This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.
For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.
Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.
Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.
I don't think Ultima is trying to loosen the standard. If he regards Monadhood as false then obviously the same applies to Platonic Concepts. Everything requires context and support from the setting or else, we’ll randomly give verses free leeway into 1-A. I'm pretty sure like R>F, Monadhood...
It's due to the fact later on in the incoherent thread. Ultima decided against removing Low 1-A and decided to incorporate his idea of High 1-B+ into Low 1-A.
I don't know if this is meant to be ironic but listen closely. So we know that 0 is kind of meant to illicit some sort of being/entity being transcendent beyond the entire hierarchy. Ultima usually refers to things like Adi-Buddha or Nirguna Brahman as things for Ultimate Reality being 0. His...
Yeah, I thought it would be more fun to call 0 “Godhood/Godhead” than Monadhood. Obviously, I already knew of the problem at hand, and given DT's argument against Ultima, I can see why. However, something like “Divinity” sounds much cooler, for lack of better words. However, that also probably...
Monad, in its totality, is the essence behind all things and beyond all distinctions. It’s also known as the highest aspect of “God” in its unknown and truest part. So Godhood seems to vary, but at its highest interpretation, I believe would be a more fitting title than Monadhood. After all...
I can’t say, but there are ways to get them to that in the current revision. Hopefully, Ultima and I can come to some sort of an agreement on Vertigo cosmological positioning. Though, it’s best to ask Ultima.
The voting isn't done yet. I don't think they fully read the argument, they were being very generalized that the OP is decent.
It's clear some of them just say “this guy made more sense” without reading the actual argument because they trust person A usually over person B.
I highly doubt it since the whole premise of the Archangels was to build the Universe under Yahweh’s instruction Destiny, whom represents cause and effect, is one of the cornerstones in building Creation. Lucifer, as a Creator himself, mentioned how cause and effect are “useful tools” but...
That's just Vertigo Presence: Yahweh. To whom his physical form was retroactively shaped by beliefs. It really doesn't affect him at all, it just shows what humankind can do. On a lesser note, the Divine Presence is 0.
They just shaped him as Yahweh. He still can do what he wants and change his...
They're God at that point because they lose their individuality to be the whole(God). Maya will be consumed by Oblivion as the infinite Void preceded the illusion Goddess.
I forgot to make the Sandbox for Matteis’ Cosmology. I already placed Oblivion as High 1-A+(higher) and Maya as High 1-A+(lower). The Staff, Book, Nexus, Fallen Stars, and Lords of Shamballa are High 1-A. God as we know is 0. The dream layers are a 1-A hierarchy to me.
I'm pretty sure any depiction of Adi-Buddha is 0 for Buddhism. JTTW equivalent of that is the Dharmakaya and well Adi-Buddha is known as Dharmakaya Buddha.
I agree that the Apophatic Theory is 0. However, the concept is impossible to apply and there is no logical sense in using it even when theorizing how it can even work.
The consensus largely favor the OP, but I feel that it should be taken into more careful interpretation, but, honestly, if we were to move on then it would be now
I think Narnia deserves 0, if Tolkien's verse is getting Eru to 0. Yes, I understand that the latter has a better mention of where Eru scales, but the point remains that the two verses are quite similar just within their own settings.
It appears in Strange Tales, Man-Thing, and Doctor Strange: Into Shamballa, and is indirectly mentioned within other Matteis stories. Anytime a story of his includes the Dream/Creation and the Dreamer/God.
I doubt it since the concept was Hindu while Defenders is Kabbalah. Though Brahman and Ein Sof share similarities at the top of their respective belief. I doubt Ewing was referring to the Divine Creator. Nevertheless, I believe the entity easily surpasses the One Above All.