Love created God

Fen

Registered Senior Member
I. In the beginning there is Love.
II. Love creates two conscious entities.
III. Love creates God.
IV. God asks Love to increase the number of entities to the musical number, which is even. Love does this.
V. God sets up the rules of physics (randomly) and starts the universe--then waits for it to end.
VI. Repeat the last step.

1. A conscious entity is the self.

a. The amount of conscious entities is finite, constant, musical, and even.

b. Each is separate from all other conscious entities.

c. Each has no beginning.

d. Each has no end.

e. Each cannot input if it is not coupled with a conscious seat.

f. Each cannot output if it is not coupled with a conscious seat.

g. Each has a nonquantized infinite storage of previous input.

g1. The storage resists attempts to glean information from it.

g2. The storage cannot be directly shared--it must go through conscious seats.

h. Other than storage, each is identical to all other conscious entities.

2. A conscious system is the fusion of one conscious entity with one seat of consciousness.

a. It has a beginning.

b. It has an end.

c. It has a quantized input.

d. It has a quantized output.

e. It must be either active (inputting and outputting) or inactive (doing neither).

f. Output is determined by the entity's storage, system input, and free will.

3. A universe.

a. It is quantized.

b. It has a beginning.

c. It has an end.

c1. All conscious systems end at the end of the universe.

d. It is finite.

e. It produces at least one conscious seat from its beginning.

f. It has musical rules of physics.

g. If a seat needs an entity that has never taken part in the current universe, it is randomly selected by God.
 
You're assuming the necessary existence of God there. And what are his properties? And why do you posts have exactly the same format? :rolleyes:
 
Fen,

Love is a set of emotions experienced by biological humans. Love cannot exist without a biological basis and hence cannot come first.

Your first point fails, and the rest, as far as I can determine is just gibberish.

Cris
 
Originally posted by Cris
Love is a set of emotions experienced by biological humans. Love cannot exist without a biological basis and hence cannot come first.
Your first point fails, and the rest, as far as I can determine is just gibberish.

As I'm new it will take me a bit to get into the swing of things here, but as an athiest I can only but concur with what you say ...
 
Originally posted by Cris
Fen,

Love is a set of emotions experienced by biological humans. Love cannot exist without a biological basis and hence cannot come first.

Your first point fails, and the rest, as far as I can determine is just gibberish.

Cris

No Love is the strongest force there is. Love exists without a biological basis just like 1+2=3 does.
 
junglist:

A: Welcome to sciforums
B: Nice Mandelbrot.
C: Another athiest! We're taking over!

Fen:

Why do you say that love exists without a biological basis? And what do you mean by "force"?

For that matter, what do you mean by "love"?
 
Junglist,

A very warm welcome to sciforums.

Cris
 
a. It is quantized.

b. It has a beginning.

c. It has an end.

d. It puts the lotion on its skin or else

e. It gets the hose again!


Quantify "it". How does "it" have a beginning and end? "It" sounds like another abstract human concept with no basis in reality.
 
Being as gentle as I can here...

Fen, your post is nonsense. It is either flamebait, or you THINK it is profound when it really isn't. It is meaningless vapid, and a waste-of-time.

Sorry, was that gentle enough?

;)

-Mike
 
Re: Re: Love created God

Originally posted by Ekimklaw
Being as gentle as I can here...

Fen, your post is nonsense. It is either flamebait, or you THINK it is profound when it really isn't. It is meaningless vapid, and a waste-of-time.

Sorry, was that gentle enough?

;)

-Mike

Do you have any specific criticism? Would you like to separate a piece out and exam it independently of the rest? Or is this post in fact infinitely more vapid than mine?
 
Fen.

Do you have any specific criticism?
I thought Ekim's criticism was specific - your post is nonsense. While Ekim and I will rarely agree, I think on this issue you win the prize.

Would you like to separate a piece out and exam it independently of the rest?
Would extracting a piece of nonsense from a larger nonsense help in any way?

Cris
 
Re: Re: Re: Love created God

Originally posted by Fen
Do you have any specific criticism?


I think what most people here are trying to tell you is that you've made a bunch of assertions with absolutely no proof. In addition, you've included in these assertions many nebulous concepts but have given no definition or even a syntax from which a meaning might be derived. You apparently have some concept in mind but you have provided us nothing to evaluate or even to discuss really. Given this, I must agree with Ekim's judgement.

~Raithere
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Love created God

Originally posted by Raithere
Originally posted by Fen
Do you have any specific criticism?


I think what most people here are trying to tell you is that you've made a bunch of assertions with absolutely no proof. In addition, you've included in these assertions many nebulous concepts but have given no definition or even a syntax from which a meaning might be derived. You apparently have some concept in mind but you have provided us nothing to evaluate or even to discuss really. Given this, I must agree with Ekim's judgement.

~Raithere

That's because you're too stupid to get it.
 
Okay gang. I have some time on my hands so I'll deal with this rubbish.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
I. In the beginning there is Love.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So what? Says who?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
II. Love creates two conscious entities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Says who? You? Are you now preaching? Is God speaking through you? What?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
III. Love creates God.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again, according to who or what authority do you say this? You?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
IV. God asks Love to increase the number of entities to the musical number, which is even. Love does this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh how special. What exactly is the musical number? 8?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
V. God sets up the rules of physics (randomly) and starts the universe--then waits for it to end.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fen are you some kind of prophet now?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
VI. Repeat the last step.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay. Now what?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
1. A conscious entity is the self.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So? Your point? That is like saying "my foot is at the end of my leg." Yeah... so...?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
a. The amount of conscious entities is finite, constant, musical, and even.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Says who? You? Baloney. If it is infinite it can't be even. For something to be numbered "even" there has to be a set number that is counted to determine it is "even". Duh! I say the musical number is "three". I sang it and it sounded fan-flipping-tastic.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
b. Each is separate from all other conscious entities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

... and baked infinite musical cookies.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Each has no beginning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I thought you said in the beginning love created two entities. Sounds like a beginning to me.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Each has no end.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thankfully this post has one.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
e. Each cannot input if it is not coupled with a conscious seat.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My seat is unconscious.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
f. Each cannot output if it is not coupled with a conscious seat.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have been known to output when I am coupled with a certain kind of seat. ;)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
g. Each has a nonquantized infinite storage of previous input.
g1. The storage resists attempts to glean information from it.
g2. The storage cannot be directly shared--it must go through conscious seats.
h. Other than storage, each is identical to all other conscious entities.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That reminds me I need to make my mini-storage payment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
2. A conscious system is the fusion of one conscious entity with one seat of consciousness.
a. It has a beginning.
b. It has an end.
c. It has a quantized input.
d. It has a quantized output.
e. It must be either active (inputting and outputting) or inactive (doing neither).
f. Output is determined by the entity's storage, system input, and free will.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is there an underlying point to all this? No.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. A universe.
a. It is quantized.
b. It has a beginning.
c. It has an end.
c1. All conscious systems end at the end of the universe.
d. It is finite.
e. It produces at least one conscious seat from its beginning.
f. It has musical rules of physics.
g. If a seat needs an entity that has never taken part in the current universe, it is randomly selected by God.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Far out man. And like... cool too, man. Totally. (hits from the bong)

So, summing up...

Love made God, "self" and some other unnamed entity. God then asks love to make more entities to the musical number (?). God makes the universe then waits for it to end. There are zillions of constant entities that have no beginning, no past, no storage. Each one can't input or output without being coupled to a "conscious seat". Some more stuff about storage... and fusions of seats of conciousness with a seat of conciousness, er something. And a quantized universe something or thingy or whosamawhatsit.

Great Fen. Great. Brilliant.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fen wrote:
That's because you're too stupid to get it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If not "getting it" means I'm stupid then I am a real blockhead cuz your post means diddly squat to me.

Go start you religion somewhere else Fen. We don't care here!

-Mike
 
Re: Re: Love created God

Ekimklaw, I think you should really stop being mean to Fen, as you often make claims identical to his/hers/its.

Such as something along the lines of "I believe Jesus is Savior because he rose from the dead."

Well, can you give us some proof? Oh yes, proof from scripture. Yes, thankyou for your proof that Christ is Savior.

And often I've seen you argue that since Christianity and Christians have done so much good for the world, Christianity must be the TRUE religion. What about all the bad it's done?g
 
Fen,

That's because you're too stupid to get it.
Rait's request was quite reasonable so your outburst is simply offensive.

Please explain your posts, if they are explainable.

Many of us have attempted to understand what you are saying. So do you conclude that we are all stupid and you are the only one who is wise? Perhaps it is just that you are very poor at explaining yourself.

Cris
 
GB,

Ekimklaw, I think you should really stop being mean to Fen, as you often make claims identical to his/hers/its.
Well yes, but's fen's gibberish is vastly more incomprehensible.

Nice try Ekim, and an excellent conclusion.

Cris
 
I hate the guts of religious fundamentalists, but I also dislike atheist fundamentalists as well. Both parties do not know to respect one another, and from my own experience (not that it has weight, the experience of a total jerk? ha ha. but anyhow) that does not help at all. I believe religion to be a hopeless dream (cmon, the world is rough out there, no one is out there to scoop you out if you fuck up), but I respect many people from different religions. I do not mess with them to try to convert ehm to atheism. Just because religion is not for me does not mean that I can't be friends with religious people. As long as they do not interfere with my own beliefs.
 
Green Eggs and Ham

Originally posted by Fen
That's because you're too stupid to get it.


Brilliant retort Fen! With one sentence you've managed to put me in my place, validate your theory, and prove beyond doubt that you are indeed the pinnacle of human cognitive aspiration. Please, if you would be so kind to explain the "musical rules of physics" (Is that why I feel like dancing when I read Einstein, Hawking, and Bohr?) to us mere mortals.

BTW, just in case you missed it, I was being sarcastic.

Now then, please put on your dunce cap and retire yourself to the nearest corner. Adults would like to have meaningful conversation.

~Raithere
 
Back
Top