Comments on: What are “intelligences”?

By: Simple-Simon

Simple-Simon — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 03:43:58 +0000

Jacob,
In a way…yes, but we’re talking billions and billions of times smaller than that!

Look up: “String Theory”

Matter is all inconceivably small 1 dimensional energy WAVES or strings, i.e., [remember E=MC2]

Sounds are WAVEs
Lights are WAVEs
So, if all Energies are WAVEs
Then, all Matter is made up of WAVEs too.

The most elementary particles are really 1 dimensional [First Estate]tiny waves of energy. Vibrating [2 dimensions: 2nd Estate], like sound waves – only really fast.

Genesis:
And God said•, Let there be light: and there was light.
and
John:
In the beginning was the word.

Quick little side note:
The Hebrew and Aramaic word “Abracadabra,” or the phrase “avrah ke dibrah” literally translates into “By my word, I create” or “It happened as it was said.”

Sound was used to create Light,
And light can be used to create all the matter in the Universe; E=MC2 – into [3 dimensions: or the 3rd Estate] or MATTER.
And so on, and so on.

It all began with a single WAVE…..

By: Jacob

Jacob — Sat, 17 Jun 2006 16:25:59 +0000

Simple-Simon,

So you’re saying that intelligences are powered by mitocondria, right?

By: Simple-Simon

Simple-Simon — Sat, 17 Jun 2006 01:08:42 +0000

If: Physical creations are patterned after Spiritual creations…

Then: “Cells” are to the physical body, like “Intelligences” are to the Spiritual body.

Think about it, the light should come on.

By: Blake

Blake — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 22:28:27 +0000

Clark: I thought you’d find this article particularly interesting. It argues that quantum mechanics entails panpsychism. See it here: http://cogprints.org/3064/01/qpan.pdf

By: Mark Butler

Mark Butler — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 18:03:16 +0000

Thanks, CE.

By: CE Digger

CE Digger — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 06:08:29 +0000

Mark Butler you have made some beautiful and insightful comments on this thread (as have the others). Just wanted to say thanks… again… :)

By: Mark Butler

Mark Butler — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 21:34:20 +0000

Thanks, Clark.

By: Mark Butler

Mark Butler — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 21:34:02 +0000

And it follows that outer darkness is not a *punishment* it is the natural state of those who are not willing to love and sacrifice. They end up alone wandering in strange roads, subject to the random highwayman, in a Hobbesian state of fear, or go in for a more perverse kind of love/rule by intimidation in the anti-Kingdom, the combinations of the devil.

By: Mark Butler

Mark Butler — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 21:29:17 +0000

I agree with that, Blake – involuntary love is not love at all. A healthy relationship must be freely entered into and maintained through the active effort of both parties. An unreciprocated love is *necessarily* much weaker than a reciprocated relationship, because of the lack of consent on the party of the second part. Draw near unto, me and I will draw near unto you, and so on.

By: Blake

Blake — Thu, 08 Jun 2006 21:05:37 +0000

Mark: I suggest that the reason LDS are not “orthodox” trinitarians is that the unity of the persons is metaphysical and logical for traditional Christians such that they have no choice as to whether they are in the relationship of divine unity. I argue in vol. 2 that the essence of fellowship love, the highest form of divine love, is freedom to say “no” to the relationship and therefore I suggest that the traditional view of the Trinity adopts a logical and metaphysical reading contrary to any sound scriptural hermeneutic and it devalues the divine love.