reply to post by RevelationsDivad
Originally posted by RevelationsDivad
You shouldn't look at something that god created to solidify gods existence.
I was not seeking evidence of a God when I conceptualized my theory. Step 9 came about by pattern recognition and nothing more.
Originally posted by RevelationsDivad
You have to examine gods tendencies and see if they are logical or illogical. This is the way of correct logic.
I'm not exactly sure what your statement is addressing. Do you believe God is the energy referred to in my theory? Regardless of what your answer is,
my theory never calls into question whether God is logical or illogical in his tendencies - I am not judging God's sanity here.
“Step 9 not only assures the existence of a God, but it also explains why he would create us”, only speculates on what step 9 is. The speculation
is based upon the pattern recognized in the prior steps. If you do not recognize the pattern, then there is nothing to argue.
Originally posted by RevelationsDivad
These solidifiers are often what existence is made up of. You cannot cross examine something that is apart of existence and say that it is the reason
why god exists...
And again, this theory was not contrived to show God's existence. I did not have God in mind until I recognized the pattern in steps 1-8. As stated
in the opening sentence of the post, this theory started by breaking down concepts. I was trying to get to the root of concepts when I noticed that
the mind must have a concept of the body. From there, everything flowed naturally all the way down to energy (the lowest form that I have a concept
of). When reconstructing the concepts I noticed the pattern and formulated my theory.
If you have a better concept, on how to explain the pattern or close the loop of said pattern, then I would love to read it.