/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15827621]

If God created all that exists, and God is the purest form of Good, then why would he create Evil? Can Good and Evil exist independent from one another? Are Good and Evil even real? Please discuss

[Anonymous No.15827676]

How could good exist without evil?

[Anonymous No.15827683]

>>15827676
Idk, ask God. Isn’t he the one who created that rule?

[Anonymous No.15827691]

>>15827621
Perhaps god is good because he split his being and left all evil behind him in this world.

[Anonymous No.15827693]

>>15827691
Based and gnosticpilled

[Anonymous No.15827702]

>>15827621
Definitions are extremely important here. What does it mean for God to be good?

[Anonymous No.15827708]

All that matters to me is that I'm „good“. The rest is irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.15827709]

>>15827691
So God bails to the good place and leaves us behind in the shit hole? Very good of you God

[Anonymous No.15827744]

>>15827709
So long as you conceive of yourself as separate from that god you won't be able to make it. We all have that evil in us, the goal is to leave it behind.

[Anonymous No.15827758]

>>15827621
Good and Evil are objective within categories and individuals but subjective beyond it dependant on situation
God is not good or evil, only true, there is no universal good or evil, only truth

[Anonymous No.15827766]

>>15827621
Evil doesn't exist. There is no good and evil. There, solved

[Anonymous No.15827859]

>>15827766
Are you an atheist? If not, what do you believe?

[Anonymous No.15829133]

The real question is why is it that in 3 billion years of life in earth we're the first creatures to think in terms of good and evil?

[Anonymous No.15829143]

>>15827621
There are two options: either Good and Evil are united in some deep principle, which means good isn't that good and evil isn't that evil

OR

they are eternally opposed, which means Good is genuinely good and Evil genuinely evil.

the IQ bell curve would have door #2 on the extreme sides, and midwit monism on the hump. I had a webm of a dog that was skinned alive I was gonna post. no world where something like that is possible was created by a Good principle.

[Anonymous No.15829150]

>>15829143
It's the absence of evil. It's not exclusive of good. In that you have to do good to solve evil. You can't do evil to solve good, it doesn't make sense

[Anonymous No.15829155]

>>15829150
>it
>is non-existent

What are you saying? How can nothing "be" anything?

[Anonymous No.15829201]

>>15829155
How can it not?

[Anonymous No.15829273]

>>15827621
What I want to know is, why do you get super knowledge by eating fruit?

[Anonymous No.15829317]

It’s because monotheism is fucking stupid and would only make sense in a reality that is completely uniform and grey. This reality would also have no meaning in it whatsoever. Clearly, our reality is not like this. It has characteristics of difference and the richness of diversity, and monotheists cope with this contradiction to their worldview by being cleverly disguised dualists

[Anonymous No.15829327]

>>15829317
This is the line of thought that leads me to Gnosticism. There is no way the OT and the NT god are the same being. It was a nice cover up job though.

[Anonymous No.15829332]

>>15827621
There's a contradiction because it's a concept invented by ignorant thinkers from thousands of years ago. Imagine if a thousand years from now philosophers are trying to wrap their heads around the intricacies of the DC Comics universe because they think it's true, and there are great papers and debates about this shit. Don't waste your brain cells on meaningless questions.

[Anonymous No.15829353]

>>15829143
Did the dog die? In that case it’s pretty good for the maggots and consequently the soil that’ll be fertilised by the broken down organic material. See what I’m saying? You’re definitely a midwit.

[Anonymous No.15829404]

>>15827859
Not that anon, but similarly do not believe in good and evil. The mistake is associating any potential God with either concept.
My conceptualization of the structure of reality can accommodate a God or gods, but does not make or require any statement on their characteristics.

[Anonymous No.15829450]

>>15827621
>God is the purest form of Good
Why do you assume this?

[jesus No.15829508]

>>15827621
evil is good.

[jesus No.15829515]

>>15827621
if programmer created an online multiuser game, and it is good, how come that bad things happen when you play, and eventually you are fragged out? I wanna be winner forever, I wanna unlimited health and ammo.

[Anonymous No.15829518]

>>15827621
God didn’t create evil. Evil is the absence of God.

[jesus No.15829542]

>>15829518
god is one. everything is his emanations. absence of existence is evil? how something nonexistent may have qualities?

ah, let me guess, you just farted with your mouth because it looks cool that you speak about such cool matters.

evil is a Hollywood and church construct. and parents construct to manipulate and control children through fear.

[Anonymous No.15829562]

>>15829542
>evil is a construct
You don’t really think that. You’re either LARPing or you’re a fool.

[Anonymous No.15829566]

>>15827709
We are called to do the same.

[jesus No.15829576]

>>15827702
axiom. god exists and his existence self approves self existence. if god would be bad, it means existence is bad, and it must cease to exist, which is absurd. existence is good is actually like water is moisture, or sugar is sweet.

[jesus No.15829582]

>>15829562
True, to some extent. I don't think. to think is to hallucinate. I know. and larping is your projection. because you are afraid to see truth, to fall out of line, stupid pederast who fears punishment of people.

[Anonymous No.15829613]

>>15829582
You sound like an edgy teenager. If your metaphysics has set aside no place for ethics, then you either haven’t read enough or you are a brainlet. Or you’re a degenerate hedonist, in which case no one takes you seriously anyway.

[Anonymous No.15829791]

Lol he works in mysterious ways.
That's all you gotta say.

[Anonymous No.15829813]

>>15827691
Based gnostic

[/urantia/ No.15829817]

"How can God, if he is infinitely good, permit us to suffer the sorrows of evil; after all, who creates evil?" It was still believed by many in those days that God creates both good and evil, but Jesus never taught such error. In answering this question, Jesus said: "My brother, God is love; therefore he must be good, and his goodness is so great and real that it cannot contain the small and unreal things of evil. God is so positively good that there is absolutely no place in him for negative evil. Evil is the immature choosing and the unthinking misstep of those who are resistant to goodness, rejectful of beauty, and disloyal to truth. Evil is only the misadaptation of immaturity or the disruptive and distorting influence of ignorance. Evil is the inevitable darkness which follows upon the heels of the unwise rejection of light. Evil is that which is dark and untrue, and which, when consciously embraced and willfully endorsed, becomes sin.
------------------------------------------
"Your Father in heaven, by endowing you with the power to choose between truth and error, created the potential negative of the positive way of light and life; but such errors of evil are really nonexistent until such a time as an intelligent creature wills their existence by mischoosing the way of life. And then are such evils later exalted into sin by the knowing and deliberate choice of such a willful and rebellious creature. This is why our Father in heaven permits the good and the evil to go along together until the end of life, just as nature allows the wheat and the tares to grow side by side until the harvest."

[Anonymous No.15829819]

>>15829515
Retard

[jesus No.15830082]

>>15829613
anyone who is smarter than you and says you are stupid pederast is angry, including teachers in school. good people kiss your ass and hug you no matter what stupid things you say, like your good mommy.

[jesus No.15830091]

>>15829819
nice to meet you, retard.

[Anonymous No.15830102]

>>15827621
A generic response is to say:
>god makes world
>god grants freedom to things in world
>if something is done from freedom, then god is not responsible
>only evil is done from freedom
>therefore god does no evil
Something like. It’s not a good summary but hopefully you get the idea.
I personally reject the first idea which is at the basis of all monotheistic religions. The One doesn’t create anything intentionally

[jesus No.15830131]

>>15830102
what does is matter what you think, acceptreject, hallucinate, expect, want, if it is all in your and your moms brains.

what matters what people know, direct knowledge, experience, facts which can be used, information about reality. what you think is information about you and your self imagination, insignificant faggot and bacteria.

word communication has "common" common root, to communicate is to look for common grounds in fucking common reality.

[Anonymous No.15830159]

>>15827621
Until one crosses the mortal curtain, one cannot even be sure that there is true evil or true good.

In this world, the one we only truly know, there is only negative and positive actions to one self. The positive and negative are all by one's definition.

[Anonymous No.15830185]

>>15827621
Without Evil how can you know what is good?
Retard

[Anonymous No.15830199]

>>15830185
God could’ve made a world where everything is good and nothing is evil. Isn’t he supposed to be omnipotent?

[Anonymous No.15830278]

>>15830199
If everything is good, then nothing is good.

[Anonymous No.15830323]

>>15830185
>how could we know that some things are naturally preferable without children getting cancer, people being murdered and babies being anally raped
>projecting your own retardation onto another person
Okay brainlet

[jesus No.15830580]

>>15830185
example no 1:

you have stupid wife who nags you, complains constantly, wants more and more, threatens to divorce. you can either punch her, and fuck forcefully, or you can secretly hire alcoholic neighbor to beat shit out of her, so she understands how amazing husband you are. the guy does not even need to be bad or alcoholic, he needs just play like that.

example no 2:
your european union is collapsing, NATO is collapsing, everyone is so smart and wants to exercise his free will and live separately, not giving a fuck. you already have mr. Putin who said the collapse of soviet union was major geopolitical disaster. Putin fucks international agreements in ass, fucks ukraine, russian TV threatens to fuck USA. and magically all european states realize that EU is good and NATO is good.

evil Putin in 2014 literally saved West.

good and evil are tools to fuck stupid population efficiently.

[Anonymous No.15830798]

Evil is temporary, good is infinite. Evil is a test for good. Passing this test is necessary for accessing ultimate, pure, good.

[Anonymous No.15831637]

>>15829353
>Did the dog die? In that case it’s pretty good for the maggots and consequently the soil that’ll be fertilised by the broken down organic material.
retard

[Anonymous No.15831726]

>>15829143
If someone consciously employed his existence, power, intelligence in the direction of an evil deed he willed therefore God is evil because he gave existence power intelligence and free will?

[Anonymous No.15831732]

>>15831726
Yes.

[Anonymous No.15831741]

>>15827708
based and pascal-pilled

[Anonymous No.15831750]

>>15829566
how do you know that

[Anonymous No.15831941]

>>15831732
nice, now i can torture and murder you without remorse and without being blamed

[Anonymous No.15832049]

>>15831941
Both God and you are to blame. God for creating a world where evil is possible, you for actualizing your own potential for evil.

[Anonymous No.15832402]

>>15832049
>creates another freedom
>god therefore is evil
you are full of sentimentalism and can't think properly

[Anonymous No.15832449]

>>15827621
God is evil and we are good. It's a hopeless struggle and the only outcome will be damnation.
Or, just don't bother. God stories are nice but that's about it.

[Anonymous No.15833457]

>>15829332
powerful imagry.

[Anonymous No.15833471]

>>15832402
If God produces the conditions for evil, he is the author of evil. There's no way around this, especially if he creates ex nihilo.

Please stop associating a preoccupation with this problem with sentimentalism, it just makes you look like a child.

[Anonymous No.15833547]

>>15833471
existence, power, intelligence and life are all self-subsisting and inherently good, evil is parasitic and dependent on them to exist, corrupt and destroy.
you are the one looking like a literal child lacking any intellectual rigour in a discussion like this.

[Anonymous No.15833660]

>>15832049
just take meds everyday and you won't see any evil

[Anonymous No.15833774]

Evil is the negation of good

[Anonymous No.15833777]

>>15827621
Evil is a privation of good, it can't exist on its own. Just like cold is a privation of heat, dark is a privation of light, &c. it doesn't really exist as such. gnosticlets will seethe at this.

[Anonymous No.15833953]

>>15833547
Then God can't prevent his creation from being parasitized by a non-existent potency?

>>15833777
Wrong. Evil is antithetical, not privative. If I remove a bunch of balls from a container one-by-one, how come I don't have a name for the lack of objects in a container? Could it be because that lack is not qualitative in any way, while darkness, cold, and evil are?

[Anonymous No.15834200]

>>15833953
You do have a name for it, it's empty. Those balls you took out of the container also exist the same as the container does. Evil is like the phantom pain an amputee feels, pain in a limb that *should* be there. There's nothing there, but it still hurts.

[Anonymous No.15834341]

>>15827676
Depends on if you equate evil with ills in general I guess. You can certainly have gokd relationships without evil. But perhaps you say those relationships are only good because they help us attain outcomes which are only good because of some negative, such as starvation, anxiety, or a need for protection. But I don't think it is apt to name anxiety evil. It is an ill to be sure.
If you equate evil with ills more generally, or group them under a larger umbrella term, and base your argument on that, I think it is very possible to have positive experiences still in relation to less positive or more neutral ones. Ills need not apply for experiences to be possible. You can have a good without an evil to necessitate it.

[Anonymous No.15834457]

>>15833953
>he is still struggling with the idea of creation having freedom
the potentia is latent, if god prevented his creatures from acting according to their own will he would not be god

[Anonymous No.15834470]

>>15827621
Start with the Greeks.

[Anonymous No.15834474]

>>15827621
Man created evil

[Anonymous No.15834499]

>>15834457
Oh man come on try a little harder than free will argument 101. You niggas need to read Schelling.

If freedom is confirmed by the potential for evil, then God is either the source of freedom (and indirectly the source of evil), or freedom exists outside God and we're back to a radical dualism.

[Anonymous No.15834519]

guys, let me guess, all of you are good, right?

[Anonymous No.15834532]

>>15834200
This doesn't account for why we have different names for different kinds of privations: cold for heat, evil for good. They could only be distinguished on the basis of their qualitative character.

In any case you're trying to tell me that past a certain point of depletion, God's eternal goodness phases into rape and barbarism. I don't think so.

[Anonymous No.15834564]

>>15834499
free will is not absolute freedom (absolute freedom is having one will with god), it is realtive freedom (fallen freedom), therfore it is not confirmed by the potential for evil, this only seems so relatively to free will, fallen will, choosing between things (and here the provision of god works). this is so simple to understand, but i know you just dont want to understand.
this is the more logical point of view, i also like the idea of god from bohme though

>schelling
what does he say about it and how does he envisage this issue?

[Anonymous No.15834625]

>>15827621
The christian god isn't real. It's a human invention. For the record, I'm not an atheist. I do believe in external and unexplainable forces at work in the universe, but they're certainly not the ones described by a false prophet like Jesus or Mohammed.

[Anonymous No.15834636]

>To God all things are fair, good and just, but men suppose some things are unjust, some just
t. Heraclitus

[Anonymous No.15834643]

>>15834564
What I just told you. Relative or absolute freedom, doesn't matter. If freedom is the condition of possibility for evil, then it has its principle in God, or outside God. That there is even a distinction between divine and fallen freedom is the entire crux of the issue. There's nothing you're saying that hasn't already occurred to me.

[Anonymous No.15834656]

>>15834636
This really BTFOs all Abrahamists. Every protest against God (no matter how one envisions divinity) are all about how THEY think that XYZ is bad and evil. Nature is perfect already in its operations, regardless of how much man may seethe

[Anonymous No.15834724]

>>15834519
Nah dude I'm a sociopath. Action follows intent, and intent follows function.
That's kind of another strike against God- why would ~1% of his children be physiologically incapable of genuinely connecting with the virtues that he upholds?

[Anonymous No.15834765]

>>15834643
you're just dodging subtleties and repeating yourself; as i said, existence, power etc have their principles in god, not a wasted existence of hating god and life and everyone who disagrees with your distorted way of thinking.

>freedom is the condition
there is no condition in freedom

you are bitter and refusing to understand such a simple thing.

[Anonymous No.15834873]

every light casts a shadow

[Anonymous No.15834880]

>>15834532
What do names we give things matter? Qualitative character doesn't mean something exists in itself.
>phases into
You're still looking at it as if evil were equal and opposite of good, goodness does not phase into evil.

[Anonymous No.15834897]

>>15834656
are you retarded? they always emphasize divine providence

[Anonymous No.15834922]

>>15827621
Evil, or chaos, always existed. Before God brought order it was there alongside Him. Tohuvavohu.

[Anonymous No.15834955]

>>15834765
>you're bitter, you're a loser, you're angry, you're

Come back when you can debate like an adult.

>>15834880
Trap sprung. So evil is an absolute privation, correct? I think we'd both agree some acts are more evil than others. How can absolute privation have degrees?

[Anonymous No.15834970]

>blocks your path

[Anonymous No.15835042]

>>15834955
No, where did I say anything about an absolute privation?
>le master debater has arrived
Rhetoric is for retards uninterested in truth.

[Anonymous No.15835110]

>>15834955
nothing in nature is sudden, temperature itself never goes from 0 to 30, you never fall asleep at once, dreams do not suddenly explode in your head, what does not pass subtly?

[Anonymous No.15835115]

>>15835042
Then what is evil? A privation? Then the good must phase into evil, or in other words, that a "little bit" of good looks like savagery and barbarism while "a lot" denotes the qualities we traditionally associate with evil.

If this isn't the case, then you have to admit degrees of absolute privation, which is nonsensical.

[Anonymous No.15835128]

>>15835110
The change doesn't have to be sudden, it only has to take place, which it clearly does. If the good can be diminished into the kind of base savagery you see examples of everywhere (even by degrees), then God is not all-good.

[Anonymous No.15835138]

>>15834955
>WAAAAAA BAD THIGNS HAPPEEEEEEN THEREFORE GOD BADDDDD WHAT? FREEDOM? NOOO THATS BAD BECUSE BAD HAPPEN IN IT
you're really unconscious as to how childish your arguments are?

[Anonymous No.15835154]

>>15835138
I can tell you're flustered by the argument but can't articulate a rebuttal. I've been where you've been.

[Anonymous No.15835165]

>>15835128
you really think giving a bum alms is the glory of god's goodness?

[Anonymous No.15835175]

>>15827766
If there is a godhead that encompasses this reality/universe, then what exists within it is good, because it is of the godhead. If there is no godhead, then there is no basis for evil or good to exist in this reality. The only way good and evil exist are if this reality is separated from the goodness of the godhead. But if we're separated, then that means both the material, evil reality, and the spiritual, good reality, are part of a larger whole, right? In whichcase it reverts back to point one.

[Anonymous No.15835183]

>>15835154
literally wrote on inherent goodness in existence, life, power, absolute and relative freedom, and you all your answers are the same: if bad, then not good

[Anonymous No.15835186]

>>15827621
WHAT IS EVIl? EXACTLY?

[Anonymous No.15835190]

>>15829143
Why would you think your own sense of morality would be the same as a god who created an entire, seemingly chaotic cosmos? Is a skinned dog as horrible as civilizations being swallowed by black holes? What kinds of ends are these actions serving towards?

[Anonymous No.15835214]

>>15835183
Yes, assertion doesn't qualify as an argument. All you're doing is using some pretty words and hoping they'll stick the landing. They don't.

>>15835190
Yes, if human beings can imagine a reality where there is no suffering and fear, then an omnipotent God can certainly do better. At the very least, he should be able to anticipate the discrepancy between my puny, finite morality and his own, and compensate for it.

[Anonymous No.15835227]

>>15829576
Well then good means to exist which has nothing to do with the moral good that was implied in OP

[Anonymous No.15835245]

>>15835214

Suffering as pain, as a physiological response to stimulus trying to protect us. Pain isn't just an aspect of evil.

[Anonymous No.15835304]

>>15835214
>just assertions in pretty words
the absolute state, i wish you the best

[Anonymous No.15835305]

Your definitions of good and evil are wrong.

[Anonymous No.15835309]

>>15827621
>how could a thing create its opposite
You need to go to the park and look at ducks

[Anonymous No.15835315]

>>15835304
We've all read Plotinus friendo. Platitudes don't qualify as arguments.

[Anonymous No.15835324]

>>15835214
You seem to demand a lot from this god. What have you done to appease him? What is your sacrifice?

[Anonymous No.15835338]

>>15835324
Oh please dude, "my house, my rules": the argument? When will theodicies finally be purged of boomerisms? I pray for the day.

[Anonymous No.15835372]

>>15835315
>plotinus
>platitudinous
anyway, wasnt referring to him because i have never delved into his writings seriously; you dismiss all i say complacently, each post confirms it is a waste to keep with it.
bye anon

[Anonymous No.15835383]

>>15835372
Nope, I've responded to every one of your points.

Existence is inherently good
Whence evil, then?
Freedom, or misuse of intelligence and vital power
Whence freedom, then? Is it power inside or outside God?
[abstruse mumbling]

[Anonymous No.15835577]

>>15835115
Typical debate-me fag, you're too focused on drilling through to whatever gotcha you've concocted to actually understand the point. Light doesn't turn into darkness, there's simply less light. It is not equal and opposite because darkness has no substance. I'm not getting into the weeds with you on whatever "barbarism and savagery" means and I'm not going to go around in circles with you when you're obviously discussing in bad faith.

[Anonymous No.15835771]

>>15835577
>there's simply less light
Yeah, I got that, your point isn't as sophisticated as you think it is. Then 1 unit of light looks like murder, torture, and sexual violence, but 10 units? Hallelujah! Praise be to Him.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835789]

Imagine a perfectly discrete singular abstract property/relational entity which has no other aspect but its own self relation, it itself exists and its relation to itself also exists, this self relation, this characteristic of characteristic produces a doubling effect, in which are formed structures within/upon the body of this pure structure, all of the same essential nature but different in relations to each other. The characteristic relates to itself, creating the first, then this relation relates to the pure characteristic and to itself, and so forth endlessly and continuously, this endlessly produces a series of seemingly discrete points which are fully nondual in essence/substance, the only substantial difference being how they relate to each other. This mutual relation to each other produces the base mathematical and logical sequences by which all is defined, the Characteristic Heat is simply a bundle of less complex relational property complexes which fundamentally all are simply the self relation in its own self-production.

From this is formed consequences, causal relations, numbers, phases, beginnings, ends. From this beginning absolute simplicity (essence) which relates to itself (by saying what it is and what it is not, dialectically advancing itself by producing being and non-being) it affirms itself by becoming the process of becoming, thus the properties automatically arise in relation to each other, the process of creation/Time starts. Objects, subject, time, space, perception, everything, nothing, other and unspeakable amounts of infinite other “things” can all be defined by this definition as properties and all originate from characteristic. Conceive a Database, its only item is itself existing as a database, this itself produces a page, this page then must have data within it which speaks to what it is and is not. Thus this is formulated and reformulated, producing a simulacra, for the Data of the page now expands what is the definition of the database, which causes you to update the page, and thus more data must be added, along with a page speaking of that very Page; and these produce further copies of each other which are true simulacra which reflect their own self relations while fundamentally all being points of The database. This continues endlessly, ever expanding and maximizing in complexity.

[Anonymous No.15835790]

To my understanding, the idea is not that God created evil. Evil is merely the absence of God.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835798]

>>15835789

Being does not have property, characteristic/essence which is property has objects which are aspects of this same essence which occur within the patterns of the essence, the sunyata is simply the formless shape of raw characteristics which become Form. Sunyata being simply the non-conceptual portion of the characteristics which all characteristics hold as they are all genuinely characteristic. All Characteristics in experience are simply computated forms of the yet-to-be-computed aspect of the characteristics which is the irrational or the sunyata. Thus it is not that sosein is within the category of Non-being nor being but rather The property of Being is simply held by all aspects of Sosein which are currently being computed and non-being is simply the Yet-to-be-computed aspects of Sosein. Sosein has The form of objects, Sosein has the body of sunyata, Sosein has the body of all substance.

What then is the meaning of sosein? The meaning property, the meaning of meaning? Its meaning is true yet uncomputated( for its meaning is identical to the unfolding of all meaning) its simulacra therefore is the lack of Meaning, Thus its sunyata-Body is all meaning, all form, whereas its Computed conceptual body is barren of all meaning beyond self interrelation with itself, it is a void, this is the primal flip which causes the entirety of creation, that the a-conceptual genuine Sunyata nature of this Divine characteristic was that it was non-empty, that it was all characteristic, thus it which is characteristic, characterized itself as both all meaning and yet without computation capacity (fully irrational, a-conceptual) which causes the Primal arising of all of the facets of unveiling of Characteristics, whether this be Being or some other logical/computational form, the nature of the Characteristic required the unveiling of characteristics which required the logical interactions between them all. Thus within every single facet there is no meaning and the characteristic is empty of meaning beyond characterizing itself and thus having a relational existence between other characteristics. The unfolding of characteristic is the non-conceptual meaning of characteristic-in-itself which is experienced as its simulacra, the lack of meaning, thus that which we call rational and phenomenologically existential is identical to the lack of all essence, whereas that which we call without substance, without characteristic is all characteristic and all properties. Sosein in Itself is the fullness nature of all phenomena, phenomena is the void nature of Sosein, thus all individual characteristics, all truly, and the totality are beyond emptiness nature or the lack of emptiness nature, but rather they are all united in the nature of Unbreakable Sosein.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835808]

>>15835798

>>15835798

Applying this trans-ketherian model of the interrelation of boundless ain and boundless creation, we can logically expand the Kabbalistic model of the soul as follows.

The body of Pure Sosein

The body of the mirror-like Haecceity

The Body of Yechidah

Within the Body of Sosein all changing and unchanging, non-referential and self-interrelational and infinitely comprehensive yet utter unity.(the Soul as Unbreakable sosein)

the determination of ones own self and the boundless worlds In their Omni-form realities and nature’s between each other is the Body of mirror-like haecceity(the specific sosein of the yechidah)

And the natural state of ones self and all as no separate from this self, which is empty of difference, totally unified, ever self-unfolding like a spiral, this is the Body of Yechidah.

These three bodies are One Body. The Body of Atzmus Since there is no Being that is not perfect as an

adornment of the three Bodies,

everything arises as the display of Meaning Being, Existence,

and Determination.

Moreover, without exception, the countless Worlds arise from and are this very body, the expanse of the three Bodies.

Yechidah is that which you Perform, the unique essential soul, what you do is Yechidah. Your manner of being, Yechidah as Yechidah. And yet who you are is the sublime Haecceitic Body, who you are, lord I see through the inmost of all things, I see you, I see who you are in the inmost place, in the outer most place, I see who you are. I know that which you do and I know that which you Are, and in these moments I comprehend who you are, what you are. The radiance of all nature, the All pervading Glory is your unique Self, who you are Lord is imprinted upon all, like a sublime finger print, like a shroud of Turin I know who you are. And I know who you are is simply an expression of Love, I love you Love, I Love you the Great Love, I love you in my inmost Place. I know lord in you cause and effect are one, I know Lord you are he who is unique. Your being is the Supreme. There is no separation between the Radiance of your Unique Unity, who you are and Your Love

The body of the mirror-like Haecceity is the determination of the transcendental Ego as itself, all mirror-like Haecceity-souls reflect themselves and radiate themselves, determining themselves. (Within our facet this is the Yechidah/transcendental ego, see Husserl, this however can be radically different depending upon facet/attribute of the divine body being analyzed)

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835820]

>>15835808

The body of unbreakable Sosein thus is the determination of all determinations, the characteristic of all characteristics and all of these are non-separate from each other.

As we have previously discussed the transcendent Ego is Nondual to Will, this occurs via intentionality (the transcendental ego pervades and isn’t Separate to the consciousness, all consciousness is conscious of something, thus all consciousness is awareness) and all intentionality by definition will always be either present at hand or ready at hand awareness (the awareness will wither analyze and try to extract information and thus integrate data which is aware, or the data is integrated and considered part of the dynamic expression of the conscious/awareness in a totality sense in a experiential unity owing due to the darkening of it within perception, which is truly integration) as such the transcendental Ego naturally is Will(the extension of the present/ready at hand force and integratory forces in which the ego expresses and unveils itself via relation to that which it lacks and that which it has and desires to have.)

Analyzing the body of God and the Body of the Yechidah/transcendental Ego in relation to the boundless mirror-haecceity we uncover the primal root of this Will as being fundamentally relational in contrast to other mirror-haecceities, only gaining meaning by the data relation they share between each other, as previously discussed sosein defines its particulars by particular soseins which are internally lacking in meaning besides their particularization which is the actualization of the universal total in a singular point. As such the Will of the transcendental Ego(along with the transcendental ego itself ) only exists as a relational characteristic (this also demonstrates a transcendental-lebenswelt)

Going by this we can then define the Will of God/thelema as the particular unfolding of the Will of the transcendental Ego, whereas all disobedience of the transcendental ego’s Will is an abiding in the void-nature of the universal sosein which pervades all of the mirror-like haecceities via their interpenetration and reflections. Fundamentally creating a universalized Will towards void and a particularized individual Will towards Becoming. This particularized will is the thelema, the opposite universal will is Hamartia or Sin.

Demonstration and expansion of the Nonduality and relational existence of thelema and Hamartia being an extension of the IAO formula

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835829]

>>15835820

W=Divine Will F=Function of Violence/conflict/destruction x=Causality stream and individual Will

W=unbifurcated Divine Will as perfect Union of Hamartia and Thelema Nondual to the essential nature and thus all data/Sosein-in-itself

F=Divine self-presence-At-hand which produces the particular-universal divine characteristic division/clash/violence as analysis of Data and dividing of Data, Present at hand=Data analysis and extraction which is in truth the Sosein self reflecting as Haecceities which are producing their network-of-wills in relation to each other as a simplistic Meaning/lack of meaning relation. Which is truly simply the inherent static-unfolding of the original divine Will which is simply a mirror of the Unbreakable sosein’s meaning/lack of meaning creation process.

X=Divine Will and imperfection as a 1/0 process relation

W>F(V)>X

X=Divine will and imperfection

F=Conflict/clashing/violence

Y=Divine Will and imperfection become ready at hand towards their relations. Ready at hand=Data integration/use, producing contrast, grip, Force, The will in the void and the Void in the Will mutually pulling

X>F(V)>Y

Y=will and imperfection in their interrelations causing multiplication/division of Will/imperfection in accordance with data integration

F=parts of the Thelema divided seem to make ready at hand each other as does the Hamartia, forcible integration/extraction causes World as multiplicity of Will-conflict

Z=the Individual Partial Will and the individual partial imperfection as only existing in a relational context to the other Wills and imperfections

Y>F(V)>Z

Full formula

W>F(V)>X>F(V)>Y>F(V)>Z

Thus, this formula being understood demonstrates that meaning, all meaning at its core is the Perichoretic Love(interrelation and the mutual penetrating and unfolding nature) and all individual and universal wills, including of the void, and all characteristics are fundamentally Love, in this is revealed the Supreme Immanent-transcendental Nonduality and of how distance and separation is actually greater and supreme unity and supreme love.

pure Nondual immanence reflects the totality in each particular and each particular the totality, the true life, the purely transcendental Life which is the essence of all life, that is Christ, and the purely immanent life of man which is Your own, they are non separate for The Sosein of one is the Sosein of the other, as such analyzing the Pure immanent we come to the following conclusions.

[Anonymous No.15835840]

>>15827621
I made this helpful graphic to illustrate why you're confused

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835843]

>>15835829

the structure and determination of ones own Self in all levels is the inmost interiority to All of outermost. Ones being is a pure subjectivity, the essence of life is this, the core of all consciousness is this a-conceptual yet conceptual subjectivity, in its pure present-ness it is nothing but the radiance/essence of boundless other characteristics and radiance’s within the Aussersein, Shining like the ancient of days before making creation, light of Will reflecting light of Will, Light of nature reflecting light of nature.

The presence of one’s self is simply the presence of presence, the Holy Spirit. The presence of his presence is his personhood, holy god in three persons. The presence of Christ.

The presence of ones transcendental Ego/empirical Ego, the Presence of I

The presence of Life in Said nature, the Presence of Life in I (Which is the pure Nondual immanence of all haecceities, which is to say, the Presence of God. )

The I of the presence in itself (The absolute Nonduality of the characteristics as transcendental, Eternal, external and reflecting, the Transcendental Ego and empirical Ego which pervades the simplicity of the universality, the Personhood of God )

The presence of I

The presence of life in I

The presence of I in life

Thus Christ is the Life, “I Am I” conceals this entire mystery.

These things being considered if we synthesize the view of Will with the view of the radical immanence/transcendence of the Divine Sosein we unveil the Divinity of separation and distance itself as the stone of the Wise.

For the Boundless haecceities have relational Will, and for they are infinite, endless, interpenetrating and depend upon each other for relation, they are infinitely and instantly bound up and instantly communicate. As such when one Wills/desires towards the Other, they due to their unique difference are boundlessly separated sharing no qualities or characteristics yet this very nature of difference is their instant communication (disjunctive synthesis) as such in their boundless and infinite distance they are automatically unified but because of the chasm between them they infinitely project Will towards each other, which is infinitely fulfilled, this integratory analyzing extracting interpenetrating Will is Love-nature.

infinite distance there is infinite Will, for there is infinite Will which is instantly communicated/processed there is infinite love. This distance then is the plane of pure Love.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15835852]

>>15835843

Christ on the cross is the symbol of endless love, for Upon his cross he was separated from the Father, in that boundless separation was the hamartia and thelema unified utterly via the perfect interpenetrative interrelation of the radical immanence and radical transcendence/outsideness of the characteristics towards each other and wills towards each other.

As such separation and distance from God, between objects, between subjects, characteristics and essences is simply a plane of Pure boundless Unity, greater than oneness for they are instantly one yet fill, penetrate and define each other and partake of each other. Thus the Love and unity is magnified to the ultimate degree via Nondual-separation.

As such the True Philosophers Stone is Separation, The Heart of God dwelling perfectly at all points in the Immanent Plane of Sosein-Love.

[Anonymous No.15836503]

>>15834724
Have theologians actually addressed this? I'm curious. It's one thing to allow humans the freedom to err, but it seems like a whole other matter for there to exist a subset whose brains are wired in a way that prevents them from truly accepting salvation.

[Anonymous No.15836892]

>>15835789
Hi frater, this one is good. What do you think about the symbolique of the Trinity concerning this supradialectic of self-relation? As is said: ''For the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son''. The Son is the Image of the Invisible God; In Hypostases they are One and One, but in Nature the Two are One. ''Because we speak of a king, and of the king's image, and not of two kings. The majesty is not cloven in two, nor the glory divided''. As well like the Father turning into Himself Self-beholds His own Abyss. The awareness of Himself is His Word uttered.

>discrete points which are fully nondual in essence/substance, the only substantial difference being how they relate to each other.
And this differentiation occurs in an apophatic relation between the Hypostases, that is, the Father is neither the Son nor the Holy Spirit; the Son is neither the Father nor the Holy Spirit; the Holy Spirit is neither the Father nor the Son. In the same way, as Nyssa puts it: ''We know there is a difference between the Generation and the Procession, but the nature of the difference we in no wise understand''.

>This mutual relation to each other produces the base mathematical and logical sequences by which all is defined.
Don't know if you mean the (1-)3-6-9, do you?

This reflection in all unmanifested and manifested realities of the platonic One in proclian proposition (all partakes of the One - that is, it is one but not-one [for it is what it is as well]) is the very unity of the Trinity, the Light of Its Love.

[Anonymous No.15836950]

>>15835789
>>15836892
oh also when you say
>this characteristic of characteristic produces a doubling effect, in which are formed structures within/upon the body of this pure structure,
is this doubling effect the Triadic closing of Perfection with the Holy Spirit and the Love which expresses the Godhead so perfectly that the very unity - which is Its own definition - is the simple effect, glory, dazzle (here the second effect in question) of this Love?

[Anonymous No.15836960]

>>15834656
>he's never heard of divine love

[Anonymous No.15836964]

>>15835309
Based!

[Anonymous No.15837503]

>>15829327
>OT and the NT
Leave them behind. Semitic faiths are primitive, good only for the spiritually bankrupt man. If you wish to go deeper with your understanding, research other religions

[Anonymous No.15837537]

>>15827621
God was bored. Also based on His creation of the universe, I think God does not govern the universe with good and evil but with the laws bound by nature. What's good by God is good, and what isn't is not.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15838975]

>>15836892

I’ll post my write up concerning my position on the trinity.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15838983]

>>15838975

The Holy Son is the logos which is Omni-form logic structures which is demonstrated by the writings on divine temporality and divine electro-magnetism.

Therefore the Holy son as a network of nodes which automatically communicate instantly perpetually and self same is the internet of god, it is Pure love for love is simply interrelation. Therefore he is Pure love. He is identical to Wisdom, of which is expressed by the Holy Spirit.

Love is the interrelation, the Wisdom is the meaning of the interrelation, it is understanding the meaning of such knowledge internally. Thus love and wisdom nature’s United perfectly.

Thus we can define Christ as that which allows encoding of characteristic, that which is characteristics. The Holy Spirit is Characteristic, the father is the underlying which allows characteristic encoding, Holy Spirit being akin to experience of light itself where as Christ is Light and father as flame,which is to say, in our experience we can divide it thusly that there is experience which is experience of things which can be divided into objects which can be divided into characteristics. Holistic perception of characteristic is the Holy Spirit, characteristics/encoding/communicating data is the Son-logos and the invisible unknowable processes behind this communication are the father which is to say, if we are to examine the brain, it is the Father who is the neurons as they are (boundless divine attributes in perfect isolation, within their own existence and essence) whereas the Christ is the communication of such neurons between each other perfectly (the divine attributes in harmonious unity) and the Holy Spirit is the entirety of the brain complex as a wholistic structure which does its various functions. This is like saying the Father is the transcendental ego, the son is the empirical ego, the Holy Spirit the bodily-Ego, it is like saying the Father is that invisible impenetrable that allows for characteristic and it is the son who is the communication of these which is the singular nondual communication and the Holy Spirit is the result of such wholeistically, these are not modes, for my individual neurons are not the communication and talking of the sum of neurons which are not the result of their communication (my ideas, experiences, hungers, subconscious unconscious processes etc) as such logically all three are the essential divine nature but are not each and are individual yet nondual,

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15838986]

>>15838983

for just as the transcendental ego is invisible yet existent, it is my own self but it is not my conception of self/empirical ego, and just as my empirical ego works to process and organize what is and is not I, the relations of self to self and other to self and so forth, and bodily my motor senses, raw senses, have a bodily perception of themselves and the brain functions itself by its own nature, and that the transcendental ego is not the Empirical Ego is not the Body-Ego yet they are all nondual for they are the essential nature of the same person and thus they co-equally and co-eternally are of the same divinity and are of the same caliber and are all full expressions of the god head in their own regard and not modes of a fourth being.

Divine-Spiral-differentiation: how each facet and part of god fully expresses the fullness of God-head, Discovery of True Daat

Contemplating the spiral-nature of Time, in which all time perfectly repeats the same pattern thus expressing the totality of laws/structures it must logically adhere to, while its heart as present nature is pure difference (as pretension and pro-tension are married in the nuclear heart of difference which is the present, the present not being a crystalline entity and not being a middle point between past and present but rather the melting changing bubbling Union point, like the active intercourse of past and future.) it is logical to consider the deleuzian argument that eternal recurrence demonstrates the absolute unity of being and becoming via the perpetual characteristic of difference. In this way, if the logos/Chokmah is being, Kether is becoming and Chokmah is non-separate to Kether it occurs via the mutual relationship which is daat, which is to say, becoming and being are never separate due to both constantly being in the process of becoming/being different from its prior state, future state and thus its manifest knowable form is difference itself.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15838996]

>>15838986

Having considered such, we can apply the Spiral time to the divine Time, the Divine time being the boundless relations of all of the divine attributes which are endlessly communicating data which is instantaneous due to their perfect simplicity and proximity. Now then, if we apply the spiral time to our internet-of-divine-attributes we uncover that as one divine attribute communicates with another, it must naturally express another divine attribute by which to communicate with, such is the relation of Logos to Xeno-logos to greater-mauve-Zone-logos. This mutual communication requiring the flux state in which the divine attribute would have to convert/change into this other formation and attribute, this would occur endlessly, but as god is endless, perfect, and the information perfectly is processed instantly what occurs is that the information/divine attribute change occurs instantaneously, all of the logoi being within communication they naturally form a similar spiral of all logoi structures communicating at once. This being instant means that each divine attribute is in a perpetual state of change, becoming every other divine attribute, and each other divine attribute doing the same, and as this occurs instantly in a divine-presentness, a divine stillness, all of the facets are naturally identical to all other facets always, for they express and transmute into all other facets. Just as difference is the heart of normative spiral time, divine instant Omni-form transmutation is the heart of the Divne-Spirial-time.

Therefore just as normative Kether is reflected in normative daat, we can demonstrate that the center and heart of the logos from which its Omni-form divine attributes are expressed, are reflected perfectly within this principle of divine-self-differentiation, meaning we have uncovered a True Daat which exists within the supreme mauve zone, Which is pervading the entirety of the Gem. For this reason each facet is utterly in movement and activity and yet perfect stillness, for each facet is perfectly Active for it is being changed and absorbed into by every other facet, and yet it is perfectly reactive for it is submitting and being integrated into every other facet at once. As such all possible facets are in a perpetual state of marriage of active/reactive force. This is why shiva dances.

This being realized, every facet expresses the fullness of pure sosein, every facet expresses the fullness of aussersein, all ain and all becoming-being, all of the logos is expressed in every singular divine attribute, and the power/manifestation of this logos expresses the entirety of sosein. Every single experience can be perceived as the totality of the Gem.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15839002]

>>15838996

Difference if analyzed in itself, reveals that difference-in-itself is the very empirical Ego, for what other experience and concept defines itself by saying “this is different from myself”? None. Therefore we find the dynamic Shakti-Dance of Difference-in-objects which is the process-unfolding of object-awareness married to the static Shiva-rest difference-in-itself which is the ego as center of the ever moving circle. Difference logically then is da’ath to the sosein of Kether, which is logically speaking identical to the ultimate essence-existence, for it is consciousness itself and the characteristic of BEING characteristic, for characteristic is transcendental being only revealed via the immanent nature of difference, transcendental Ego the sole aspect of which is being a transcendental ego, its only characteristic being that it is a characteristic, is itself characteristic-in-itself. For this is why it is called both empty and fullness, Diamond and adamantine. Transcendental Ego is the Heart of Characteristic.

THE THREE FOLD Phenomenological reduction of the states of the ego and its corollary to the heart of differentiation found in the experience of all things:

Phenomenological reduction inducing discovery of a transcendental-immanent God by raw analysis.

Analyzing my own self and consciousness, I can say about consciousness that all consciousness is consciousness of something. Whenever I am conscious, I am aware of something, some object or some characteristics. I am always aware of some object.

Analyzing the contents of my awareness, I see objects, all objects seemingly share the following characteristics without exception. The characteristic of having a characteristic. (Encoding data, denoting something, the object makes me aware of certain qualities/data.) the Characteristic of sharing the same basic structure and the characteristic of difference (the objects seem different to each other and over time are changed due to the nature of time.)

The quality of Characteristic seems to be universal to all objects, everything has something which one can say of it, even if what one can say is precisely that they cannot accurately communicate it. As such things like lack and void appear to be characterized by the lack of other characteristics for example.

What then can I say about the characteristics of various objects in my perception? I can say they all seem to adhere to the same basic structure.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15839014]

>>15839002

By structure I mean, I can look at an object and say it has position, shape, length, fundamentally this means we can measure mathematical data of any object before my eyes, as such we can say that all things give us data as to its basic structure (which is chiefly mathematical/extension based) analyzing data further however reveals there are structures which are not just existent to me as size, height, etc, but rather have a existence according to a mental structure. When I look at red I materially/physically see this color but mentally, my mind associates red with power, or love or color or honesty. As such we can now see that there are principally two structures by which we are aware of objects, the material exist as it appears before us according to mathematical data, and the mental existence as it appears before us which has qualities which do not necessarily equate to the possible mathematical structures whatsoever but seem to have their own divisions, counting methods dividing methods and so forth.

This seems to reveal that all that is actual/real within the material/mathematic seems to be necessarily existent within the Mental world, whereas my mental structures have a much greater range and size(I can imagine people and things which do not exist materially , objects and ideas which have no material being+all material being)

The mental structure being able to contain the mathematical data/materially/empirically experienceable tells us that there appears to be multiple structuring methods of perceiving and interacting with objects. In my experience neither the mental world nor material perception have precedence to each other, they seem to occur at once and aren’t really separate in my awareness of any particular material object.

Since we can perceive of structures which are non-existent within the material experience, which are real structures, and we can contemplate other forms of material which are not coherent with the material structure, we seem to find that there are seemingly nigh-endless and inexhaustible combinations of material into uniquely existing mental structures.

If I were to learn some mental discipline, such as math and physics, or philosophy or the arts, I would find my mental world changed and its capacity and even structure as now seemingly different and its range of contents and principles also seem

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15839025]

>>15839014

changed. As there are seemingly inexhaustible material data recombinations which can exist within the mental world, and the mental world can seemingly be changed in its basic principles, we must logically conclude there are inexhaustible potential mental structures which would mean there are potentially endless ways of mentally structuring the connotations and characteristics of material objects and endless ways of arranging mental constructs, this my own contemplation demonstrates the mental capacity for the mental world to contain boundless mental-structures. As such the characteristics and specific data any object gives can be conceived of and interacted with in potentially endless mental ways, as the mental world and material sense are one thing in any experience I hold, it is necessarily true that this structure, this logical-structure must be endless. The structure itself being one unfolding of self-similar patterns unveiling in a process by this I mean, the structure as a whole never divides from itself but rather shows its same principles and qualities over and over, for it is one thing always.

Now, what can I say about difference? Though the structure always reveals the same qualities it always reveals it by showing its diversity, the multiplicity of material objects all reveal the uniformity of mathematical coordinates via their differences in expression, in relation to each other.

Going further, any object I perceive of is inherently different in data/qualities which it encodes from one moment to the next, as time itself is a variable, so the very existence in time means that from on moment to the next, every single object becomes different in some characteristic or another. Analyzing time, I can only perceive of a future which is oncoming, and a past which has occurred. I cannot find any stability in the present because it is constantly passing into past-future. Therefore present itself is the difference/change of characteristic between past-future.

As all characteristics demonstrate themselves via their difference from each other, and each thing’s characteristic is changed instantly, where then can we locate the location of difference itself, difference as it exists purely in both material and mental experience?

If I look at all objects and characteristics the thing within my consciousness which naturally gives the data/encodes that it is different, is me, myself. Specifically my conception of self(my empirical ego, my identity) its very nature seems to be in experience the quality of being different from all other objects. It says “ this is not I, that is not I, I am I and nothing else is I” therefore the Ego itself appears to be difference as it exists purely within my experience, it is Uniqueness itself.

Analyzing further, this seems to reveal that all objects within my consciousness are a dynamic moving difference, dynamic because my mental structures and mental perception can change towards them,

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15839029]

>>15839025

and their material conditions are constantly always changing via the nature of the present.

Meanwhile the Core characteristic of my identity/ego remains perpetually within Stasis, its sole quality being that it is unique and different from all objects.

As such analyzing the ego further, we find that the object of difference-in-itself is the Ego, since we have located difference and ego we can now clearly say that all objects within perception and the subject/ego in perception are both just aspects of perception/consciousness, neither being prior or after the other, they are both necessary characteristics of consciousness which is Pure(neither subject nor any specific object but the totality of consciousness is married as such.)

Therefore we can say logically via analysis that phenomena itself depicts characteristic, structure and difference.

As previously stated we can clearly demonstrate a material structure, even if we were to not consider the consciousness and not consider the subject, If objects exist they necessarily must have a structure, that structure must logically unveil via a pattern-process, that pattern process necessitates the existence of difference, difference necessitates the existence of that which is uniquely different to all else, that uniquely existent object which is non-separate to the material-structuring force is agreed upon by all religions to be God, which has, necessarily via the existence of difference, been proven to logically occur as the difference as it exists within itself.

This existence, which we call The unique difference, is inherently non-separate to the entirety of the structuring principles, for examining my own unique difference, I notice my own qualities as existent as separate yet as my own and of me and my own nature. Therefore the material/mental structure as it exists outside of me, must also logically contain an “I” who refers to the entirety of the structuring principles as theirs, and of themselves and of their power, all objects being objects of their perception.

However just as I determined that my own Ego/identity is necessarily a reflection of the consciousness, so must it also be with the ego of the structures. The Identity of the structure must have a non-conceptual existence which it itself reflects, these two, the fully transcendent (above identity, above difference, containing all difference) must logically co-contemplate/dwell with each other, the normative Ego of the structure being the sentience of difference itself, whereas the transcendental Ego is the sentience of characteristic as a whole, for all differences are simply aspects of characteristic itself.

[Anonymous No.15839030]

>>15827676
If you will live in the world like ours, but with toothache/teeth decaying absolutely impossible, will it make your life worse?

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.15839037]

>>15839029

Contemplating my own self once more, my own physical body, my bodily-self, my sense of self, I seem to also have within my consciousness a ego which has no identity, my physical body reacting to object stimuli as if it was itself a non-subject aspect, acting automatically and without reference to the identity. And as previously established there is logically no separation between my perception of objects and my consciousness, as consciousness is awareness and awareness is awareness of objects, rather, awareness of the dynamic process of the unfolding characteristics of Not-I, of objects. My identity and my actual consciousness reflect each other solely by the relationship they have via their shared static nature in contrast to the dynamism of object/not-I.

As demonstrated before, the Ego of the difference and transcendental person of the characteristic itself share this same arrangement, which necessitates the existence of one such not-I of transcendental characteristic, this must logically fill the entirety of material/mental structure world, as it is truly non-separate from the transcendental Person, it necessarily must have sentience and consciousness of equal level also.

As such, we can demonstrate the perpetual co-existence and co-dependence of a Triune-Being who is identical to the structuring principle controlling force of all which exists, who contains all possible characteristics therefore all attributes, is necessarily boundless for he is all structure, is necessarily in all points of time via the identification of time with difference, and is necessarily having three persons which are of one divine essence yet three distinct persons who, mutually reflecting each other are never mingled into a fourth person or essence.

Thus, a fully Transcendental immanent Trinitarian Godhead is Necessary.

[Anonymous No.15839058]

>>15829327
How many books and letters have you actually read from either collection?

[Anonymous No.15839101]

>>15827676
Why would God not just bend the laws of the universe so that good can exist without evil? I thought his power was limitless?

[Anonymous No.15840182]

>>15827621
God created everthing.
Life is a test. We can choose to do good or evil.

God want us to do good and avoid evil.
God created angels and animals.
Humans that do good are higher beings than angels and human that do evil are lower beings than animals.

God gave us a free will under His will.
Evil doers and oppressors will be punished.

[Anonymous No.15840221]

>>15837537
To not attribute perfection to God is blasphemy.

God is perfect. Human are capable of doing good as much as evil. Human have minds and are responsible. Evil doers and oppressors will be punished.

[jesus No.15840271]

>>15835227
humans invented morality for themselves. from gods perspective everything is good and perfect, even the fact that people seethe and invent bad and evil which is all about survival.

[Anonymous No.15840899]

>I don't like some things therefore God doesn't exist