God and the Crucifixion of Opposites

[Fenrir_Odal]

This is my first time explaining this so it might not be parsed the best. Essentially, the premise starts with the crucifixion of opposites, which states that everything in this universe works on the law of opposite pairs: good and evil, chad vs sub 5, positive vs negative, north vs south, loud vs quite, rich vs poor, and so on. Lets take for instance chad vs sub 5. You have normies ofc but its all relative the opposite of htn being a ltn a mtn being a slightly worse but equal mtn and so on. With respect to wealth u have rich and poor but in the middle class you have upper and lower; as one can see the crucifixion is present in all matters.

I was reading a CIA document ill link here that I think puts this analogy into an easier manner to understand:

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf

Still pertaining to the opposites, in the brain you have the left and right hemispheres. Hemi sync per the gateway tapes attempts to bridge the two halves connecting each to form a uniform whole. The hope is to ascend the mind to higher vibrational frequencies/plains. Thus this necessarily means there are also lower plains of existence. Ill get back to this later.

The ultimate point in this is that god or whatever rules this universe must be all powerful; he must in essence be the unity of the opposites both good and evil to be one or the other necessarily means that he has an equal opposite thus the all powerful ruler of this universe must be the unity of both.

I liken it to a magnet:

where god can be seen as the middle of both positive and negative he is the exact middle he joins the two just as the corpus callosum connects the two hemispheres of the mind. Or in another vein when you see yin and yang if god were one or the other he would have an equally powerful opposite. Therefore assuming there is a god he must be both yin and yang the whole of both.

Most of this metaphysics can simply be premised of Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that for every action force, there is an equal and opposite reaction force

Thus the question then becomes well if there is a conscious god and he is assumed to be all powerful based on the above premise by taking action he makes himself not all powerful by necessitating and equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, based on this alone god must be a non intervening entity as to take action would violate the aforementioned principles. We can also assume reasonably that any being with any amount of power would therefore seek to make use of its power. And that if god who must be all powerful is a non intervening entity he would also likely be unconscious. Since consciousness allows for self monitoring a god that is conscious would be able to decipher good vs evil this would violate the crucifixion of opposites thereby making him not all powerful. As in being able to judge its own actions it would then per the magnet above be choosing to ascribe a positive or negative view to the circumstances; this conscious would also mean the god is taking action and thus choosing a side simply by labelling one thing or another as good or evil.

Now where am I going with all this. Well if god is all powerful, unconscious, and unable to take action then well it doesn't really matter whether u do good or evil. However, per the hemi sync reference earlier of higher and lower vibrational planes I would say this is not necessarily true. The ascension to higher planes per the gateway tapes can be seen in higher karmically good values and the lower planes karmically reductive values both sides equally add to the total sum of experiences of the universe and therefore can be seen as necessary. Thus while to the universe good and bad are meaningful, within the universe your actions like a magnet will push you to one end or the other....one extreme or the other.

Thus, you have to decide how you want to live your life; this manner of thinking certainly gives you agency and absolves you of any moral pandering. However, just like in an RPG you still must decide how you want to live your life: good or evil, with both being equally valuable to the totality of the universe.

Obviously there comes a sense of meaningless with this, but in many respects the video games and RPG's we play are in large part meaningless. Yet, we still play simply for the love of the game.

@longlifesacriface @elxbp sphenoidnr@sphenoidnr Litekiller11@Litekiller11 6'4 MTN@6'4 MTN [email protected] BigBallsLarry@BigBallsLarry NuclearBrainReturns@NuclearBrainReturns elliottttt@elliottttt disillusioned@disillusioned Hayes@Hayes

 

[wii]

repfarm spot claimed

 

[Striated]

dnr

 

[uglyretardednigga]

dnr schizopost

 

[Fenrir_Odal]

Most of this metaphysics can simply be premised of Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that for every action force, there is an equal and opposite reaction force

I imagine this is also why the elites tell you what they are going to do

It absolves them of the equal and opposite reaction. Thus allowing there power to increase at the expense of the masses.

 

[gautama333]

The problems with this argument are: 1) if a thing is and is always in relation to an opposite, what constitutes thingness? What constitutes the posibilities of things appearing as such? and if the thing itself is in relation to another, what is being in relation? Is relation necessary?

2) you are making a false analogy when quoting Newton, as using a law concerned exclusively with a specific form of empirical data (physics and its region of knowledge) with an abstract and undefined quantification in the potency of god. If it could be analogous to physics, it should be clarified in which way it is inhered from the law of physics, and not indifferent, or viceversa, condition of possibility of representation.

3) according to what are these things opposites? You pointed to several fields in which dualities happen (good-evil, positive-negative, physical motivator-response, etc.), but you didn't give a reason to why this fields are preferential over others in which opposition isn't necessary. Can't you generalize all of these to the thing and it's negation, which isn't necessarily an opposite according to anything, but instead just the limit of the thing? Without delimiting how these fields in which the oppositions are given are or are not privileged as proof to the whole of experience, the matter is entirely unclear, and the possibility of confusing local effects of another law (this oppositions themselves) with the primary law remains unsolved.

However, the argument is creative enough, keep it up. You'd have fun with marxist dialectics (or Hegelian if you have enough balls to read that shit XDD)

 

[Fenrir_Odal]

The problems with this argument are: 1) if a thing is and is always in relation to an opposite, what constitutes thingness? What constitutes the posibilities of things appearing as such? and if the thing itself is in relation to another, what is being in relation? Is relation necessary?

this is a fair point. Its taking the micro to expand to the macro since we dont have the whole picture its generally more difficult to conceptualize. When you go from the macro to micro its far easier think extrapolating blood u can see to red blood cells under a microscope.

2) you are making a false analogy when quoting Newton, as using a law concerned exclusively with a specific form of empirical data (physics and its region of knowledge) with an abstract and undefined quantification in the potency of god. If it could be analogous to physics, it should be clarified in which way it is inhered from the law of physics, and not indifferent, or viceversa, condition of possibility of representation.

physics underpins our reality. Obviously it manifest itself in different ways but it would be foolish to think that it only applies to the material realm. Much of the science today was based on occult and esoteric knowledge (now obviously this is more of an appeal). However, its often the case that such subjects are intertwined just as biology and chemistry merge together via biochemistry so too can physics be extrapolated into the metaphysical.

3) according to what are these things opposites? You pointed to several fields in which dualities happen (good-evil, positive-negative, physical motivator-response, etc.), but you didn't give a reason to why this fields are preferential over others in which opposition isn't necessary. Can't you generalize all of these to the thing and it's negation, which isn't necessarily an opposite according to anything, but instead just the limit of the thing? Without delimiting how these fields in which the oppositions are given are or are not privileged as proof to the whole of experience, the matter is entirely unclear, and the possibility of confusing local effects of another law (this oppositions themselves) with the primary law remains unsolved.

everything is an opposite. The point in using the extremes is it makes the differences more obvious. You can scale it down for instance say a bell curve the difference between an IQ of 101 and 99 is so minute as to be irrelevant but there is still a difference or a charge of say negative 1 vs positive 1....think of a limit in math where you approach the number but never touch it - or + the opposite is still there, but it is so small as to be considered equal. This is why we use the extremes.

I am rather certain you can think of many things in which the opposites present themselves. The thing and its negation is also an opposite (think to have vs have not)

This is likely why you have symbols such as the yin and yang and also why such dualities present themselves in many of the major religions.

However, the argument is creative enough, keep it up. You'd have fun with marxist dialectics (or Hegelian if you have enough balls to read that shit XDD)

ill check them out could certainly be a fun read

 

[Niebvll]

Dnr

 

[islamiczionist]

this is a fair point. Its taking the micro to expand to the macro since we dont have the whole picture its generally more difficult to conceptualize. When you go from the macro to micro its far easier think extrapolating blood u can see to red blood cells under a microscope.

physics underpins our reality. Obviously it manifest itself in different ways but it would be foolish to think that it only applies to the material realm. Much of the science today was based on occult and esoteric knowledge (now obviously this is more of an appeal). However, its often the case that such subjects are intertwined just as biology and chemistry merge together via biochemistry so too can physics be extrapolated into the metaphysical.

everything is an opposite. The point in using the extremes is it makes the differences more obvious. You can scale it down for instance say a bell curve the difference between an IQ of 101 and 99 is so minute as to be irrelevant but there is still a difference or a charge of say negative 1 vs positive 1....think of a limit in math where you approach the number but never touch it - or + the opposite is still there, but it is so small as to be considered equal. This is why we use the extremes.

I am rather certain you can think of many things in which the opposites present themselves. The thing and its negation is also an opposite (think to have vs have not)

This is likely why you have symbols such as the yin and yang and also why such dualities present themselves in many of the major religions.



ill check them out could certainly be a fun read

What do you think the opposite of time is? I was thinking it could be any state of timelessness obviously but to measure timelessness you fully need the concept of time

Unlike opposites like dark and light or north and south

You don’t need darkness to measure light or light to measure darkness they’re consequential


The only opposite to time may be space but that’s a micro to macro comparison

So where does time fall?

 

[Fenrir_Odal]

What do you think the opposite of time is? I was thinking it could be any state of timelessness obviously but to measure timelessness you fully need the concept of time

Unlike opposites like dark and light or north and south

You don’t need darkness to measure light or light to measure darkness they’re consequential


The only opposite to time may be space but that’s a micro to macro comparison

So where does time fall?

Time is really an abstract concept of 3 things past, present, and future of which the past and future are opposites and the present is always passing us by. So in breaking down the etymology of the word we find the crucifixion still holds.

Its possible something like a black hole represents timeliness due to the manner in which it slows down and distorts space time itself per the torus field above.

 

[gribsufer1]

 

[Topkra]

Yea yea whatever

 

[Fenrir_Odal]

What do you think the opposite of time is? I was thinking it could be any state of timelessness obviously but to measure timelessness you fully need the concept of time

Unlike opposites like dark and light or north and south

You don’t need darkness to measure light or light to measure darkness they’re consequential


The only opposite to time may be space but that’s a micro to macro comparison

So where does time fall?

I think maybe another way to think about this is in terms of waves and frequency both of which underpin our universe via light and resonant vibration.

The wave itself has peaks and troughs akin to the opposites above. And if the wave alternating between each cycle then so too should our universe since it is the macro of the wavelength micro.

@sphenoidnr @Litekiller 11 @6'4 MTN @Bayardo.arc @BigBallsLarry @NuclearBrainReturns @elliottttt @disillusioned @Hayes

 

[6'4 MTN]

This is my first time explaining this so it might not be parsed the best. Essentially, the premise starts with the crucifixion of opposites, which states that everything in this universe works on the law of opposite pairs: good and evil, chad vs sub 5, positive vs negative, north vs south, loud vs quite, rich vs poor, and so on. Lets take for instance chad vs sub 5. You have normies ofc but its all relative the opposite of htn being a ltn a mtn being a slightly worse but equal mtn and so on. With respect to wealth u have rich and poor but in the middle class you have upper and lower; as one can see the crucifixion is present in all matters.

I was reading a CIA document ill link here that I think puts this analogy into an easier manner to understand:

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00788R001700210016-5.pdf

View attachment 5061342


Still pertaining to the opposites, in the brain you have the left and right hemispheres. Hemi sync per the gateway tapes attempts to bridge the two halves connecting each to form a uniform whole. The hope is to ascend the mind to higher vibrational frequencies/plains. Thus this necessarily means there are also lower plains of existence. Ill get back to this later.

The ultimate point in this is that god or whatever rules this universe must be all powerful; he must in essence be the unity of the opposites both good and evil to be one or the other necessarily means that he has an equal opposite thus the all powerful ruler of this universe must be the unity of both.

I liken it to a magnet:

View attachment 5061387
where god can be seen as the middle of both positive and negative he is the exact middle he joins the two just as the corpus callosum connects the two hemispheres of the mind. Or in another vein when you see yin and yang if god were one or the other he would have an equally powerful opposite. Therefore assuming there is a god he must be both yin and yang the whole of both.

Most of this metaphysics can simply be premised of Newton’s Third Law of Motion states that for every action force, there is an equal and opposite reaction force

Thus the question then becomes well if there is a conscious god and he is assumed to be all powerful based on the above premise by taking action he makes himself not all powerful by necessitating and equal and opposite reaction. Therefore, based on this alone god must be a non intervening entity as to take action would violate the aforementioned principles. We can also assume reasonably that any being with any amount of power would therefore seek to make use of its power. And that if god who must be all powerful is a non intervening entity he would also likely be unconscious. Since consciousness allows for self monitoring a god that is conscious would be able to decipher good vs evil this would violate the crucifixion of opposites thereby making him not all powerful. As in being able to judge its own actions it would then per the magnet above be choosing to ascribe a positive or negative view to the circumstances; this conscious would also mean the god is taking action and thus choosing a side simply by labelling one thing or another as good or evil.

Now where am I going with all this. Well if god is all powerful, unconscious, and unable to take action then well it doesn't really matter whether u do good or evil. However, per the hemi sync reference earlier of higher and lower vibrational planes I would say this is not necessarily true. The ascension to higher planes per the gateway tapes can be seen in higher karmically good values and the lower planes karmically reductive values both sides equally add to the total sum of experiences of the universe and therefore can be seen as necessary. Thus while to the universe good and bad are meaningful, within the universe your actions like a magnet will push you to one end or the other....one extreme or the other.

Thus, you have to decide how you want to live your life; this manner of thinking certainly gives you agency and absolves you of any moral pandering. However, just like in an RPG you still must decide how you want to live your life: good or evil, with both being equally valuable to the totality of the universe.

Obviously there comes a sense of meaningless with this, but in many respects the video games and RPG's we play are in large part meaningless. Yet, we still play simply for the love of the game.

@longlifesacriface @elxbp sphenoidnr@sphenoidnr Litekiller11@Litekiller11 6'4 MTN@6'4 MTN [email protected] BigBallsLarry@BigBallsLarry NuclearBrainReturns@NuclearBrainReturns elliottttt@elliottttt disillusioned@disillusioned Hayes@Hayes

nice theory.