24 Oct 10
Originally posted by AgergLook man- I've seen it. (suspending the usual laws of physics).
How simple is magic? By this I don't mean how hard is it to chant "abracadabra"; I'm more interested in the underlying mechanics (or spiritual mechanics if you will, of other dimensional entites/events that betray the laws of physics, and the range of interaction of such phenomenon with the material universe, and also what has to in place for such to occur - ie: howzit all work??? 😕)
I wont preach, but I just wanted to put it out there.
Specific questions will be met very well-considered responses.
24 Oct 10
Originally posted by josephwExcept for your athiests comment, that was a really good post
Yes and no.
Try to think outside the box. What is described as Christianity by the little graph is only what is visible. Like trying to forge an image of God out of rock or wood or something. You can't "see" God with your eyes, or for that matter, with any of your other physical senses.
The "Church" which is the "Body of Christ" is invisible as well. E ...[text shortened]... eism is exactly true as far as I can tell. One dimensional and boring as hell.
24 Oct 10
23 Oct '10 23:51
Originally posted by Hand of Hecate
http://img.moonbuggy.org/occams-razor/
Think maybe Occam was onto something?
Yes and no.
Try to think outside the box. What is described as Christianity by the little graph is only what is visible. Like trying to forge an image of God out of rock or wood or something. You can't "see" God with your eyes, or for that matter, with any of your other physical senses.
The "Church" which is the "Body of Christ" is invisible as well. Each member has within the "Spirit of Christ", and you can't always tell who is lying or telling the truth. In fact, a lot of folks think they're Christians, but they are not.
What passes for Christianity that you can "see" in this world is a corruption of the true "Church". Although, there are many very small local assemblies around the world that you may never "see" where true believers gather together for fellowship.
So, Occam's observations are true, but not about the truth.
Interestingly though, the part about atheism is exactly true as far as I can tell. One dimensional and boring as hell.
24 Oct 10
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeesterAs Fabian Fnas says...the laws of physics, whether we understand them correctly/accurately or can express them, would still have been in place after the big bang.
How simple were the first few seconds after the 'big bang'; where were the laws of physics during those seconds?
I get the impression that people think, say, willing an object X into existence via magic is simple compared to compared to a large system of interactions that result in some object X. I disagree:
-Whence did this stuff come?
-What was physical aspect of the mechanism that put it there (such that the end manifestation of this 'magic' is a material object(s) in the material universe)?
-What effect does the instantiation of this new object have on neighbouring objects?
-what things cannot be created in this manner?...why not?
-Who or what is capable of performing this magic, to what extents? For those that cannot, in detail, why not? Is the list/set of 'cannots' exhaustive? How do you know something else you haven't accounted for cannot do other magic Y to counteract/prevent magic X??
.
.
.
-I suppose I could contrive other questions but I hope you get my drift
24 Oct 10
Originally posted by AgergWhat magic?
As Fabian Fnas says...the laws of physics, whether we understand them correctly/accurately or can express them, would still have been in place after the big bang.
I get the impression that people think, say, willing an object X into existence via magic is simple compared to compared to a large system of interactions that result in some object X. I disagree: ...[text shortened]... magic X??
.
.
.
-I suppose I could contrive other questions but I hope you get my drift
24 Oct 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelBefore I jump the gun with a preemptive account of what you've seen perhaps you might tell me what it was you saw, how long ago this occured, perhaps what you'd had to drink or possibly medication/drugs taken, your general mood/state of mind, your level of fatigue, a brief description of the ambience and your proximity to said event, and who else was there to witness it?
Look man- I've seen it. (suspending the usual laws of physics).
I wont preach, but I just wanted to put it out there.
Specific questions will be met very well-considered responses.
24 Oct 10
Originally posted by AgergSo then what brought natural laws into existence?
things that defy natural laws like, say, willing a planet into existence.
Did they always exist?
Is it necessary that matter exists before natural laws would exist?
Which came first? The chicken or the egg?
Well, guess what? The chicken came first. It has been discovered that there is an enzyme in the shell of a chicken egg that only exists in the ovaries of a chicken. So naturally a chicken would have had to exist before the egg.
24 Oct 10
Originally posted by AgergMan. I wrote this medium length response and it just wont go up there (get posted)
Before I jump the gun with a preemptive account of what you've seen perhaps you might tell me what it was you saw, how long ago this occured, perhaps what you'd had to drink or possibly medication/drugs taken, your general mood/state of mind, your level of fatigue, a brief description of the ambience and your proximity to said event, and who else was there to witness it?
I'll take it as a sign to answer you later...
24 Oct 10
Originally posted by Agerg1.What does that matter?
As Fabian Fnas says...the laws of physics, whether we understand them correctly/accurately or can express them, would still have been in place after the big bang.
I get the impression that people think, say, willing an object X into existence via magic is simple compared to compared to a large system of interactions that result in some object X. I disagree: ...[text shortened]... magic X??
.
.
.
-I suppose I could contrive other questions but I hope you get my drift
2.Dont know
3.Everything affects everything else.
4.the reason that it cant be created is that it is not done properly,
5.Tis not "magic" . Only "physics"
(I'm going to cop it for these answers but I thought I would try to answer)