Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
Pastor Wairimu of 'Pambazuka na yesu'
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 5/19/2012 Posts: 552
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. Nimejaribu kufuata hii conversation lakini bado sielewi. @ Tycho, its so difficult understanding your arguments. Too often we underestimate the power of a touch, a smile, a kind word, a listening ear, an honest compliment, or the smallest act of caring, all of which have the potential to turn a life around.... Leo Buscaglia
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. If we aren't Simon Makonde, who are we? Aren't we then eternal, now?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
rryyzz wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. Nimejaribu kufuata hii conversation lakini bado sielewi. @ Tycho, its so difficult understanding your arguments. Understanding is a jigsaw puzzle. In this case one with many small pieces. I have also wondered why what may seem simple to me may be complex to another. It all depends on how one's knowledge is structured, symbols used and their values, and ontological awareness. Sometimes my mind encounters darkness. This darkness is inevitable. New symbolic arrangements, generate new and unseen possibilities. What remains is investigation to illuminate. And who will limit the time for investigation? Or what will bar one from seeking till he finds?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. If we aren't Simon Makonde, who are we? Aren't we then eternal, now? Either Makonde, or eternal? I dont think that is the case.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
rryyzz wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. Nimejaribu kufuata hii conversation lakini bado sielewi. @ Tycho, its so difficult understanding your arguments. I find them easy to understand. You see all of us have certain 'goggles'. Even brother Tycho has a pair. Understand these goggles and all else falls into place. Easy peasy.
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
tycho wrote:rryyzz wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. Nimejaribu kufuata hii conversation lakini bado sielewi. @ Tycho, its so difficult understanding your arguments. Understanding is a jigsaw puzzle. In this case one with many small pieces. I have also wondered why what may seem simple to me may be complex to another. It all depends on how one's knowledge is structured, symbols used and their values, and ontological awareness. Sometimes my mind encounters darkness. This darkness is inevitable. New symbolic arrangements, generate new and unseen possibilities. What remains is investigation to illuminate. And who will limit the time for investigation? Or what will bar one from seeking till he finds? Rryyzz you see the highlighted part? Those are the goggles. So brother Tycho has knowledge that he is God. He is Man-God. Or is it God-man? You should begin to understand him now.
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:tycho wrote:Muriel wrote:Only that ,,,,,
'Anti rule' obtains it's definition and it's existence from 'rule'. Hence it is dependent on 'rule'.
Without 'rule' there is no 'anti rule'. However, the converse might not be reality. 'Rule' can exist without 'anti rule'.
Hence 'anti rule' is finite while 'rule' is infinite.
Simon Makonde therefore becomes, for our purpose, the 'anti rule' while Monday, Tuesday etc becomes the 'rule'. They have been going on before, as and since Makonde died. They are 'eternity'.
Hence we can conclude there is a future, there is order, there is eternity, and ultimately, there will be no contradiction. Yet the 'anti rule', Simon Makonde, is the one making all these observations. That is, he's also the rule. Makonde is contradiction. But perhaps it's not Makonde making these observations. Who is? God? An other? Yet there's contradiction here also. And Makonde comes with every 'Sunday' and dies every Friday. We are in a never ending 'dialectic', and this is 'perfection'. Or rather, perfection is realizing the contradiction. Hence eternity is always in the present. Brother Tycho, Makonde is the participant. He then relinquished to a very great degree his 'observer' status. He participated and maybe also observed a little, but we, we are the observers! We watched everything! We watched him die. He could not have watched his own death. He is not the host to come to us - alive - every Sunday. For - what is the state of the dead? This question can be our next talking point. If we aren't Simon Makonde, who are we? Aren't we then eternal, now? Either Makonde, or eternal? I dont think that is the case. So what is the case then?
|
|
|
Rank: Member Joined: 11/19/2009 Posts: 3,142
|
The case is that the here and now - the Makonde situation - is not eternal. It is in time. It will pass. Even if it recycles every week, the fact is it passes.
Given that it passes it certainly is not the highest ideal of man - for it passes.
Indicatively, man has not reached his highest ideal for it passes. If it passes it is not ideal for there still is movement towards the equilibrium.
This implies expectations of future.
A future where there is equilibrium for everything will be stable and not moving or passing to other things - in short, no contradiction.
I think that is the case. What is your take?
|
|
|
Rank: Elder Joined: 7/1/2011 Posts: 8,804 Location: Nairobi
|
Muriel wrote:The case is that the here and now - the Makonde situation - is not eternal. It is in time. It will pass. Even if it recycles every week, the fact is it passes.
Given that it passes it certainly is not the highest ideal of man - for it passes.
Indicatively, man has not reached his highest ideal for it passes. If it passes it is not ideal for there still is movement towards the equilibrium.
This implies expectations of future.
A future where there is equilibrium for everything will be stable and not moving or passing to other things - in short, no contradiction.
I think that is the case. What is your take? Remember 'we' are watching Simon Makonde. The question was whether we who are watching are Simon Makonde, that is Makonde is watching himself, or an other than Makonde is watching Makonde and is always watching hence eternal.
|
|
|
Wazua
»
Club SK
»
Life
»
Pastor Wairimu of 'Pambazuka na yesu'
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|