Someone removed <Ed Trice> along the way, underscoring that the finished product could be edited by anyone.

<His mischief proves the folly of trying to get every word just right on Wikipedia, as anyone can come along to insert random changes.>

<He is, between Shulman and Suba.>

2)earlier , <big pawn> used to say that god of omv argument is same as god of classical theism - Abrahamic god. And yesterday, <big pawn> , in effect , admitted that that was not so that god of omv argument may die one day and god of omv argument is not running affairs of world and world is running spontaneously on its own without any intervention/oversight.

3)I urge you people to ask <big pawn> to provide a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer to following three questions :

Question no 1 : may god of omv argument die one day ? Just a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer please.

Question no 2 : is god of omv argument running the affairs of world ? A simple 'yes' or 'no' answer please?

Question no 3: does omv argument imply that it is not possible that world is running spontaneously on its own without intervention/supervision/oversight ? A simple 'yes' or 'no' answer please.

Thank you

Anyone having any questions?

I am going to post it in forum of <ohiochessfan> because he always runs away from me , always hides from me , can never answer my questions and after a while acts as if omv argument was never refuted.

Thank you

2)well, I have presented a theory - that 'locus of omv , was created at the same time that universe was created and is not timeless i.e. it will dissolve/die if/when universe dissolves/dies - it has beginning and end , it is not timeless. More so , it has no say in running affairs of universe. Universe runs spontaneously on its own without any intervention/supervision/oversight.

And obviously it is not creator of universe either - it was created at the time universe was created.

Definition of classical theism as provided by <big pawn> has god as timeless and creator of universe. So, omv stands refuted.

3)this is a well known theory. In fact , many scholars including David godman believe that that is the correct interpretation of teachings of Jesus. Like this : 1)timeless source of universe is not 'personal god' but impersonal Absolute. 2)Absolute is locus of 'Brahman' which runs affairs of universe spontaneously. 3)when universe dissolves , Brahman dissolves and when universe is created Brahman is created 4)Absolute is eternal/timeless. 5)Absolute is continuously supplying some 'spiritual energy/light' (which is neither matter nor energy - something spiritual) and if that 'spiritual light' is not supplied , universe will collapse.

4) all those details are not needed for omv debate purpose.

Only thing that matters is a locus for omv which is not timeless and so on.

Here, people don't even understand even the basics of teachings of Jesus that <big pawn> explaining in his forum, so obviously I don't expect them to understand the advanced details.

Even <big pawn> had no clue what Absolute was let alone knowing the difference between 'personal god' and Absolute in detail/depth.

I had introduced <big pawn> for the first time to the 'concept' of Absolute and he was completely clueless. Later on I had provided some links on philosophy to study Absolute.

I had provided links on teachings of Jesus too in the rogoff forum, however, obviously , neither <big pawn> nor his mates are ready for that yet.

They all at very junior level.

Nonetheless, one should not have difficulty understanding that imv argument is nonsense and stands refuted without knowing teaching of Jesus in advance.

However, why you still talking about it when I have already refuted it?

If you google 'personal god vs Absolute' , you would find a lot of material.

Here is the link that I had given to <big pawn> earlier

Give us your account of their ontology now.>

Hey, <big pawn> read the article on Absolute - I had given you this link earlier too.

This is the ontology:

1)uncaused cause is not personal god as you assume but Absolute.

2)Absolute created locus of omv when universe was created.

3)universe runs spontaneously on its own without supervision/oversight/intervention.

So, we see that locus of omv is not timeless, spaceless, omnipotent. It is not creator of universe either.

This theory is given by philosophers.

This is the theory taught by people who followed teachings of Jesus and had direct experience of uncaused cause and they saw uncaused cause is Absolute.

I had given you link on teachings of Jesus earlier -articles by David godman

Let me know if you guys have any questions.

It is unfortunate that <big pawn> does not understand teachings of jesus and Absolute

2)after all , what was <big pawn> 's objection when people first talked about evolution and genes ? That omv can not exist just like that , they need some proper locus.

3)once you have this locus , theory of atheists fits in perfectly.

4)I know teachings of jesus very, very well both at level of understanding as well as at the level of experience. So, I know that theories of atheist scientists are perfect. Only thing is that some spiritual energy is supplied from Absolute to every person, everything in universe. But how would one know that ? There is no way of knowing that except through direct experience. If we assume that that spiritual energy is not necessary , then theory of atheist scientist is not only perfect but true also. That is how universe works even according to people who know teachings of jesus. And there is no way of knowing that spiritual energy is necessary except through direct 'spiritual ' experience.

5)hence , omv argument thoroughly refuted.

<johnlspouge> and <thegoodanarchist> , please understand (<big pawn> , you may also try to understand - in a few decades , you may succeed)

1)locus of omv can not be tested/,observed by any 'non living ' instrument. Consciousness is the only instrument through which you can test/observe locus of omv.

2)if we live teachings of jesus , body and consciousness change and at some point , we are able to test/observe locus of omv.

3)people who have lived teachings of jesus have observed/tested locus of omv and they told that Absolute created locus of omv when universe was created.

I have given links for theory of Absolute.

4)once you know locus of omv exists and that locus is not personal god, after that theory of atheist scientists is not only correct (free from contradictions) but true also. That is how universe runs.

Omv argument thoroughly refuted.

I knew someone was going to say this sooner or later, and it is spot on. <Tga> is not going to be happy that <Nizzle> left his dirty toilet paper all over his forum.>

I am leaving chessgames.com forever from today (as regular poster. I may post under special circumstances which I detail below) , because instead of thanks , I get insults.

I showed <big pawn> how stupid omv argument was , I also showed him that he did not know teachings of jesus or philosophy, he did not know difference between 'personal god' and Absolute (he did not even know what Absolute is till I mentioned this 'concept' to him)

And instead of thanks , I get such insults.

Today is my last day on chessgames.com. as regular poster.Now, I may post here only if someone insults me or thanks me or needs my help in physics/maths/economics etc. Or if I need to inform people that johnlspouge has endorsed my refutation of stupid omv argument.

True, <offramp>.

See , what is happening is that <thegoodanarchist> is playing a farce which I explain by his recent action - he commented on one of my posts in rogoff forum and said that I made an empty/bald assertion with circular logic etc. Now, that is usual stupidity of <thegoodanarchist> - the post he commented on was one of a series of posts and evidence/proof/test of the assertion mentioned by me was in other posts of mine. He does this all the time and then posts insulting remarks about me in his forum and implicitly invites <big pawn> (who is most obnoxious/notrious troll of this site) to insult me in his forum as well.

So, this time I posted all of my posts of the thread that he commented on in his forum so that he does not miss any - you see , in rogoof forum , so many people posting and therefore all posts of one thread get scattered and perhaps that is why <the good anarchist> missed other posts of mine and made a fool of himself. That is why I posted all those posts in his forum so that he does not miss any and does not make a fool of himself again.

I have always tried to help <thegoodanarchist> in physics/maths, teachings of jesus , spirituality and philosophy - all those areas where <thegoodanarchist> is very weak and almost always makes fool of himself.

And instead of thanks I get insults. That is why I decided to leave chessgames.com forever where ungrateful idiots like <thegoodanarchist> and <big pawn> keep on posting nonsense all the time.

From now on , I will post only under special circumstances.

What?? No, no, no, <OCF>! Stay! Just ignore them. Or don't engage too much with political posts!

Here's something for you.

Stoian v Theissen, World Junior Ch. 1992.

click for larger view

That reminds me...