Jacob Quintanilla

@TheresaArueyin1 The Jews do not believe in hell. Jesus was a Jew and would have held the same beliefs.

When a person dies, their spirit goes to heaven or hell. No one becomes a ghost on earth. People do not become angels when they die. Those who have died cannot interact with the living. Angels do not impersonate people who have died but demons can. Stop following the godless teachings of superstitions, the New Age, and the occult.

@TheresaArueyin1 How did Moses and Elijah interact with Jesus and his disciples in the transfiguration?

@DrFrankTurek If evil is the absence of goodness and God is all goodness, it would stand to reason that He cannot be absent of Himself. Evil is not something that can be destroyed...it's just an absence of God and not a thing of itself.

If God destroyed all evil at midnight tonight would you still be alive at 12:01?

@novend_obi @InterstellarUAP Yes nothing you said was real or had any value to reality.

@InterstellarUAP Everything could be fake, I mean… I might just be in a sort of test world where I’m being manipulated and y’all ain’t real, just here to gaslight me

🚨 Simulation Theory: The Double Slit Experiment proves particles act like waves until observed then they snap into particles. What if our reality only "renders" when we're looking, just like a video game optimizing resources? Check out this episode from The Why Files breaking it down, tying it to Simulation Theory. Are we in a sim? This could be the key to unlocking the true nature of existence! The Why Files video did a great job on explaining the Double Slit Experiment & Simulation Theory What do YOU think—real or rendered? Drop your thoughts below!

@CannonballDeath @InterstellarUAP Maybe like trying to unplug God from one's life? God who is observing all things thus making us particles of matter. But really we are just waves of energy at our core just like God... truly made in His image (imagination).

This experiment seems to fail to consider that the electricity that flows through any device to help us observe the particles could affect their movement. So, unplugging the electricity would effectively stop the impact, and turning it on would create the impact. Unless the used a different, non-observaable machine as a variable, then we don’t know that the nearby electricity isn’t affecting the outcome.

@simonfrans @InterstellarUAP Good questions lead to more good questions, not mere conclusions. Only the foolish look for answers, the wise look for more good questions that lead to more good questions, with a few answers along the way. Nothing you said leads to more questions.

While impossible to disprove, the simulation theory is philosophically inferior to realism for 5 reasons: Self-undermining: If we are in a simulation, our reasoning and observations may be unreliable, so we have no solid basis to believe the simulation theory itself. Unnecessary complex: The theory adds extra entities (simulators, higher reality) without need; realism explains experience more simply. No explanatory advantage: It doesn’t explain anything better—it only shifts the question to who created the simulation. Dependence on reality: A simulation still requires a real underlying world, so realism remains fundamental. Speculative probabilities: Arguments that we are “likely” in a simulation rely on unproven assumptions. So simulation theory is weaker, less parsimonious, and epistemically unstable compared to realism. The rational position is realism.

@JockoJonson @tensionengine @InterstellarUAP Maybe all observation is not passive. In fact it's an action. Try staring/observing a woman, a deer, or a dog and see what happens...you will indeed have a reaction based on your "action" of mere observation.

@tensionengine @InterstellarUAP FYI in the double slit experiment, the "observation" is bombarding something with electrons. It isn't passive observation so the results are misleading. Of course something might act different when hit with particles. 🤷

@Dan_Brisbois @InterstellarUAP God who is observing all things thus making us particles. But really we are just waves of energy at our core.

You’re flirting with a deep idea but don’t butcher physics to make it sound edgy, the Double-slit experiment doesn’t prove reality is some Xbox loading screen, it shows quantum systems behave like waves of probability until they interact with a measurement setup, “observer” doesn’t mean your eyeballs, it means any physical interaction that locks in a result, and the whole “renders when you look” take is a cute metaphor but it’s not how the math actually plays out in Quantum Mechanics, now Elon Musk tossing around simulation odds is just philosophical spice, not evidence, because here’s the cold truth, we have zero empirical proof we’re in a sim and zero proof we’re not, which means you don’t get to pretend you cracked the code, you’re just standing in the fog like everyone else, the real power move isn’t obsessing over whether reality is rendered, it’s mastering the game you’re already inside, because whether this is base reality or some cosmic GPU flex, the rules still punish weakness and reward competence, so instead of chasing metaphysical clickbait, build something, learn something, dominate your little slice of the universe, simulated or not.

@WildRoseXP @InterstellarUAP Where did all the matter that made the universe come from is just the same as saying where did God come from? Only God knows both answers.

But hows the simulation operating? Whats the source? Are we simply to understand what the universe is? Are we just a compiled consciousness free to explore ourself, creating nature and physics to entertain unique perspectives? Is any of it real? Has it already happened? Are there infinite realities? Perhaps one day we’ll find out.

@50centtug36641 @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP God who is observing all things thus making us particles. But really we are just waves of energy at our core.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Obviously God

@_kirkbushell @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP God who is observing all things thus making us particles. But really we are just waves of energy at our core.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP God.

@GlenMcGrath8 @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP How can we tell the difference between the tire ones and the fake ones? Is there a sale to measure such things by? If so do you hold or possess that scale? Who made the scale that judges this and other truths by?

@ANNE__Chat @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Maybe it's more within and not beyond.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP What is beyond the beyond? It is possible we are in a simulation in a simulation in a simulation do we exist outside the simulation?

@evacalina22 @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP There is no such scale to measure if we are only using 1%. Stop pulling nonsense out of thin air.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Well, yourself. We perceive 1% of the reality around us at a time, we hyper focus so our senses don’t get overwhelmed. You can train your brain to focus on the problem, or in the solution. On the error or the beauty. Free will is just choosing where to put your attention

@84JordanJones @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Not if there is a God who is observing all things thus making us particles. But really we are just waves of energy at our core.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Nevzat is right! This is the classic "infinite-regress problem" in philosophy. The Sim provides zero answers just like the Big Bang. Neither of them can explain what came before, how can something come from nothing before time exists and so on. Sim Theory is retarded

@mattcasters @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Just like there being no conscious thought behind your statement? You can't have it both ways. There is either intention behind life or there is not.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP There doesn't need to be a conscience involved. We could be a simulation in some sort of natural substrate or phenomenon.

@fear_munger @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Good questions should lead to more questions...not to deadend conclusions.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Yep. The simulation theory leads to plenty more questions, rather than some kind of resolution and doesn’t make existence any less utterly mind-blowing to me.

@WoodyWoodys @nvztergun @InterstellarUAP You said so much, without saying anything. Put another way... So many words without substance.

@nvztergun @InterstellarUAP Life is a simulation anyway. Your brain creates your reality and everybody has a different reality. Whatever is true in your reality isn't true for other people. Many subjective things do not have an absolute truth.

@AtheistPhoenix No Phoenix was ever an atheist. Because no Phoenix ever existed.

There was no tomb Fantasy No crucified criminals were put in tombs

@unapuckagetic @Biblicalman Name your top three objections to "crappy morality" that are found in the words in red.

@Jacobdreams @Biblicalman Sure. And Jesus doesn't know you should wash your hands before meals. And he predicted the general ressurection of the dead would happen in his generation and it didn't. And he has lots of crappy morality opinions. So I'm not too concerned.

Reason is faith. Science is faith. Your rejection of God is faith. You're religious. You just picked a weaker god. Yourself.