“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#888 Apr 7, 2014
The hypothetical law of balance is an attempt to assert that Newton's third law (for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction), which is not actually a law in modern scientific parlance, but an element of one aspect of the theory of inertia, is also a metaphysical principle. Its association with real science is supposed to lend it credence and avoid the skeptic's natural response, "Interesting idea, but is it true?" Unlike Newton's principle, though, it cannot be tested via the scientific method. Its support consists of stories that seem to support it, but for every one of those, I can find one that calls it into question.

The "Law of Balance," then, is not a law at all, but one more philosophical abstraction that has no more support than anything else in the collection of claptrap that is religion.

As far as I can tell, the "Law of Economy (Death)" is jide oni's own invention, which he will share for $21.98 in a book self-published via Lulu. From what he's written here, I gather that it combines the Hindu principles of karma and reincarnation to promote the idea that spiritual life is neither created nor destroyed and that everything comes out even in the end.

Again, an interesting idea with no reason for a skeptic to see it as more than a complex exercise in wishful thinking.

The phrase "natural justice" has meaning in English law, but I'm pretty sure that's not what jide oni means. I think it's another aspect of his view karma and reincarnation combining to make everything come out even. Again, to a skeptic, it's only an interesting bit of wishful thinking.

These "laws" do not exist outside of the imaginings of oni and people like him. As such, they cannot be inviolable or permanent.(How is it that oni doesn't even realize that inviolability is the same as having no exceptions?)

Man's laws have been a work in progress as long as they have existed. Like all other such endeavors, they move towards perfection, albeit slowly, and without the possibility of reaching it, as man's collecting intelligence grows over time.

But just as Oni's laws do not exist, nor does the perfect intelligence that he conjures to have created them.

No perfect intelligence.

No supreme intelligence.

No supreme being.

No evidence.

No logic.

No reason. No QED.

It's just another set of The Emperor's New Clothes. No substance. an intricate weave of nothing at all.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#889 Apr 7, 2014
Thinking wrote:
More bollocks from you.
<quoted text>
killer bollocks?

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#890 Apr 8, 2014
jide oni wrote:
Are man-made laws imperfect?
Yes.
Are the imperfect man-made laws the products of the imperfect intelligence of man?
Yes.
What are the imperfections of the man-made laws?
1. They are violable,
2. They are
changeable,
3. They have
exceptions.
Are there perfect laws that naturally operate on man and all of existence?
Yes.
Can you give an example of the perfect laws?
1. The law of balance,
2. The law of economy of life (death),
3. The law of natural justice etc.
What are the perfections of the natural laws?
1. They are inviolable,
2. They are permanent,
3. They have no exceptions.
If the imperfect man-made laws are the products of the imperfect intelligpence of man, aren't the perfect natural laws the products of perfect intelligence?
Yes.
Isn't the perfect intelligence superior to the imperfect intelligence?
Yes.
Isn't the superior intelligence supreme after all?
Yes, It is.
Isn't the supreme intelligence a thing, an entity or a being?
Yes, It is.
Then, a supreme being is evident.
Gallimatias!
Thinking

Sturminster Newton, UK

#891 Apr 8, 2014
You're clearly an expert in B movies.
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text>killer bollocks?

Since: Jan 14

United States

#892 Apr 8, 2014
Inviolability of the perfect laws is not the same as their having no exceptions.
A law that is inviolable is that which cannot be disobeyed. Whereas, that the law has no exceptions implies that there is no sacred cow in the way of the law, but that it applies to everybody equally irrespective of racial, academic, religious, etc, status.
In addition to the earlier-mentioned characteristics of the perfect laws, are their omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience and benevolence.
For example,let us consider the law of economy of life, i.e. death:
No living thing can disobey it;
No human government can abrogate it;
It is a respecter of no one;
No matter how spiritually, financially, militarily, medically etc, fortified you may be, utterly overpowered and trapped you will eventually find yourself in the suffocating paws of the omnipotent death;
Wherever you are, you see the omnipresent death ever present;
Whatever your laurel in preventative medicine, your knowledge remains thwarted by the omniscient death.

Since: Mar 12

Devil's hometown

#893 Apr 8, 2014
jide oni wrote:
Inviolability of the perfect laws is not the same as their having no exceptions.
A law that is inviolable is that which cannot be disobeyed. Whereas, that the law has no exceptions implies that there is no sacred cow in the way of the law, but that it applies to everybody equally irrespective of racial, academic, religious, etc, status.
In addition to the earlier-mentioned characteristics of the perfect laws, are their omnipotence, omnipresence, omniscience and benevolence.
For example,let us consider the law of economy of life, i.e. death:
No living thing can disobey it;
No human government can abrogate it;
It is a respecter of no one;
No matter how spiritually, financially, militarily, medically etc, fortified you may be, utterly overpowered and trapped you will eventually find yourself in the suffocating paws of the omnipotent death;
Wherever you are, you see the omnipresent death ever present;
Whatever your laurel in preventative medicine, your knowledge remains thwarted by the omniscient death.
You're once again messing up with the terminologies that you don't understand.How come natural laws be omniscient?Do they have minds of their own?

Since: Jan 14

United States

#894 Apr 8, 2014
fadu singh,
The moon, the earth, the sun - is the excercise of your mindpower anything close to that displayed by these so-called lifeless heavenly bodies?
You have a mind, yet the so-called mindless laws rule and control your life.
It is a natural fiat that whatever has life must succumb to the action of death, despite man's fruitless efforts to the contrary.
No matter where you might hide yourself, even at the bottom of the sea, the omniscient death knows how to locate you whenever your life purpose has been exhausted.

Since: Mar 12

Devil's hometown

#895 Apr 8, 2014
jide oni wrote:
fadu singh,
The moon, the earth, the sun - is the excercise of your mindpower anything close to that displayed by these so-called lifeless heavenly bodies?
You have a mind, yet the so-called mindless laws rule and control your life.
It is a natural fiat that whatever has life must succumb to the action of death, despite man's fruitless efforts to the contrary.
No matter where you might hide yourself, even at the bottom of the sea, the omniscient death knows how to locate you whenever your life purpose has been exhausted.
You're personifying death.Death can't be omniscient.Death is just like any other natural process.It is just like the explosion in the sun,destruction of stars,etc.
I don't know what makes you emphasize death and how does it relate to your cosmic-consciousness theory.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#896 Apr 8, 2014
fadu singh wrote:
<quoted text>
You're personifying death.Death can't be omniscient.Death is just like any other natural process.It is just like the explosion in the sun,destruction of stars,etc.
I don't know what makes you emphasize death and how does it relate to your cosmic-consciousness theory.
A natural process beyond your control!
Thinking

Sturminster Newton, UK

#897 Apr 8, 2014
You have presented no evidence.
jide oni wrote:
fadu singh,
The moon, the earth, the sun - is the excercise of your mindpower anything close to that displayed by these so-called lifeless heavenly bodies?
You have a mind, yet the so-called mindless laws rule and control your life.
It is a natural fiat that whatever has life must succumb to the action of death, despite man's fruitless efforts to the contrary.
No matter where you might hide yourself, even at the bottom of the sea, the omniscient death knows how to locate you whenever your life purpose has been exhausted.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#898 Apr 8, 2014
fadu singh wrote:
<quoted text>
You're personifying death.Death can't be omniscient.Death is just like any other natural process.It is just like the explosion in the sun,destruction of stars,etc.
I don't know what makes you emphasize death and how does it relate to your cosmic-consciousness theory.
Oddly enough, I just wrote about this on another thread:

I think it's more likely that critical thinking abilities developed/evolved over a very long period of time, preceded by instinct and simple pattern recognition by eons. Over time, those two probably combined to allow primitive humans to perceive intent and predict the behavior of other animals, helped in finding prey rather than becoming it, and of other humans.

That same ability would have been misdirected towards discerning intent in inanimate forces like weather and seismic activity. They would have seen portents in the heavens long before they developed to the point where they could think about them from a more scientific point of view.

Even now, we see those ancient patterns of behavior struggling with more modern approaches to knowing. Religious people and organizations have fought tooth-and-nail against every significant scientific advancement over the past millennium even though most of them came from within--adherents or even clergy.

Deeply held belief, especially that which is learned from parents during childhood, are hard to give up and even harder to admit to in the face of criticism,scorn, and perhaps even rejection by family and other loved ones. That's why people will respond in polls that they no longer believer but won't self-identify as atheists.

This, of course, is my own opinion and conjecture, and I present it as noting more than that. But it does make some sense, doesn't it?

http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/atheism/T...

Death terrifies most people. Personifying it creates the illusion that it has behavior patterns that can be understood, even predicted and perhaps avoided., and/or that it is not permanent, but a process of transition of some sort, to heaven, a new life, or some other state of being--anything except the extinction that is its reality when seen without blinders or faith-colored glasses.

Jide oni is not immune to those fears or the need to create or buy into such delusions.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#899 Apr 8, 2014
Death personified?
But what is personification?- The height of creative genius which bestows life on lifeless 'percept' or concept, to further underscore and picturesquely capture the importance of the thing so personified.
Come to think of it: The term 'god' itself,viewed from a 'theosophical' angle, is nothing other than imaginative personification approximation of truth, love, life, beauty, light, energy, force, universe (cosmos), nature, intelligence, mind, consciousness and any other form or idea that pervades or/and enobles all of existence.
So, why the fuss, and why the epistle, over innocent and creative depiction of death - a powerful force in existence?

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#900 Apr 8, 2014
Thinking wrote:
You have presented no evidence.
<quoted text>
You have failed/refused to see evidence.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#901 Apr 8, 2014
Only a person can withhold respect, hold someone in its "suffocating paws," or be omniscient. To ascribe those qualities to a phenomenon is to personify it, even allowing for poetic license. Doing so requires no creative genius, especially when the purpose is to personify the entire universe as a fully existent god that is also asserted to be omniscient.

Jideoni-Charles over-assess his own abilities and importance to a ridiculous extent.

Since: Jul 09

Location hidden

#902 Apr 8, 2014
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text>
God is omnipotent; But what has no beginning could have been created.
the god you imagine is a projection of your psyche,

that is why the god is so confused
Thinking

Sturminster Newton, UK

#903 Apr 9, 2014
I say no, but either way, your god is not omnipotent.
jide oni wrote:
<quoted text> You have failed/refused to see evidence.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#904 Apr 9, 2014
What is personification still?- Bestowing intelligence, mind and volition on non-human animal.
How do we recognize the existence of the above qualities?- Through the observable manifestations in the effects produced by their actions.
Aren't the laws made by man the necessary products of man's intelligence?
Yes, they are.
Aren't there natural laws or principles that operate on man, independent of man's intelligence?
Yes, there are.
If no law can exist without an intelligent source behind, could the natural laws have existed without an intelligent natural source at the background?
No, they couldn't.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#905 Apr 9, 2014
karl44 wrote:
<quoted text>
the god you imagine is a projection of your psyche,
that is why the god is so confused
What has no beginning couldn't have been created.

Since: Jan 14

Europe

#906 Apr 9, 2014
God's omnipotence (all-powerfulness), the totality of all the existing powers in the universe, including the powers of Kar144, of NightSerf, of singh, of Thinking, and virtually of anything that manifest any form of power at all.
How happy indeed it will be, when the truth dawns on the world of atheists? That jide oni does not conceive God to be a personalized human-like god, having a separate existence somewhere in the sky!
Nay! God should be conceived as the totality of existence, without which nothing exists. such that the perfect character of the God is simply the utmost sum-total of all manifest existence.
With the above in mind, we would all realize that when we talk about God, we are directly talking about ourselves; for we are gods ourselves, manifesting in a relative degree the exact miniaturized replica of the absolute attributes of the whole.
Thinking

Sturminster Newton, UK

#907 Apr 9, 2014
More bollocks from you.
jide oni wrote:
God's omnipotence (all-powerfulness), the totality of all the existing powers in the universe, including the powers of Kar144, of NightSerf, of singh, of Thinking, and virtually of anything that manifest any form of power at all.
How happy indeed it will be, when the truth dawns on the world of atheists? That jide oni does not conceive God to be a personalized human-like god, having a separate existence somewhere in the sky!
Nay! God should be conceived as the totality of existence, without which nothing exists. such that the perfect character of the God is simply the utmost sum-total of all manifest existence.
With the above in mind, we would all realize that when we talk about God, we are directly talking about ourselves; for we are gods ourselves, manifesting in a relative degree the exact miniaturized replica of the absolute attributes of the whole.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 min Rosa_Winkel 228,566
Our world came from nothing? 1 hr Reason Personified 700
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 3 hr Dally Mama 5,587
Heaven 6 hr susanblange 2
Another week, another atheist demands we call h... 7 hr Patrick 7
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 7 hr Patrick 152
The Ultimate Evidence of God (Mar '14) 16 hr Patrick 140

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE