Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

โ† Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Submitted by Terence Blackett


In 1492, when Columbus was making his voyages through the Caribbean, it is said that the Native West Indians (American Indians who had travelled South) could not see the sailing vessels approaching on the distant horizon. Their brains could not process the information due in part to the fact that they had never seen such large galleons before. It was only after constantly looking out onto the horizon that spatial recognition transformed the ships into physical objects of reality creating a new consciousness in their minds.

The philosophy of consciousness is inherently a fundamental part of the universe just like scientific issues of matter and velocity. Human spatial awareness is inherently a God-given attribute which has always existed and we each have our own individual consciousness as part of this larger collective consciousness. The exploratory concept of proto-consciousness however assumes that every living thing is also a part of this spatial consciousness, and that each living being has to some extent varying levels of what we term self-consciousness.

This is fundamental to our understanding because it is said that we are only seeing and experiencing the tip of a quantum mechanical iceberg. If our brains can process 400 billion bytes of information per second โ€“ then why are we only using 2000 bytes which involves our spatial recognition and understanding of time-space distanciation, our physical bodies and its [5] primary senses and our evolving and changing environment? Are we even capable of going beyond the realm of mere superficial consciousness – migrating from a loci of sensory perception to another proto-consciousness state? And what can the science of quantum mechanics and quantum geometry allow us to understand about our own levels of human spirituality if anything at all?

Arguably, the materialist aspects of quantum science have been obsessed for decades with measurable, observable phenomena in the hope of logging empirical data in spreadsheets, graphs and tables. The irony has been how can science account for the billions of bytes of information processed daily in the human brain which remains randomized and unaccounted for and cannot be allocated a definitive tabulation or an analytical framework. If we think of the eyes as analogous to the lens of a video camera (which when recording sees more than the images that is within its focus) โ€“ then could it be that our brain processes so much more than is perceptibly possible but because of innate prejudices and judgments as well as social preconditioning, we are only allowed to see what we want to see?

Science is beginning to recognize that the world between our two ears and the observable world out there BOTH carry an intrinsic harmony which is measurable and quantifiable at some points and at others points pose menacingly niggling questions which call for hypotheses, theories and oftentimes conjecture to make sense of them. Scientists who have for years been grappling with sub-atomic physics continue to be baffled as to where atoms and particles appear and disappear to and some of the answers are frankly nothing more than human guess-work. One of the challenges even within the realm of quantum mechanics is the question of where TIME* goes. Does it go backward or does it go forward? And can we alter time? In the Bible, it is recorded that a prophet did!

Eminent researchers like Dr. Amit Goswani are forging a new pathway in the science of quantum theoretical science which looks at this whole idea of the fusion and merger of modern scientific theory with ancient philosophical pathways as a way of understanding our world and for those of us who choose to come to a fundamental understanding of Intelligent Design caused not in part but in the whole by an Intelligent Designer.

The spiritual and religious notion of a Creator GOD* continues to evoke all kinds of emotions amongst many within the scientific establishment and in the public square of secular humanist philosophy are many disingenuous thoughts and the haranguing of epistemic modal logic by those who seek excuses to disavow knowledge of anything outside of their [5] base physical sensory attributes. This is where not only science hits the wall but where common men stagnate in perpetuity. Within their brains is this discombobulation effect – an almost permanent loss of desire to activate the hidden resources of the mind, recognizing the quantum effects of all of those bytes of disused information prevalent in the mind which go undiscovered, undeveloped and unused fulfilling the Scriptures which says โ€“ “where there is no knowledge or โ€˜visionโ€™ people continue to perishโ€.

If Dr. Goswani is correct, then the physical things around us are merely movements of consciousness and by choosing these moments and movements we translate these things or as Heisenbeger termed them โ€œtendenciesโ€ into the realm of consciousness. But they are many theoretical physicists who have a problem with this position because of the controversially radical nature of it.

For example, Quantum Theory espouses this notion of Quantum Positioning which puts a myriad of possibilities in both our past, present and future actions. And from those multiple of positions come the power to choose a distinct position where all other multiples collapse into that one determinant choice. So Quantum Mechanics ask the question โ€“ โ€œcan we go back in time and change our choice and/or our position?โ€ Science believes โ€“ yes it is possible based on current quantum trends available now which influences all the possible positions which ultimately produce the best possible outcome as we go into the future. So the choices we make now determine our past and ultimately affect our future.

As human beings, we have long been taught to accept that the created things are set, separate and distinct from our own individual reality but this is not really the case. In the same way, notions and ideas of a Creator God within the context of theoretical science posits this narrative that there is no basis in empirical science for any appreciable understanding of spirituality.

But is that really the case?

In the book “The Spiritual Brain: A Neuroscientist’s Case for the Existence of the Soul” – Mario Beauregard has concluded that, “Individual minds and selves arise from and are linked together by a divine Ground of Being (or primordial matrix). That is the spaceless, timeless, and infinite Spirit, which is the ever-present source of cosmic order, the matrix of the whole universe, including both physis (material nature) and psyche (spiritual nature). Mind and consciousness represent a fundamental and irreducible property of the Ground of Being. Not only does the subjective experience of the phenomenal world exist within mind and consciousness, but mind, consciousness, and self profoundly affect the physical world…it is this fundamental unity and interconnectedness that allows the human mind to causally affect physical reality and permits psi interaction between humans and with physical or biological systems. With regard to this issue, it is interesting to note that quantum physicists increasingly recognize the mental nature of the universe.”

The basis for quoting Beauregard is that in our last article a few weeks ago, we looked at Stephen Hawkingโ€™s M-Theoretical position in his work entitled The Grand Design which to many of us was another throw of the dice to prove the possibility of the non-EXISTENCE of a GRAND DESIGNER โ€“ a position which has proven incoherent and pointless.

Hawking in his landmark work “A Brief History of Time” – suggests that: “If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God.” Yet in the said book he argues that the existence of God was unnecessary to explain the origin of the universe… Is that a contradiction as well as a denial of his own assumptions or merely the mutterings of an overcharged brain?

Hawking’s early research work in the book “The Large Scale Structure of Space-Time”, cites that: “It seems to be a good principle that the prediction of [God] by a physical theory indicates that the theory has broken down, i.e. it no longer provides a correct description of observations.” So while Hawking tried to dispel the possibilities of God in using Quantum Geometry to box God out by some mathematical theory – the sad irony is that he and his cohorts have again failed in their insalubrious quest to undermine The Creatorโ€™s existence.

What is truly astonishing is how quantum science has opened up a whole new world of endless possibilities to mankind yet for the most part we are stuck in this neutral vortex of inertia about the world around us and the โ€œmagicโ€ (used in an imaginative context) that life offers to us if we were but to open up our minds and our souls to the limitless possibilities we have available to us. But the fault may lie with the pace of life and the fragmentation and flux we experience as the world we have created โ€œbobsโ€ and โ€œweavesโ€ out of control.

A final question asks – can we individually and collectively affect the reality of the world around us at the deepest subconscious level? You better believe we can! It has been proven time and again that we create our own world โ€“ a gift given to us by God at the moment of inception. The deception however has been that we have been spoon-fed lies about how we can change not only our thought process but also the trends and the observable, empirically tested realities which greet us every day.

One dramatic case in point was a group research study in the murder capital of the United States โ€“ Washington DC. It was shown that in the summer of 1993; where [4000] volunteers came from over a 100 different countries to collectively meditate for long periods of time during the day as a way to reduce the capitalโ€™s crime rate by some 25%. The DC Police Chief went on television stating that it would take two feet of snow to reduce crime that summer. The wonderful thing was that crime in DC did fall by 25% that summer and the Police Department did collaborate in the research work which had already seen similar successes in [48] other smaller studies.

The argument is clear โ€“ denying a scientific basis for spirituality has proven false and the objectification of reality can summed up in a simple passage of Scripture โ€“ โ€œAs a man thinketh in his heart so is heโ€.

There are empirical proofs that our thought process does influence the existential world around us and only God Himself truly understands the full capacity of manโ€™s potential and his ability to chart his divine destiny in this life with repercussions for a world without physical limits or esoteric boundaries to come in the distant future. The choice however is ours. We must understand that the time for straddling fences has almost run outโ€ฆ

If we are what we eat โ€“ then we are what we think! This is a water-study by Japanese Dr. Masuru Emotoโ€ฆwhich clearly proves our point!


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

215 responses to “Is There A Scientific Basis For Spirituality? And Can Quantum Mechanics Map A Space/Time Continuum For Proto-Consciousness Which Invariably Frames A Solid Argument For the Existence Of God?”


  1. @ HANTS

    “FAITH” according to The Holy Scriptures referenced in Hebrews chapter 11 v. 1 states: “Now faith is the ‘SUBSTANCE’ of things hoped for – and the ‘EVIDENCE’ of things not seen…”

    How do you unravel that statement in the context of our current discussion?


  2. @ AOD
    “Quantum Mechanics is an โ€œoxymoronicโ€ approach to a philosophy of reality…”

    How do you qualify that statement with Dr. Casey Blood’s findings in – “The Way from Science to Soul…”

    Ref:

    http://www.quantummechanicsandreality.com/


  3. @TMB…

    To your above submission, I have many comments. But since I am a little busy right now, I’m going to have to only give a few…

    @TMB: “If we are what we eat โ€“ then we are what we think!

    An unsubstantiated presupposition. Much like many of the claims you make in the above submission.

    @TMB: “Hawking […] suggests that: ‘If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason โ€“ for then we should know the mind of God.’

    As a student of the Bible, I would have thought you would be familiar and comfortable with the concept of metaphor. (BTW, Einstein made similar references to God. He was agnostic.)

    @TMB: “This is a water-study by Japanese Dr. Masuru Emotoโ€ฆwhich clearly proves our point!

    I’m not sure it actually “proves [your] point”, even though you would like it to. (Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masaru_Emoto for reasons that perhaps these claims are not completely honest.)

    @TMB et al… I have learnt that those one should listen to are those who listen to, learn from, and cite those who are credible.

    @TMB: With all due respect, you do not seem to be one of those people.

  4. smooth chocolate Avatar
    smooth chocolate

    @Terrece blackett

    “it is said that the Native West Indians (American Indians who had travelled South) could not see the sailing vessels approaching on the distant horizon. Their brains could not process the information due in part to the fact that they had never seen such large galleons before”

    FOR THE THIRD TIME I HAVE TO PAST THIS FOR U TO UNDERSTAND. the issue is not WHAT they saw… or what someone told them it was, or what they interpret it to be. the fact that i am trying to point out to u is that THEIR EYES SAW SOMETHING… so ur opening statement is an utterly retarded statement. whether someone told them that it was a dog, pig or cow meant their minds showed them that an object was on the horizon. can u not get it yet? gosh…………man

  5. smooth chocolate Avatar
    smooth chocolate

    @Terence Blackett | May 3, 2011 at 8:37 AM |
    “… the โ€œMEDICINE MENโ€ ( Witch Doctors/ Sharmans) made the natives believe that what they were seeing was actual sea-monstersโ€ฆ”

    DOES NOT THAT STATEMENT SUGGEST THAT THE NATIVES SAW SOMETHING? How then would u write the below crap:
    “the Native West Indians…could not see the sailing vessels approaching on the distant horizon. pproaching on the distant horizon. Their brains could not process the information due in part to the fact that they had never seen such large galleons before”

    whether they thought they saw a monster, a piece of wood, their false god… they SAW something so u cannot state that at first they did not see the vessels because brains could not process it fool


  6. @ SC

    No need for acerbic wit given the social climate we live in…

    I do NOT* need you to agree with my position for there to be civility and a benchmark of respectful reasoning to take place…

    For insults and castigations will NOT* make you anymore right and cause me to see your point anymore than my LOGIC* will cause you to see mine…

    That said my dear BRUV* – for the last time:- what was being shown at the outset was that the spatial conditions between what is termed the TIME-SPACE* DISTANCIATION* (according to my former Prof. Anthony Giddens) and ACTUAL* recognition of the GALLEONS* that were SEEN* (according to your relentless submissions) – it was during that deep-level subconscious PERIOD* of TIME* that certain interactions or NOT* were going on in the brains of the NATIVE* peoples which caused them not to process the what they saw (irrespective of the FACT* that they minds could not collate the NEW* info) hence the conclusion was to accept the word of the person(s) who were supposed to have “spiritual” insight…

    That is the reason for the above statement in para. (1)…

    It happens to the best of us… Even in this instance you are having difficulty reading between the lines both literally and contextually – so if your brain is unable to process that INFO* – I apologize for trying to access a part of your “HARD-DRIVE” which clearly inaccessible…

    LOL!!!


  7. What is “Time-Space Distanciation”?

    Time-space distanciation is a phrase coined by Anthony Giddens. According to Giddens, social life consists of interactions that are face-to-face or remote.

    Time-space distanciation describes the process whereby remote interaction has become an increasingly significant feature of human life, and through which social systems that were previously distinctive have become connected and interdependent.

    In contrast to pre-modern cultures, “modern time” separates from specific place and acquires a uniformity of measurements across regions through technologies like clocks and calendars.

    This “empty time” is a prior condition for the “emptying of space,” or the separation of space from place. Place becomes increasingly “phantasmagoric,” ( a constantly shifting complex succession of things seen or imagined) influenced by distant or spatially absent social influences. This separation of time and space has brought about time-space distanciation.

    Social activity becomes disconnected from the context of presence, and opened up to the possibilities of change by breaking free from the restraints of local habits and practices.

    Giddens, A. (1981): A contemporary critique of historical materialism. Volume 1: Power, property and the state. London: Macmillan.

    Giddens, A. (1984): The constitution of society. Cambridge: Polity Press


  8. @ CH

    As you are battling for “TIME” I may have to do as the Prophet Joshua did and have The Creator God have the sun stand still in the heavens so you can get your tasks done… (Just a RANDOM* thought) LOL!!!

    On a much more prescient note which you and I have some acquired knowledge of and for which you alluded to regarding the statement – “we are what we eat as much as we are what we think” …

    Science continues to support my position on these individual questions…

    So for you to say that these positions have no bearing in scientific parlance and in your own words are “an unsubstantiated presupposition” is frankly presumptuous on your part and rather disingenuous on the other hand given the volumes of research work on these issues…

    In September the BBC dragged out a long documentary on the issue of Food and how it has bearing on us as human beings…

    SEE:-

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/humanbody/truthaboutfood/

    Stephen Linsteadt in quoting from Bruce Lipton’s Insight Into Cellular Consciousness, Bridges, 2001, Vol 12(1):5 argues the position that: “Contemporary cell research is now based on the principles of quantum physics that shows the world as being created out of energy. Researchers have now demonstrated that our cellsโ€™ membranes contain special proteins called Intergral Membrane Proteins (IMPs) that respond to energy signals from the external and internal environment. These are important findings because they acknowledge that biological behavior can be controlled by โ€œinvisibleโ€ energy forces, which include thought….”

    SEE:-

    http://www.soulsofdistortion.nl/dna5.html

    From the book – โ€œThe Heart of Health; the Principles of Physical Health and Vitalityโ€…

    So again Chris, you & I both know that I was on solid ground in regards to the above statement made in my piece…

    LOL!!!


  9. @ CH
    “As a student of the Bible, I would have thought you would be familiar and comfortable with the concept of metaphor. (BTW, Einstein made similar references to God. He was agnostic.)…”

    Chris in all fairness do you believe that Hawking & Einstein et al were using metaphorical language in their individual assertions regarding God…

    For if a metaphor is the expression of an understanding of one concept in terms of another concept, where there is some similarity or correlation between the two – then how do the above statements by these [2] gentlemen correlate with this concept of metaphor…. PLEASE EXPLAIN!!!

    You cite that Albert was an AGNOSTIC* – but was he really that person that was held up to those of us who are looking for a poster boy for DISBELIEF*… An agnostic is a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God…

    History cites that Baruch Spinoza 16th century Dutch Jewish philosopher had the greatest influence on Einstein bar none… It is argued that: “Albert Einstein named Spinoza as the philosopher who exerted the most influence on his world view (Weltanschauung). Spinoza equated God (infinite substance) with Nature, consistent with Einstein’s belief in an impersonal deity. In 1929, Einstein was asked in a telegram by Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein whether he believed in God. Einstein responded by telegram: “I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fates and actions of human beings.”

    SEE REF:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinozism

    So there’s more to the argument than is being alluded…


  10. @Terence, thanks sincerely for your expression of regard; and yes, our “GLORIFIED” transformed bodies will transcend “LIGHT YEARS” in the twinkling of an eyes, leaving in the wake, those Atheisticated, Gnosticated, Kabalisticated, FOOLS* like Hawking, Dawkins, Renselle et al, in their web of unenlightened folly and IGNORANCE*

    If the light that be in them IS DARKESS* Oh, how great is that DARKNESS!!!

    Therefore, “Professing to be wise, they became fools.” (Rom. 1:22).

    ‘To say of what IS, that it IS, or of what is NOT that it is NOT, is TRUE.” (Aristotle, Metaphysics, 1077b, 26).


  11. @ CH

    Regarding Dr. Emoto findings – that is something we must all reason out for ourselves individually…

    One man’s perception is not necessarily another’s…

    So let it be!!!

    Finally, you question my credibility based on the “VOICES” that I am meant to be listening to…

    That is also equally presumptuous as I do NOT* determine whose voices you listen to or what dogma you subscribe to or what particular lenience you hold or follow…

    Withal due respect my dear BRUV* – discretion is the better part of valor especially when you know precious little about a person…

    LOL!!!


  12. The Mind-Body Problem!

    “The growth in influence and the popularisation of physical science has made the problem [of the mind] more urgent. The idea that science* captures everything*, except the centre of everyone’s universe, his own consciousness* makes a laughing-stock of its claim to present a pausible world view…If science cannot encompass the subjective, then subjectivity becomes a door through which mystical, irrational and religious notions can enter and reassert themselves, against the modern metaphysic of scientific realism.” (Howard Roberson, Matter and Sense, Emphasis added).

    “The immortality of the soul is something of such vital importance to us, affecting us so deeply, that one must have lost all feeling not to care about knowing the facts of the matter.” (Pascal, Pensees, Lafuma Edition, 427).

    Mental events includes episodes of thoughts, feelings of pain and episodes of having a sensory experience. Physical events are happening in the brain and central nervous system than can be described exhaustively usings terms from chemistry and physics. However, physical events and properites do NOT* have the same features that hold for mental* events and properties. One’s thoughts, feeling of pain or sensory experiences, do NOT have weight, are NOT located anywhere in space (one’s thought of luch cannot be closer to one’s right ear than one’s left one), are NOT composed of chemicals, and do NOT have electrical properties. However, the brain events associated with one’s thoughts, etc, indeed, material events in general, do have these features.

    If a doctor touches part of one’s brain with an electrode, it may cause a certain mental experience, say a memory, to occur. But, all that proves is that the mind* is causally connected to the brain, and NOT that they are identical. A sound is not stored in the grooves of a record, but rather is causally connected with those grooves (one can cause a sound by doing something to the grooves). Likewise, memories are neither parts of NOR stored in the brain, but are stored in the mind* yet causally connected with the brain (0ne can cause a memory by doing something to the brain).

    The subjective character of experience* is hard to capture in physicalist terms. The simple fact of consciousness* constituted by the subjective feel or texture of experience itself, is a serious difficulty for physicalists. To see this, consider the example of what is called the knowledge argument*. Suppose a deaf scientist became the world’s leading expert on the neurology of hearing. It would be possible for him to know and describe everything involved in the physical aspects of hearing. In this example, no knowledge of what is physical is left out of the description. However, something different would still be left out* of what the scientist knows , the experience* of what it is like* to be a human who hears. As Howard Robinson puts it:

    “The notion of having something as an OBJECT of EXPERIENCE is NOT, prima facie, a physical notion; it does NOT figure in any physical science. Having something as an object of experience is the same as the subjective FEEL or what it is like of experience.”
    (Emphasis added)

    Subjective states of experience* are real, people experience sounds, tastes, colors, thoughts, pain, and they are essentially characterized by their subjective (mind/soul). But certainly, this does not appear to be true of anything physical!


  13. Consider this argument:

    1. No physical properties are self-presenting!

    2. At least some mental properties are self-presenting, emanating from within* the mind/soul*!


  14. Secondary qualities, are qualities such as colors, tastes, sounds, smells and textures. Primary qualities are qualities thought to be among the properites* that characterize matter – weight, shape, size, solidity, motion. According to some, physicalism seems to imply that the ‘secondary qualities’ do not exist in the external world. For example, some claim that color is really nothing but a wavelength of light. So in general, physicalism reduces the properties* of matter to being nothing but primary qualities. We are left with a picture of matter bereft of secondary qualities.

    Examples of this vacuous thinking, is, that Redness is a wavelength; that Heat is the vibration of molecules; and Pain is a certain brain state! In each case one entity (redness, heat, pain) is reduced to another entity ( wavelength, a vibration, a brain state) in that the former entity exist and is nothing more or less than the latter entity.

    However, it cannot be denied that the world of our commonsense, is replete with secondary qualities. Therefore, such qualities do in fact exist. But, if they do not exist in the external world as properties* of matter*, they must exist as mental entities in the conscious minds/souls of experience themselves. Frank Jackson has put the point this way:

    “It is commonplace that there IS an apparent clash between the picture Science gives of the world around us and the picture our senses give us. We sense* the world as made up of coloured, materially continuous, macroscopic, stable objects; Science and, in particular, Physics, teels us that the material world is constituted of clouds of minute, colourless, highly-mobile particles…Science forces us to acknowledge that physical or material things are not coloured…This will enable us to conclude that sense-data are all mental* for they are COLOURED.” (emphasis added)

    In other words, science does away with secondary qualities in the external world, as they have choosen by their philosophical agenda of rampant Atheism* to couch their pseudo-scientific jargon, in terms that at counter-intuitive to our very God-given senses, but since we KNOW* they do EXIST*, we SEE* them, they MUST EXIST in our minds/souls, as mental entities, as Almighty God intended, because they are NOT aspects of matter!


  15. Terence McKenna was a contemporary and a colleague of chaos mathematician Ralph Abraham and biologist Rupert Sheldrake (creator of the theory of “morphogenetic fields) … Here’s his take on “MADNESS” (AN ALTERED QUANTUM STATE OR NEW DIMENSION OF THOUGHT) or what we call schizophrenia and sharmanism… This is the “LEFTIST” philosophical slant of the what we are discussing and where some have gone of the rails believing that our evolutionary adaptogenesis is in someway hitched to some psychedelic world created out physiological stimuli…

    WHAT A FEARFUL DECEPTION!!!

    SEE VIDEO BELOW –


  16. Terence, this McKenna, IDIOT, could not have spoken more deceptively, and dangerously for SATAN, its the 21st Century remake of SATAN’s words in the Garden of Eden, applied to today’s spiritually DEAD masses of people!

    Woe to those who call EVIL, GOOD!


  17. @ ZOE

    That is why I posted his VT because I needed to make it clear that the BOVINE* effluent which oozes from these (as you called them – IDIOTS) have done a job of brainwashing many…

    So we must expose the LIARS* and validate the TRUTH-SEEKERS!!!


  18. @Terence Blackett

    “so rest assured Quantonics or any other gnosis is merely interpretative hypotheses tabulated in mathematical formulae with a sprinkle of philosophy of science added for just measureโ€ฆ”

    1: The mathematical formulae used in quatonics apply a symbolic logic never applied to western mathematics before.

    2. Quantum Mechanics applies an old subject/object logic, and is still bound by Aristotle’s syllogisms. A problem with its approach is the very mathematics it uses….fix the math and the paradoxes are resolved ๐Ÿ˜€ there after it is not a “mechanics” at all. But based on quality.

    3. There is no “sprinkle” of philosophy of science in Quantonics, if you are going to lean on Quantum Mechanics, I warn you not to be so dismissive. You could save countless hours, and a fruitless search, by entertaining my invitation. The only catch is…..you will not be able to talk about the new understanding with anyone from the “old” understanding.


  19. I must admit I have not read much of the work of Dr. Casey Blood, what I have seen appears to be a good, hearty attempt at addressing this problem of consciousness/awareness. However you can move to an understanding beyond quantum mechanics… Quantum Mechanics will get you to “the door” but not through it.
    Casey is knocking on that door, no one is there to open, but it is unlocked….as long as the author clings to old linguistic shackles…this door will remain closed.

    Imagine a reality understood using mathematics and language that is so far removed from current maths and language that the person using these new linguistic tools may as well be “speaking Greek” that is my challenge/invitation/ offer ๐Ÿ˜€

    I have already said too much, now I must say no more of this.

  20. The man wiv no name!! Avatar
    The man wiv no name!!

    There’s a god as surely as I’m sitting here. John 3:16.


  21. @AOD

    “Quantum Mechanics will get you to โ€œthe doorโ€ but not through it…”

    Thank GOD*, I know who exist beyond the “THRESHOLD” of that open door… (Revelation Chapter 3 verse 8)…

    You referenced a lot of points in [2] separate pieces with a rather flippant warning to not be dismissive of what’s on offer…

    Regrettably, what is being overlooked in my summations is the loci of what I have been trying to get at from the INCEPTION* – “THE EXISTENCE OF A CREATOR GOD”; AN INTELLIGENT DESIGNER; A PRIMORDIAL MATRIX WITH PENULTIMATE POWER; THE ULTIMATE “LIGHT” SOURCE WHICH IS THE QUANTUM GENERATOR OF THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE…

    This has been the underlying thesis of my argument from the outset….

    I am not here to “HAGGLE” over empty mathematical formulae, meaningless hypotheses with no real bearing in conscious or subconscious reality; or “presupposed” (to use Chris Halsall paradigm) theoretical formulations which seeks to find basis in postmodern quantum research science…

    My FOCUS* is the unadulterated EXISTENCE* and PREEMINENCE of a CREATOR* GOD in the overall “MECHANICS” & DESIGN* of all that exist and ever will…

    For an exercise intellectual quibbling & babbling – PLEASE SEE the videos below:


  22. @ ZOE

    The more I look at these issues in quantum science and this whole aspect of supposed reality – I am beginning to see how the “Downside” of the morbid quest to discover the SUPERHUMAN*- is a harbinger for the eventual manifestation of the “ANTICHRIST”, THE BEAST & THE FALSE PROPHET in the END OF DAYS!!!

    For when “he” comes – he will possess all the attributes that will cause the “WHOLE” world to wonder after the BEAST!!!

    His DIABOLICAL* super-human powers will blow the minds of the scientific establishment, the FALLEN* churches & RELIGIONS*, governments and all who walk upon the face of the earth…

    Only, the ELECT* will not be DECEIVED!!!

  23. smooth chocolate Avatar
    smooth chocolate

    @terrence blackett
    it was during that deep-level subconscious PERIOD* of TIME* that certain interactions or NOT* were going on in the brains of the NATIVE* peoples which caused them not to process the what they saw (irrespective of the FACT* that they minds could not collate the NEW* info) hence the conclusion was to accept the word of the person(s) who were supposed to have โ€œspiritualโ€ insightโ€ฆ”

    U COULD ONLY BE A TOTAL JACKASS if u could allow someone to put such crap and u accept it. of course i understand that the mediocrities of ur infinitesimal brain cannot think nor does it have the ability to think for itself. IF U SEE AN OBJECT AND DO NOT KNOW WHAT IT IS, THE FACT IS U SAW AN OBJECT.

    now i will not respond again as u would like. if u have a brain, use it. u wrote as if the indigenous people were naive and backward, their intellectual ability was far more superior to that of conquistadores or modern day people i might say. the jackass who put that statement out their could not match their intelligence. up to this day we still have no understanding of how they were able to predict things so accurately nor can we replicate their building skills. so i find ur infantile logic to be equated to that of a monkey seeing a tree for the first time


  24. @ SC

    Again you have proven yourself worthy of an Alfred Nobel by sweating the small STUFF* (according to you) and pissing in the wind over the big stuff!!!


  25. THE ETERNAL ‘WORD’ OF GOD, IS* THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!

    “In the BEGINNING was the WORD, and the WORD was with GOD, and the WORD was GOD.”

    “HE was in the BEGINNING with GOD. ALL THINGS were MADE through HIM, and without HIM nothing was MADE that was MADE.”

    “In HIM was LIFE, and the LIFE was the LIGHT of of men.

    “And the LIGHT shines in the DARKNESS, and the DARKNESS did NOT comprehend* it.” (John 1: 1-5, Emphasis added).

    The word COMPREHEND* from verse 5, is rendered from the Greek ‘katalambano’ meaning, ‘To seize, layhold of, overcome’ Therefore, ‘The DARKNESS of men’s heart does NOT gain control of it. The extended meaning further means, ‘To perceive, attain, lay hold of with the MIND; to apprehend with MENTAL or MORAL effort. Thus, the DARKNESS of men’s SIN stained heart, IS unreceptive and does NOT understand it. The DARKNESS will NEVER be able to eliminate it. LIGHT and DARKNESS essentially are antagonistic* The Christians joy IN Christ Jesus, is KNOWING that LIGHT is not only GREATER than darkness, but will also ETERNALLY outlast the darkness.

    The following is an exegesis of this most profound declaration of the Eternal Word of God, none other than, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!

    ‘In the beginning’ (en archei). ‘Arche’ is definite, though anarthrous like our at home, in town, and the similar Hebew ‘be reshith’ in Gen. 1:1. John carries our thoughts BEYOND* the beginning of creation in time to eternity. There IS NO argument here the prove the existence of God, any more than in Genesis. It is simply assumed. Either God exist and IS the Creator of the Universe as scientist Eddington and Jeans assume, or matter IS eternal or it has come out of nothing. ‘Was’ (en. Three times in this sentence John uses this imperfect of ‘eimi’ to be, which conveys NO idea of origin for God, or for the ‘Logos’, simply continuous existence. Quite a different verb (egeneto, became) appears in verse 14 for the beginning of the Incarnation of the Logos (Jesus). See the distinction sharply drawn in 8:58 “before Abraham came (genesthai) I AM” (eimi, TIMELESS EXISTENCE). ‘The Word (ho logos). Logos is from ‘lego’ old word in Homer to lay by, to collect, to put words side by side, to speal, to express an opinion. Logos is common for reason as well as speech. The term ‘Logos’ is applied only in John 1:1, 14 and Rev. 19:13 and I John 1:1 ‘concering the Word of LIFE.

    This term suits John’s purpose better than ‘sophia’ (wisdom) and is his answer to the GNOSTICS* who either denied the actual humanity of Christ (Docetic Gnostics) or who separated the ‘aeon’ Christ from the man Jesus (Cerinthian Gnostics). the PRE-EXISTENT Logos, (Jesus) “became flesh” ( sarx egeneto, verse 14) and by this phrase John answered both heresies at once. ‘With God’ (pros ton theon). Though existing ETERNALLY with God the ‘Logos’ Jesus, was IN perfect fellowship with God, the Father. ‘Pros’ with the accusative presents a plane of equality and intimacy, FACE to FACE with each other. In I John 2:1 we have a like use of ‘pros’: “We have a Paraclete with the Father” (parakleton echomen pros ton patera). “And the Word was God” (kai theos en ho logos). By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism, by not saying ‘ho theos en ho logos’. That would mean that all of God was expressed in ‘ho logos’ and the terms would be interchangeable, each having the article. The subject is made plain by the article (ho logos) and the predicate without it (theos) just as in John 4:24 ‘pneuma ho theos’ can only mean “God is Spirit,” NOT “spirit is God.” So in I john 4:16, ‘ho theos agape estin’ can only mean “God IS love” NOT “love is God” as so-called Christian scientist would confusedly say. “The Word became flesh,” NOT “the flesh became the Word. “The same” (houtos). “This one” the Logos of verse 1, repeated for clarity, characteristic of John’s style. He links together into one phrase two of the ideas already stated separately, ‘In the BEGINNING He was with God,” “afterwards in TIME He came to be with man.” thus John clearly states of the Logos Pre-existence BEFORE Incarnation, Personality, DEITY.

    “All THINGS” (panta). The philosophical phrase was ‘ta panta’ (the all things) as we have it in I Cor. 8:6; Rom. 11:36; Col. 1:16. In verse 10 John uses ‘ho kosmos’ (the orderly universe) for the whole. “Were made” (egeneto). Second aorist middle indicative of ‘ginomai’, the constative aorist covering the creative activity looked at as ONE event in contrast with the continuous existence of ‘en’ in verse 1 and 2. All things “CAME INTO BEING.” Creation is thus presented as a becoming (ginomai) in contrast with BEING (eimi). ‘By HIM” (di autou). By means of HIM (Jesus) as the intermediate agent in the work of Creation. The Logos in John’s explanation of the Creation of the universe. ‘Without HIM” (choris autou). Old adverbial preposition with the ablative as in Phil. 2:14, ‘Apart from.” John adds the negative statement for completion, another note of his style as in John 1:20 and I John 1:5. Thus John excludes two heresies, that matter IS eternal and that angels or aeons had a share in creation.

    ‘In HIM was LIFE” (en autoi zoe en). That which has come into being (verse 3) in the Logos was LIFE. The POWER that creates and SUSTAINS LIFE in the universe IS the LOGOS, The Lord Jesus Christ. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb ‘ektistai’ (stands Created) in Col. 1:16.). This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John 11: 25). This IS the idea in Heb. 1:3 “bearing (upholding ALL THINGS by the Word of His POWER.” Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John ‘Zoe’ means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes ALL life; only it is not ‘bios’ (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of LIFE. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. “And the LIFE was the LIGHT of men ( kai he zoe en to phos ton anthropon). Here the article with both ‘zoe’ and ‘phos’ makes them interchangeable. ‘The LIGHT was the LIFE of men.” is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some scientists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call Himself the LIGHT of the world. (John 8:12).

    “Shineth” (phainei). Linear present active indicative of ‘phaino’, old verb from ‘phao’, to shine (phaos, phos). “The light keeps on giving light.” “In the darkness” (en tei skotiai). An evident allusion to the darkness brought about by SIN. The ‘Logos’ the Lord Jesus Christ, IS the Only real moral LIGHT, He keeps on shining both in His Pre-incarnate state, and AFTER the Incarnation. John is fond of ‘skotia’ for moral darkness from SIN and ‘phos’ (photizo, phaino) for the LIGHT that IS IN Christ alone. In I John 2:8 he proclaims that “the DARKNESS is passing by and the true LIGHT is already shinning.” The deceived Gnostics often employed these words and John takes them and puts them in the proper place. (Word Pictures In The New Testament, Vol. V, pp. 3-7 Emphasis added).

    All those who REJECT and DENY the Eternal Word of God, as expressly revealed IN the Historic Person of THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, by choice, dwells IN DARKNESS; and will, if they choose to remain in this utterly deluded state and condition, ultimately, will enter outer DARKNESS in eternity, and everlasting damnation, as emphatically spoken by Jesus Christ in His Word, the Bible!


  26. @Terence M. Blackett

    My fundamental point is LANGUAGE, but you do [not] understand, and [cannot] understand with your language. Hence my comment stating [I] have said too much. Probably makes [no] sense [me] saying anything else, until [we] can speak in a new language? There [are] [no] loci, [no] grand unifying theory, [no] theory of everything….but your very language seduces [you] into believing in such a reality, there [is] [no] [one] source, there [isn’t] even an “is” or an “isn’t”.

    Reality [is] greater than any of your understandings of god using a mechanics, even a quantum mechanics. Aristotle’s arrogance has been institutionalized [and] we have [all] been brain washed with [it] at some [point] in life. If [you] are attempting to use a relativistic frame to elucidate a [ONE] source then [you] are still trapped in a subject/object metaphysics.

    Note all bracketed terms are key linguistic elements of such a subject/object metaphysics. You do live in a matrix but it is linguistic….you cannot use your enslaving language to argue, or study or write your way out of such a trap…..Hence the Wittgenstein mention; are you not aware that we are all playing language games?? See a basic outline below.

    1. Classical Physics, Classical Language : Subject/Object
    exemplified by Newton and Aristotle

    Einstein is a bridge between 1 and 2 but because of language, remains trapped in domain 1. He wanted light to behave the way he thought it should…

    2. Quantum Physics in a Quantum Mechanics representation, Relativistic Language: Relativistic Subjects/Objects
    exemplified by Heisenberg, Bohr and the Copenhagen “compromise” AKA “interpretation”

    3. Cannot be spoken of in English, but resolves all paradoxes in domain 1 and 2. By it’s own language it is not even a domain. It resolves the riddles of Zeno of Elea, and returns Heraclitus to importance. Many of its prominent thinkers are thought to be insane or have been insane. Henri Louis Bergson’s introduction to Metaphysics is probably the safest place to begin.

    Attempts to communicate domain 3 to those of domain 1 are futile but if you understand domain 2….then “door to 3 is unlocked”

    Domain 3 makes perfect sense to a musical genius. After all life is musical light.


  27. @ ZOE

    Man, where do you get this knowledge?

    OFF THE CHAIN BROTHER!!!

    That is phenomenal teaching…


  28. @AOD

    You said and I quote – “There [are] [no] loci, [no] grand unifying theory, [no] theory of everythingโ€ฆ.but your very language seduces [you] into believing in such a reality, there [is] [no] [one] source, there [isn’t] even an โ€œisโ€ or an โ€œisnโ€™tโ€….”

    That may be your position but surely isn’t mine dear one…

    I could sit here all day and be “SEDUCED” into discussing the value of M-Theory, Quantum Chromodynamics, Supersymmetric Particles, String Theory and whole sleuth of meaningless paradigms which have no “PRIMACY” (to quote your words) in the “LANGUAGE” of HEAVEN*…

    If you believe that my mind is somehow trapped in the verbose world of religious apologetics – then so be it!!!

    I am defined by my FAITH* in JESUS CHRIST* and my consciousness is rooted in the acceptance of what the Word of God says irrespective of scientific convention, sociological flux, political or monetary aberrations or the EMPTY*, meaningless VOID* of secular, humanistic philosophy which frankly has no real answers to the ills that plague humanity!!!

    So let us transcend from the quantum world of mathematical dystopia and from the metaphysical world of bewildering fragmentation to the safe and secure primordial world of GOD-CONSCIOUSNESS exemplified through the life and works of Jesus Christ who set the perfect pattern for all men who would live upon the earth!!!


  29. @Tina
    OFF TOPIC>>>

    Have you seen the VT on the PLANETARY ALIGNMENT later this month and what the May21ster’s are saying about it?

    SEE VIDEO BELOW:


  30. @ Terence, Isn’t it ironic that as I was posting from the TRUE LIGHT and LIFE of men, the ETERNAL Second Person of the Godhead, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, that one of SATAN’s disciples, in the handle of one ‘AOG’ a classic representative of untold DARKNESS, passed by…literally confirming from the very WORD OF GOD, referenced in my post,

    “In I John 2:8 he proclaims that “the DARKNESS is passing by and the TRUE LIGHT is already shinning.”

    What amazing, ironic confirmation, right here on BU, where the Eternal Personification of TRUTH, LIGHT, and LIFE of men, was been given WITNESS to, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, and Satan sends one of his emissary’s with from the-pit-of HELL, diabolical, demonic, incognizant, inconversant, nonsense, bildge, drival, twaddle and hogwash!!!


  31. It is so nice to see Zoe and TB playing in the sandbox together.
    It would be funny if it wasn’t so tragic…..knowing that soon and very soon, they will have to disagree, as they can be only one!!

    All this logic and knowledge and they cant agree on how to correctly divide the word as found in the book of truth…the Bible.
    You just have to love BU !!
    Ring side seats to the greatest show on Earth!!


  32. The Word of God, to those who have trusted The Lord Jesus Christ by Faith:

    “That you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing HIM, being fruitful in every good work and increasing in the KNOWLEDGE of God. Strengthened with all MIGHT, according to His glorious POWER, for all patience and longsuffering with jpy; giving thanks to the Father who QUALIFIED us to be partakers of the INHERITANCE of the saints in the LIGHT. He has delivered us from the power of DARKNESS and conveyed us INTO the kingdom of the Son of His love. In whom we HAVE redemption through the His blood, the forgiveness of sins.” (Col. 1: 10-15 Emphasis added)

    Now, the following verses, that are so potent with incredible import.

    “He (Jesus) IS the image of the invisble God, the firstborn over ALL CREATION.” (v.15)

    The word ‘Creation’ is from the Greek word, ‘ktisis’ meaning ‘A founding, establishing, setting, formation. The word is used to denote both the act of Creating and the product, or result of the Creative act. Salvation gives a person the status of being a new creation ( 2 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15).

    Next verse:

    “For by HIM (Jesus) ALL THINGS were CREATED that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, wheter thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. ALL THINGS were CREATED through HIM and for HIM. And HE is before ALL THINGS and in HIM ALL THINGS CONSIST. And HE is the head of the body, the Church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that IN ALL THINGS He may have the preeminence.” (vv. 16-18 Emphasis added).

    What absolutely, Divinely Inspired, words are these, to be found nowhere else, in any ancient document, as this IS the Word of God.

    Exegesis of verses 16-18:

    ‘All things” (ta panta). The universe as in Rom. 11:15, a well-known philosophical phrase. It is repeated at the end of the verse. “In HIM were created” (en autos ektisthe). Paul now gives the reason (hoti, for) for the primacy of Christ in the work of Creation 916f.). It is constative aorist passive indicative ‘ektisthe’ (from ‘ktizo’ old verb, to found, to create (Rom. 1:25). This central activity of Christ in the work of Creation is presented also in John 1:3 and Heb. 1:2 and is a complete DENIAL of the Gnostic philosophy. The whole of creative activity IS summed up in Christ including the angels in heaven and everything on earth. Almighty God, wrought through “the Son of His love.” All eaethly dignities are included. “Have been created” (ektistai). Perfect passive indicative of ‘kitzo,’ “STAND CREATED,” “REMAINS CREATED.” The permanence of the universe RESTS, then, On Christ far more than on gravity. IT IS a Christo-centric Universe. “Through HIM” ( di auton). As the intermediate and sustaining Second Person of the Eternal Godhead. He had already used ‘en autoi’ ( IN HIM) Jesus as the sphere of activity. “And unto Him” (kai eis auton). This is the only remaining step to take and Paul takes it. (I Cor. 15:28). See Eph. 1:10 for similar use of ‘en autoi, eis auton’ used of Christ. See Heb. 2:10 for ‘di hon’ (because of WHOM) and ‘di hou (by means of WHOM) applied to God concerning the universe 9ta panta). In Rom. 11:35 we find ‘ex autou kai di autou kai eis auton ta panta’ referring to God. But Paul does not use ‘ex’ in this connection of Christ, but only ‘en, dia’ and ‘eis.’ See the same distinction preserved in I Cor. 8:6 (ex of God, ‘dia’ of Christ).

    ‘Before ALL THINGS” (pro panton). ‘Pro’ with the albative case. This phrase makes Paul’s meaning plain. The PRECEDENCE of Christ in time and the PREEMINENCE as Creator are both stated sharply. See the claim of Jesus to Eternal TIMELESS existence in John 8: 58; 17: 5. See also Rev. 23:13 where Christ calls Himself the ALPHA and the OMEGA, the Beginning (arche) and the End (telos). Paul states it also in II Cor. 8:9; Phil. 2:61. ‘Consist’ (sunesteken). Perfect active indicative (intransitive) of ‘sunistemi’ old verb, to place together, and hete to cohere, to hold together. The word repeats the statements in verse 16, especially that in the form ‘ekistai.’ The Lord Jesus Christ IS the controlling, and unifying One, who HOLDS together, every single ATOM, and ALL Life on earth. If HE were to simply STOP, His Omnipotent power, through WHOM All things ‘consist’ (sunesteken), everything would go ‘PUFF’ and literally disintegrate and fall apart! The Gnostic philosophy that matter is evil and was created by a remote aeon, is thus swept away, for the nonsense it is. The Son of God,s LOVE, the Lord Jesus Christ IS the Creator and Sustainer of the universe which is not evil.

    Those of you who scoff, laugh and scorn at the Lord Jesus Christ, have NO IDEA what you are doing, and WHO you are rejecting, for it IS by, through, and IN Him, that you breath, live, and have your very existence, being!

    Because, HE *IS* it necessarily follows that, *OUGHT* is the logical sequence, as there can be NO ‘ought’ without who *IS*!!!


  33. @ Techie

    You instigata! maybe the world is comig to an end. The Bible say the lion would lie down with the lamb


  34. @ Techie

    What are you saying? That as men and brothers we do not have the rite, room or reasoning to DISAGREE* even strongly if needs be… Yet maintain no ill-will or an acerbic attitude which accomplishes nothing… Even Jesus LOVED* his enemies – so what about our FRIENDS* (because that is what we all are if we keep HIS* commandments)…


  35. @ ZOE

    Again, you are right on the prophetic PULSE* of things!!! Clearly any other kinda’ light that does NOT* dispel DARKNESS* is equal in measure and commensurate with the said darkness!!!


  36. @ AC

    The “END” is not YET!!!

    We have passed the “BEGINNING” of sorrows (according to MATT. 24) and we are swiftly gravitating to the time just before the FLOOD* of NOAH’s DAY or the DESTRUCTION* of LOT’s DAY…

    Some things needs be fulfilled 1st before the “END” comes…

    Believe me my dear BRUV, the END OF DAYS* is nothing no one want to see or have to live through… Daniel 12 vs. 1 reminds us that it will be a time like no other time has been since the world began… men will long for death but it will elude them…

    In the days ahead, every catastrophe that the world has ever witnessed in the 6000 years of mankind’s physical existence on this planet will pale in comparison to those things that are coming… Hence the words = “THE GREAT TRIBULATION”…

    I challenge the intellectual “BUFFS” on BU to take a guided TOUR* through the Book of Revelation but especially through chapters 9 through 20 and if you can claim with any intellectual honesty that the prophecies written therein does not paint the most gruesomely ominous portrait of “TERROR” ever visited upon human-kind because of willful disobedience to the laws of GOD* – then there’s nothing that I can say to you to persuade you of anything!!!


  37. @TMB: “I challenge the intellectual โ€œBUFFSโ€ on BU to take a guided TOUR* through the Book of Revelation but especially through chapters 9 through 20…

    You know, I actually tried reading the Bible once or twice.

    But I quickly got bored, and turned to and read the last page, and found out the guy died…

    It ruined the book for me…

    (That’s meant to be funny, BTW.)


  38. ‘And GOd said”Let there be light’ How could thee be darkness without light” Light is a composite of darkness as with darkness is a compsite of light .At some point they emerge as one but can and sustain each other as equal partners in the universe. Without darkness they wouldn’t be light and the opposite is true.


  39. @ac, “Light is a composite of darkness as darkness is a composite of light.” Sorry ac, that is not correct, as DARKNESS is the absence of LIGHT, darkness is nothingness, and is dispelled, disspated, when LIGHT enters.

    Darkness as a metaphor, is used to describe SIN, and is likewise dispelled from the heart of man, when the ‘Blood’ of Christ is applied by Faith to his sin.

    Light and darkness CANNOT co-exist!


  40. @ Terrence
    Now do you see why the bushman’s favorite bible character is Jonah?
    …nothing more frustrating than trying to convince a city of blind people about a coming hurricane, when all they have ever experienced in life were mild storms.
    However when you give up and try to run away, there is always some whale or the other- there to bring you back to the job at hand….

    The Bushman wishes to emphasize that there is a MUCH bigger picture than the ending of a chaotic and traumatic phase of fragile human existence.

    The instructive equivalent human situation is represented by the process of birth, where millions of potential embryos, each with the potential to become a treasured new family addition, fail to achieve this potential and are extinguished.
    HOWEVER, words can seldom express the immense joy and pleasure at the birth of the ONE or TWO embryos that DO successfully complete the process, and join the human family.

    The bushman is unaware of many families that enter into extended periods of mourning for the millions of discarded sperm….. too busy cherishing and loving the new BBE … opps ..Bushie means the new BABY….LOL


  41. @ CH
    It is not funny!!


  42. @ac….

    I am not an instigator ๐Ÿ˜‰
    Zoe has said that TB belongs to a cult, I am just enjoying their ‘togetherness’ at this point knowing full well it can not last.
    TB trying to pas it of as friendly ‘brotherly’ banter but we all know where both of them stands.
    I just love to see hypocrisy at work…..it gives me a good laugh knowing they too are just as confused as the rest…lol.


  43. “Out of darkness cometh light.
    Yes they both can merge as an equal while at the same time opposing each other, It takes darkness to create light. and without light they would be darkness .. for e.g if they sun never shine the world would be in complete darkness . Therfore without the light they would be darkness anf if the sun continually shine then they would be no darkness .both darkness and light is a componment of each other


  44. @techie
    True dat.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading