy Spirit" person in being to manifest.

Peace always,
Stephen

 

[plodding inarticulateness]

I get that your comments express genuine feelings on your part, but here is my take on your comments:

I find this obsession with "knowing" fascinating. As it's positively cult-like in it's universal tenacity, while it remains completely invisible to the adherent.

I also worry about the spread of this dogma. Because it will not have a positive outcome if it's not somehow checked.

I for one, likewise find it fascinating that you are fascinated that folks want to know things. Knowing is an essential and necessary part of being human, and really, being a living organism. For we Homo sapiens, this process begins right at birth and does not stop until we die.

I can not fathom why you insist on characterizing this as a tenacious and universal cult-like phenomenon.

Perhaps you could illustrate your utopian world of “not knowing” as I can’t quite imagine what that would look like.

Back at the turn of the last century "modern" societies succumbed to a similar obsession with knowledge-as-control being newly afforded to mankind by the industrialized application of scientific discovery. And it resulted in a global war that killed nearly 80 million people. In the midst of which was a eugenically rationalized industrial scale holocost that killed over 6 million just by itself. And all because we humans got the idea that the God of science had killed the gods of religion and that henseforth mankind would be it's own God.

Sorry, scientific discovery does not lead to, or cause war. Nor, it seems, does religious belief prevent them. I don’t see your comment as having much value, to be honest.

And the similarities with this more recent rise in a materialist science-worshiping ideology are too striking to ignore. Especially as the whole world seems to be experiencing another rise in the popularity of fascism (forced control by a "superior" elite). And especially, too, as I am aware that I am 'spitting in the wind' here, so to speak, as the danger is invisible to those that have already drunk in the dogma, and are now become 'true believers'.

In the U.S. at least, isn’t it the religious political right that is courting “fascist” leanings? I think you are tilting at the wrong windmill here.

I'm glad I'm old because I do truly fear for the future of humanity.

I suppose this depends on your specific set of beliefs. For those with notions of an afterlife and a Heaven to look forward to, one might imagine that for them, the future of humanity’s life on earth is of little concern and the sooner this life is over with, the sooner one gets on to the good stuff.

 

[Feedmysheep]

It is far more in conflict among religions and their divisions that non-religious philosophies. ALL ancient religions and philosophies are subjective based. and not factual. In fact mythology is far more prevalent among ancient religions than philosophies,

My take on God is that if God is real He is not the God of religion but the God of reality.
Like the law of gravity exists not just in a physics lab but throughout the universe.
So God is reality's God not religion's God.

Of course multiple beliefs about God exist. And for every philosophy there is an equally emphatic and
opposite philosophy.

Fortunately for my Christian faith we have, let's say, the 800 pound golden gorilla in the room of history who is one of a kind - Jesus of Nazareth. This is a man who occupies a class of one member. The nearest similar human being to Jesus Christ is no where near.

There is nothing in fallible human religions, philosophies or science that meets this criteria or standard of truth, though some religions and their dividions do make this claim of the level of truth..

I'd ask you. IF God were to become a human, IF such were to be, in history who would you think
among people who have walked the earth would likely be the best candidate for such a occurence?
Give me names?

I would have to say the man written about in the four gospels - Jesus Christ.
And He is available and enterable. As a one who rose from death in vindication He is experiencible and
we can enter into His life and His life enter into us.

"[T]he last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45)

Maybe in your next post you can inform me of any other teacher who claimed
that He and God would come into those who live Him and make a dwelling abode within them.
Who else claimed something like this:

Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him. (John 14;23)

Maybe you could recommend another teacher who ever said something like if we "eat" Him
we would live by Him. Who else spoke such words?

As the living Father has sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me. (John 6 :57)

I tried for awhile to ho-hum Jesus Christ away as just another copycat religious guy.
I did this under the influence of Allen Watts when I was interested in Zen Buddhism for spell in the early 1970s. It didn't work eventually. I got subdued by a living Savior. I got humbled by the shock of His
reality. But in being subdued and humbled I also paradoxically seem to ascend. Like Jesus said -

Truly I say to you, Unless you turn and become like little children, you shall by no means enter into the kingdom of the heavens.

He therefore who will humble himself like this little child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of the heavens.

And whoever receives one such little child because of My name, receives Me; (Matt. 18:3-5)

Oh, the kingdom of the heavens is not Heaven. It means the kingdom whose origin and source is
not of earth but of heaven, of God not fallen sin filled man.

You will notice that I often quote the Bible. And I'll tell you why I do. From my experience
if anything finally convinces a person about God it will be something spoken in the Bible.

I had many arguments in college days. I do not remember much of anything of those arguments
I had with Christians I met. In my experience eventually what I do remember is something that
was in the Bible. I guess it is something like Paul wrote - In order that your faith would not stand in the wisdom of men but in the power of God. (1 Co. 2:5)

That is more whare the evolving knowledge of the sciences stands as the knowledge of science increases with discoveries and research.

My feeling about this is (and I like science as much as anyone) that the more we learn the more we
realize how much we don't really know. Let them explore and research as much as they can.
I honestly think what was true 2,000 years ago is just as true today. And it will be true should we
spend another 2,000 years of discovery. The universe testifies to the eternal nature of God and His divine characteristics.

Because that which is known of God is manifest within them, for God manifested it to them.
For the invisible things of Him, both His eternal power and divine characteristics, have been clearly seen since the creation of the world, being perceived by the things made, so that they would be without excuse; (Rom. 1:19,20)

I honestly do not think the manifold encrease of scientific knowledge will ever out pace this intuitive
realization in the honest human conscience. Things like this simply involve a mind, a plan, an intelligence
the capabilty of which is infinite.

Do you think the DNA molecule or the Table of Elements are schemes which came together accidently
with no forethought of a planning intelligence? I cannot believe so.

First the conflicting claims of the Divisions of Christianity do not in and of themselves invalidate the life and teachings of Jesus Christ.

I don't see it this way exactly. It is man's fallen nature to sieze upon the highest and most noble truths
to try to adopt them for their banner, thier cause, and thier agenda. I do not count the divisions of denominations as a statement on the unreality of Christ.

Books like "The Pilgrim Church" by E.H. Broadbent or "Miller's Church History" by Andrew Miller
have been helpful. They showed that there is always been a remnant or stream of continuation of
oneness among some Christians in spite of varied divisions of organized denominationalism.

Having said that I do admit that Jesus Himself said that the world would believe (all who would believe)
because of the oneness and unity of His disciples.

That they all may be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us; that the world may believe that You have sent Me.

And the glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, even as We are one;

I in them, and You in Me, that they may be perfected into one, that the world may know that You have sent Me and have loved them even as You have loved Me. (John 17:21-23)

I have therefore no doubt that this "perfecting" (a process) of at least a representative remnant of His people will and is emmerging in the world. The scandel of divisions among Christians is indeed tragic. I do not believe that it invalidates Christ's message. I do not believe a piligrim like unity can be completely destroyed.

The Apostle Paul said that we Christians would all arrive at this oneness. But he did not say we would
necessarily all arrive at the same time.

Until we all arrive at the oneness of the faith and of the full knowledge of the Son of God, at a full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,

That we may be no longer little children tossed by waves and carried about by every wind of teaching in the sleight of men, in craftiness with a view to a system of error,

But holding to truth in love, we may grow up into Him in all things, who is the Head, Christ, (Eph. 4:13-15)

So shunyadragon, I do not gloat at the divisions. I look for the genuine oneness and maturity among
brethren. I do not think the scandel of divisions is so prevailing that Christ's prophecy to build His church
has or will fail. There will be those who overcome division like a remnant of Israelites returned from
the Babylonian Captivity to stand again on the ground of the promise land and its city - (see Haggai, Zechariah, Nehemiah, Ezra.).

This is not an elite. This is a recovery of normality from scattering into exile and division.
I do not grasp at the scandel of divisions as rationale to assume Christ is non-truth of defeated.

Besides, He says to me "[You] follow Me". I do not look around to use another's failure to
furnish me with reasons to not follow my Lord.

The problems of conflicts in understanding scriptures first involves the conflicting understanding of the Old Testament and the nature of God, even within the Divisions of Christianity in the claims of a Trinitarian God.

This is a bigger subject than I can give attention to right now. I'll come back.
But the Trinity is not a doctrine created to argue over. He is a reality to be enjoyed and lived in.
When we live in the Father - Son - Holy Spirit there is oneness in enjoyment and life.
When we talk about it excessively to the neglect of living in the Father - Son - Spirit then
problems of debates arrive.

The Lord said "Receive the Holy Spirit" not "Figure out the Holy Spirit".

I do not mean we should not muse over the words of Scripture.
My way is to say "Amen" to whatever the Bible says without feeling some obligation
to reconcile all paradoxes of this God. So the triune God is a life to be lived in more than
a doctrine to be expressed in mathematical like consistency.

I'll have to examine your last pragraphs latter and perhaps respond latter.

The next elephant in the room is the question of how the different religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam consider the sciences and the sciences of evolution and the history of the universe when they are divided over the interpretation of the Pentateuch, and wide spread rejection of science. The authors of the Pentateuch, New Testament and the Church Fathers believed it is a literal history of our physical universe and humanity, which is an ancient worldview in total conflict with science.

The Trinity

 

[Twilight Hue]

Short clip is ten minutes. Sorry I have the patience of a peanut. Can you summarize or drop some time stamps?

This philosophical question has always been one of the top ones that intrigues me most. I have no definite answer, except for that I think 'nothing existing' is paradoxical, hence existence.

This is strictly and clearly philosophical , but our experiences are only when we're awake.
So it kind of makes me wonder if the 'other side' has any type of experience that I can't communicate with.

How's that for a bit of craziness?

 

[Frank Buffalo]

"Why does anything exist?" is a question of meaning. And I agree with those who say there's no answer to this question..
That we exist is obvious. To argue that existence proves the existence of some god creator is just a faith statement without real evidence. Insofar as we do exist, we need to create our own meaning for our own existence.

 

[Andrew Stephen]

Peace to all,

To me in logic, the Word existed before creation was ever created was even created and is the intelligence of creation that never fails.

Peace always,
Stephen