near.lucemferre

Ok. I can't argue with that. I apologize, rules are rules.

It's not Religion, Religion is Pseudo-Science. Pseudo-Science is Psychological observation. It's not Non-Religion, Non-Religion is Physical-Science. Physical-Science is Physical observation. It is Empirical observation. Empirical observation is just that. Empirical observation is SCIENCE. PSEUDO-SCIENCE (MIND) PHYSICAL-SCIENCE (BODY) SCIENCE (MIND AND BODY) There was absolutely no need to close the thread. You read the word God, you immediately classed it as Religion, forgetting to take into account the fact 99.9% was empirical observation of life. Is it in your best interests to suppress my given ability to measure God scientifically, reasonably and with meaning? Then how can you call yourself scientists?

Empirically, what's said in the original post is proof. Why what were you expecting? Numbers and Symbols? Just to add, the 'Son of God' or Jesus (Horus) is the Aether. I will elaborate on this if you would like me to (but for now let's focus on the main topic), any problems so far?

Proof of God: Before beginning we must fully understand which methods and techniques can be defined as proof in the modern era, and what route we should take to verify the scientific or pseudo-scientific theories and hypothesises. There are three modes of observation: Mental; examination through the mind, Physical; examination through the body, and Empirical; examination through the self (both the mind and body). The physical mode of surveillance tends to be the most common, where things can only be proven through corporeal evidence – whereas the mental mode of study is infrequent and frowned upon, where things can only be proven through psychological means. The rarest method of examination is empirical, yet it appears to be the most credible as it takes into full account both physical and mental approaches; using this methodology we can junction both fields of expertise, science and pseudo-science, creating a cohesive innovative discipline. God is the prime subject for debate in the present day, Theists (pseudo-scientists) and Atheists (scientists) are vigorously competing against each other, to prove that God either exists or does not exist; a symmetrical argument that is impossible for either party to triumph, for physical evidence cannot disprove mental evidence and vice versa – this shows that the ongoing and callous argument is stupid and intolerable, at least to anyone with common sense. There is only one possible way to confirm Gods existence, and that is through separation from both factions of non-belief (Atheism) and belief (Theism) to become the superior judge of them both, and to observe and scrutinize their current elaborate stand-points. When one attempts to prove Gods existence from this advanced seat of surveillance, one is not required to follow any rules or regulations that were set by either participant, and one is given the ability to freely define the wisest form of interpretation (that is non-biased to either side) to prove the existence of God and end the current state of the dispute. One does not have to agree with the current mathematical system or language system, and one isn't bound by the current portraits or values that were depicted or highlighted by the participants. For example, if one of the parties claims that God is a man, but with this image a truce cannot be reached, then one can abolish this representation of God and replace it with something more suitable. This also applies to the mathematics and language used, if one of the parties claims that the number one is commanding, but again with it a truce cannot be reached, then one can liberally outline a new and more suitable commanding arithmetic. Using this golden rule evidently one has the capability to create a working theorem that is agreeable from both points of view. Contradictions It is impossible for God to be the concept of the number one, for to be all loving and all knowing God must be part of everything; in this case there is only one suitable answer for God that can be attained, and this would assert that God is everything, not individually, but rather the bigger picture including planets, stars, humans, atoms, black holes, animals and other beings that exist. This is backed up and established within the bible; God first creates the Heaven and Earth, then observes the current creation, and then creates Light – it is true that God would not have been able to create Light without creating the prior elements required to produce it. This pseudo-scientific theory is also in correlation with the scientific theory of the Big Bang – with physical Atheist evidence alone it is impossible to determine what came before the Big Bang, yet when combined with mental Theist evidence we can construct a valid explanation through our already durable and vast knowledge. Empirically it is judged that God is a child-image philosophical being that has grew is continues to grow – all things that exist derive from God, in God's image. Empirical Proof: 1. God first creates the Heaven and Earth, and after God becomes the Heaven and Earth; the current God (Heaven and Earth included) then create Light, and continue whilst the pattern and/or divine plan progresses onwards. Without first creating the Heaven and Earth, there would have not been sufficient resources and/or elements to produce the required effect of generating Light or the Big Bang. 2. God cannot be an adult form, as for everything to derive from God the being must be prior to our existence and essentially progressing or developing. The term 'adult' refers to the word 'progressed' or 'developed' – treating God as an already formed and developed entity, impossible for anything real to physically to derive from it. It is held that God is in the image of a child carrying forward the required mother and father elements as a trinity. This is supported by the biblical sentence 'First God created the Heaven and Earth' which can be freely redefined as 'First Child created the Mother and Father' – further reinforced in the physical realm where children are the life-force that brings forward both of their parents; with no child there is no reproduction and without reproduction there is no life. 3. God cannot be male or female, nor the concept of the number one; reason being, a man alone cannot create a woman or a child physically and vice versa. It is impossible for God to be all loving and all knowing (to know all and to love all) as the single solitary point depicted by the concept of the number one – the only possible way God can be all loving and all knowing is to surround and/or be part of all beings, and all is not the concept of the number one, although all is related as 'one', but that isn't the concept of the number – the concept is alike a penny or a point rather than a circle, sphere or cube. Risks Unfortunately the substance of this knowledge is extremely dangerous, there are people in this world who see this information as a direct infringement on their lives, for reasons that are not known – it has come to my attention that with this interpretation of God there would be a higher-chance of achieving world peace, which is something that not all peoples wish to attain; this could be through greed, vanity, jealousy or just plain evil. These people are wrong and parasitical to the human species and should be avoided at all costs. Further fabrications to the word of God may occur through the desperate and tyrannical actions of some individuals (false interpretations or fabrications with the intent to fuel the debate between Atheists and Theists or to decide one outright victor; imprisoning either the people's physical or mental liberty, rather than settling for peace and freedom for both). Certain acts of evil could be dictated by sinful people, such as forging physical proof of an alien being that exists in space or somewhere on the planet which is said to be the 'God entity' to which Theists and Atheists would then be required to worship; there could also be fake findings of an alien element in creation, and then relevant tagging of various humans who know this information, alienating them and making them targets for an attack (holocaust or mass-murder). The alien entity seems to be the Theistic victory whilst the alien element seems to be the Atheist victory. The Only Options Are: 1. Lose physical liberties. (True: Theist victory) 2. Lose mental liberties. (True: Atheist victory) 3. Worship an Alien entity as God. (Lie: Theist victory) 4. Demonize an Alien element as Satan (Lie: Atheist victory) 5. Worship Good and Demonize Evil, for the Greater Good (True: God's victory) 6. Worship Evil and Demonize Good, for the Greater Evil (Lie: Satan's victory) Options [3] and [4] are definitely plausible ways of forcing false belief: [3], through actors in position that claim sightings of Aliens combined with NASA or other organizations releasing public information of Aliens being found in some distinct part of the universe. It could just be an entity that holds certain features that can be interpreted as God, maybe even allowing contact between humans and God through methods that persuade the gullible and dumb people that they're talking directly to God, which would probably reply to them with a Yes/No or Good/Bad answer. The main problem here are the actors who are in place to support the stupid belief of Aliens, as the social circle of humanity will always have these people claiming that they exist, which will turn those who are unaware – Alien is one of those really stupid concepts, for everything is related directly. There is a chance that this Alien finding won't be classed as an Alien but rather 'the Father (and Mother maybe) to all creation', which would still be a huge hoax. In short, do not believe in Aliens or a God entity that exists somewhere out in space or on a planet. [4], through poisoning or injecting humans with some sort of particle/element that represents their Alien features, even claiming it's something to do with the way they think, giving reason for the gullible actors in place who support the concept of Aliens to hate and sustain the idea of removing their presence. They could also release a viral infection into society that would kill off thousands, specifically targeted at the ones who have the knowledge of God, again giving them reason and an alibi to remove their presence. Another version would be discovering an Alien chemical or similar on Earth that existed years ago and then declaring that people with this chemical in their body are Aliens, and should be killed or isolated. The simplest form of applying this concept is by alienating a word or group such as Theists (which would probably result in a holocaust, but this is dangerous in the modern era as people already are wary of it). (potentially dangerous information if true) (no ad hominum, or direct insults intended) (I took the role of judge, so it's a professional opinion rather than just an opinion of peoples) (this topic is discussing God, not people, although through the discussion of God people were mentioned) Any questions?