Critique of Religious Judgment
I.A.) Of the Ontological Introduction of Transformulative Logic
There is no certainty in the course of ontological endeavors that all religious experiences begin with the curvature of the bending flexibility of collective testimony in the scruples of a pure and practical religion, as the dichotomy of all religious experiences are in the interdependent duality of the transpiration of practical perception in the schema of abstraction. And, the abstractive tenses of all religious experiences provide and spawn a birth child of experience that is borrowed from the rule of exception in order to determine the religious manifold of all bundled premises in religious experiences, as well as all philosophical and moral systems throughout the ages either in the past or modern times whereas those determinations of the surges of reassurances. But, yet nevertheless, in a religious schemata of religious experiences that collective heart-felt judgments pave the practical outline of the synthetical manifold of religious experience, and the transforming outline of the mapped synthesis of practical intuitions and the sentiments are aligned in a perfect trichotomy (of the synthesis pure intuitions) that out course the abstraction of a pure intuition. For how is it so that a pure intuition needs no other tertiary quality other than belief and conviction alone in the pursuit of the origin of the pure intuition felt at the point of ignition? For how is it so that religious experiences in the practical judgments of a pure intuition is not polluted initially and is intoxicated in the processing of the interpretations after the ignition of it while the pure sphere in it captures and protects the initial pure intuition that provides the baseline for all other religious experiences?
But, it is evermoreso, that the abstractive perceptions of the human understanding reaches into the perceptual manifold of religious experience where the essential dissection and examination can be clouded with paradoxes and informal fallacies that only stall and misinterpret the course of the practical judgment when the self-propelled clouds of perceptual information undergoes the practical revolutions of the substratum of practical experiences, as well as the synthesis of the practical intuitions in the synthetical manifold when the human understanding is undertaking it's involvement in the processing of certainty. And, in the human understanding of the practical comprehension of the perceptual manifold of the religious judgments circumventing throughout the processes of the practical trichotomy of religious scruples, that the religious judgment used in it provide an abstraction of pure intuitions that the synthetical admixture comprehends. In one retrospective hand, all religious judgments are a priori in the initial strikings of pure intuitions, and are free from the synthetical admixture of judgments, while on the other introspective hand, all religious judgments are a priori in the processing of the synthetical manifold of religious judgments in the calculations of the pure synthesized judgments. But, yet it is evermoreso, that religious judgments are pure initially in religious experiences in the active agent until the internal revolutions of the synthetical mainframe begins to interpret the rational and empirical qualities of the pure intuitions, and the synthetical manifold of pure intuitions is correlative to the admixture of analytical and synthetical concepts, and judgments that are coated and encased with the rules of all religious experiences. And, to the relentless degree of certainty in pure religious experiences in a synthetical manifold of it, there lies the reformation of the curvature of the religious experience that the rule of experience embeds the certainty of the synthetical manifold in the totality of the religious substratum of religious experiences.
Yet, it is moretheless, in the entrails of the human understanding of the degrees of religious certainty, that the flux of absolutes of the synthetical manifold embeds at the core of the artificial mind, while the flux of synthetical perceptions plants itself firmly in the synthetical mind. In the latter, the degree of certainty is amplified by the processing of the synthetical manifold of the human understanding as it arises more perceptions in the understanding, while the former, creates false convictions that arises in the concrete perceptions of faultless manifolds contained in the human understanding. For how it so that the degrees of religious certainty expire the human understanding when undergoing processing of a synthesis of the manifold of perceptual intuition, and the constitution of perceptual intuitions overcoat the concrete notions of a major premise? For how is it so that the synthetical manifold of religious perceptions undergoes a transformation of a pure abstractive intuition to rational and empirical admixture whereas the expiration of a concrete notion is impure? For how is it so that a concrete notion is impure after the synthetical manifold has undertaken the processes of conceptual analysis in the trichotomy of the human understanding, and the concrete notional clamp locks the pollution of the rational and empirical manifolds only the deflate the major premise before the concrete schemata of pure intuitions can formulate?
But, it does not follow that there is no certainty in all religious experiences in the human understanding as the synthetical manifold of rational and empirical witnesses must congregate to the pre-notion of conceptual substrates, as well as the conceptual analysis of conception of pure intuitions and judgments in all religious experiences where expiration of any major premise is short-lived, and is ever-binding to the synthesis of conceptual formulation. And, yet it the contextual tenses of all religious experiences, that certainty is apparent in the rational and empirical manifolds as they inquisitively provide the proper premises for the conceptual attachment of pure intuitions for the human comprehension of any religious experience. For how is it so that pure intuitions contain a degree of certainty in a priori avenues of a conceptual pre-notion in the religious human understanding, and the transformulation of it provided the empirical and rational manifold with concrete evidence in a major premise? For how is it so that the conceptual abstractive tenses formulate per-notions in the human religious understanding, in which, the rule of exception applies to the formulation of the major religious premise of the active agent in the pure intuition of the human understanding? For how is it so that all religious experiences (regardless if it's passive or active) formulates into the peering mind and heart of the recipient where the practical senses are constructing the rational and empirical manifold of the religious experiences, and the religious synthesis of religious experiences gnaws at the human foundation of the practical religious experiences of human nature?
And, the abstractive conceptions of the synthesis of the rational and empirical manifolds latch on to the operational trivium of perceptual contexts of suppressed conceptions of certainty in religious experience, whether it is a priori and/or a posterori. It seems to be that the concrete certainty of religious experiences is dependent on the prior examples of religious experience to provide clarity to a given pre-notion of an essential and conceptual construct contained in the subject of the major premise before the perceptual admixture has taken effect, as well as the entrails of the minor premise and conclusion of any pre-notion of subjective origin where the certainty of the a priori construction in all systems of conceptual constructions is acknowledged in the perceptual senses of the synthesis of the trichotomy. But, yet it is moreover, that the perceptual trivium in the conceptual construction of the abstractive contextual tenses of the rational and empirical manifolds and frameworks bears the perceptual cross of the constitutes of skepticism, and the conceptual manifold decreases in the abstractive clarity of the perceptual pre-notion and subject experienced a priori, rather than, the constitution of rational and empirical synthesis which has processed a greater clarity of the constructional manifold of perceptions in the abstractive contexts of epistemology. Yet, in the construction of conceptual entities in a concrete notion of epistemic evolutions in a priori, the rational and empirical manifold formulates the subject according to the religious experience that has been previously comprehended, and the systematic empirical and rational manifold clarifies the notional subject and/or object into a formulation of a perceptual construction of it. But, it is nevertheless in the conceptual manifold, that the perceptual construction of the rational and empirical manifolds synthesizes and formulates the conceptual abstraction into the epistemic ions of conceptual and fundamental analysis, and the conceptual formulation bears the epistemic crown of clarity whereas, a degree of certainty is acquired in the processing of the rational and empirical manifolds of the conceptual construction of the perceptual manifold. And, the conceptual formulation of the conceptual construction is interdependent on the rational and empirical manifolds to where the formulation of the conceptual abstractive of each concrete activation of proposed complexities of epistemic synthesis is constructed into the subject and/or object of a given construct of epistemology.
I.B.) Of the Ontological Anti-Thesis of Transformulative Logic
But, it is to aforementioned that the correlating perceptual constructions of the empirical and rational manifold synthesizes into the perceptual formulation of a concrete notion of an epistemic trichotomy of practical scruples of religious experiences in the abstractive tenses, and the practical religious experience of the rational and empirical manifolds each determine the systematic synthesis of each revolution in the trichotomy of the perceptual constructions of formulation of a priori subjects and/or objects. For how is it so that all religious experiences formulate into an experience that the peering mind in unable to religiously escape the correlation of the rational and empirical manifolds in the religious a priori investigations? For how it is so that all religious experiences in the rational and empirical manifolds are amplified in the contextual depictions of religious knowledge, and the informative synthesis of the perceptual and conceptual constructions gravitate the religious seeker into the formulation of the religious abstractive concept? For how is it so that all religious experiences is processed and synthesized into the mental and sentiments of the recipient (of the rational and empirical construct), and the abstractive constraint of the religious subject and/or object is determined in the practical scruples of religious experience? Henceforth and in consequently, it is the religious formulation of a given pre-notion of a priori knowledge that activates the processing of the empirical and rational manifolds into the construction of the perceptual synthesis, and the conceptual construction of the rational and empirical synthesis each contain tertiary qualities that each borrow from the interdependent relationship of conceptual constructions so it may be that all religious experiences can correlate to the empirical and rational manifolds which is amplified by the religious judgments of the practical scruples of the rational and empirical synthesis.
And, in the empirical manifold of all religious experiences we may find that the epistemic evidence in the conceptual abstraction of a given subject and/or object is grounded in the practical senses of a posterori that formulates the conceptual construction into a clarity of obvious reassurances that have previously been determined. But, yet moreover it is so, in the contextual senses of perceptual epistemology, that there is fault in the contextual faith of religious experience, and the fault-seeking conceptual method and dogma of this conceptual construction of practical investigations continue overturn the clarity of the conceptual perceptions, whether or not, any synthesis of the practicality of mental and sentiment construction can be attained through the empirical manifold. The faults of the conceptual constructions lies in the practical senses of conceptual skepticism, in which, the practicality of the conceptual notions decrease as the reassurances of the cynical deproduction amplify contextual senses of empirical perceptions in the conceptual construction of the religious experience, as well as the decay of empirical faith in the conceptual synthesis of abstractive tenses because the dogmatic empirical method of investigations amplify negative integers in the conceptual constructions of the concrete notions a priori as the negative integers possess the deficiency of conceptual markers in perceptual constructions. And, it is to mention in the contextual constructions of empirical decay and birth-child of pessimism, that the contextual construction and synthesis of the rational manifold provides an amplified religious experience that supports the conceptual skepticism of empiricism. Yet, it is to the brethren of all religious experiences, that the empirical method contains an intrinsic value in the conceptual manifold of epistemology which underlies the conceptual supposition of projected conceptual tenses in all religious and practical investigation of a notional concept, and the collective formulation of religious judgments outline the conceptual incision in the abstractive perceptions in the empirical manifold that cannot be proved nor unproven as the conceptual faith fails in any investigations.
And, in the rational manifold of all religious experiences we may find that the epistemic evidence is contained in the religious investigations of conceptual construction of a priori instances in the rational manifold of the given subject and/or object, and the practical senses of the a priori nature formulates it into the religious predicate of a borrowed rule of experience. But, it is evermoreso, that the internal manifold of religious experience grounds itself into the perceptual construction of rational integers in the perceptual tense, and the desired effect of the amplification of the conceptual construction must be provided by the negative integers of empirical manifold, as the falling downfall of rational construction is grounded in the shortcomings that hinder the progression of the conceptual manifold. Yet, moreover, in the faults of rational investigations of all religious experiences, the positive integers provide an amplified version of the rational datum in the conceptual construction where perceptual evidence may suppress the onslaught of perceptual deficiency from the empirical manifold correlating to the rational manifold so that rational tenses may overcome the decay from the duality of the polarity of the constructive manifold in a priori investigations. It seems to be in the rational manifold, that the rational investigations are reassured in the conceptual construction of perceptual integers that the rational manifold can foresee the epistemic evidence through the duality of the mind and body as previous religious experiences has embedded in the rational manifold of the religious recipient. But, it is to mention forthright, that the predicate of any religious experience in this method is amplified by the sentiments of the recipient, and the duality of the mental construct formulates the religious experience into the rational manifold that a priori investigations borrowed the rule of exception from the empirical origins of practical sense to construct the religious experience in a rational manner. Henceforth and in consequently, all rational manifolds possess a conceptual deficiency of positive integers that suppress the potential growth of the a priori religious experience because the positive integers are grounded and amplified in the empirical manifold which suffocate in the rational construction of the religious perception, and the suffocation cannot be comprehended and compensated in the rational manifold with all of the positive integers that are contained in the rational synthesis of all religious experience.
But, it is in the rational and empirical manifolds, that a perceptual synthesis formulates the religious experience a priori in the conceptual investigations of any predicate in a subject and/or object where the formulation of the conceptual dichotomy of practical senses are based out of a collective synthesis of religious judgments (whether they are amplitive and/or collective), and the collective rational and empirical formulations of the conceptual construction from a priori origins are processed in the empirical and rational schemata, where the completed collections of processed religious judgments determine the according religious experience to the correct practical sense. For how is it so that all religious experiences are classified to the correct predicate that has been previously experienced in religious investigations? For how is it so that all religious experiences formulates out of something that has been experience and based out of a raw rational and sentiments manifold when the predicate has been processed initially? For how is it so that collective judgments formulates itself from the rational and empirical manifolds to form a priori insights from a given concept to correlate to another conceptual manifold? Therefore, and in consequently, all religious judgments are formulated in the empirical and rational manifolds where the processes admixture of the given a priori religious experience formulates into a religious batch of epistemology which can determine the springing action according to the classification of the religious experience, as well as the proper conceptual tenses of the empirical and rational synthesis in the perceptual construction of it so the religious seeker can formulate a religious marker for the epistemic classification of the religious experience.
And, in the all religious formulations of epistemology in a practical religion, there must be the determinates of the rational and empirical manifolds which the collective religious judgments can formulate into the proper classifications of the predicates, but it is also to formulate to amplify the religious experience a priori so that the course of human events may be comprehended for the greater good of religious canons and doctrines. We shall investigate through this religious investigation that predicates, subjects, objects, and collective evidence shall propose clarity in processes of the human truth of epistemology which can determine outcomes of positive correlations of human experience. We will seek to determine what formulation(s) is necessary to enhance a religious experience, as well as the proper classification of the religious experience in the rational and empirical manifolds so we can attempt to resolve our own investigation of any religious canons and axioms that we may follow. Yet, it is also to conclude that to formulate religious experience into human experience is difficult to bear as practical experience and supernatural experience possess differences in one aspect, but it also correlates in the proper tenses of religious epistemology when a religious experience is forwarded in a practical sense of instruction and comprehension. And, to the seeker of religious experience, this religious investigation of religious judgments in a practical sense is a life-giving enhancement of a previous religious experiences so the recipient may find peace in their thought-out and sentimental decisions of practical religious experience.
I.C.) Of the Religious Antimony of Practical Judgments in Transformulative Logic
But, in the religious order of practical sense datum in religious investigations of a given subject and/or object, the amplitive and collective religious judgments correlate to the amplifications of the epistemic synthesis in the rational and empirical manifolds of perceptual constructions, and the forthright conclusions of the religious experiences gravitate towards the conclusion of the argumentative destination as the amplification of rational and empirical manifolds amplified the conceptual construction of the proposition. It seems to be that the desired constructional effect of the rational and empirical manifolds provide the perceptual framework of a priori constructs that underlie the ever-flowing currents of religious experiences, and the designational mainframe of the religious experience is true in both tenses to a certain degree that eliminates doubt for the periodical timetable of religious experience. Yet, it is nevertheless, that the rational and empirical manifolds processes the epistemic currents in a construction deficiency when the plight of the religious experience grabs at the peering mind as the empirical method gravitates towards sensory experience (a posterori) while the rational method steers towards the rational experience (a priori). And, the perceptual constructions of religious experiences provide an inadequate conclusion that affects and renders the religious seeker of religious experience helpless, powerless, and confused about the religious experience that has been active in the passing of the constructional currents of epistemic principals, but it is in the conceptual construction of the religious constructions that amplitive and collective religious judgments correlate in conceptual origination, and provides a discrepancy in religious destination because each rational and empricial manifolds is similar in pretension and differ in the empirical and rational manifold of designation. Yet, it is forthright to mention, that amplitive and collective religious judgments are similar in the conceptual constructions of perceptual predicates where the conceptual classifications of the formulated schema can provide illumination in the admixture of amplitive and collective religious judgments, although, the constructional components of the rational and empirical manifolds are based in separate processes of epistemology in the conceptual construction of a religious experience.
But, in one respective hand of investigations of perceptual constructions, amplitive religious judgments heighten the mental acuity of the pure intuition of the religious experience upon activation of the practical senses of the rational manifold where the formulation of the predicate in the subject and/or object gels into the conceptual formulation of rational integers, while on the other introspective hand of investigations of perceptual constructions, collective religious judgments support the mental acuity of the pure intuition of the religious experience after the activation of the practical senses of the empirical manifold where the formulation of the predicate in the subject and/or object gels into the conceptual formulation of irrational integers (because of sensory experiences). And, it is to conceptual forward in practical constructions of religious experience that the rational and empirical manifolds amplify the formulations of practical sense through the dichotomy of both correlating conceptual perceptual tenses of the religious experience, while both also collectively gather the trichotomy of the empirical, rational, and intuitive manifolds contained in the active and/or passive activation of the religious experience. But, the collective religious judgments of the empirical manifold provides the admixture of sensory and perceptual experience that steers the pure intuition to the rational manifold through the practical sensory of pure mental acuity as the recipient of the religious judgment is provided with an admixture of epistemic religious evidence of the totality of the religious experience in the empirical manifold. Yet, in the clearer sense of the empirical manifold of religious experiences, the conceptual synchronization between the rational and empirical experience is interdependent between the rational and empirical manifolds where collective religious judgments provided the totality of the unification of the religious evidence in the initial and final conceptual construction of the religious experience, and the amplitive religious judgments activate the conceptual construction of the perceptual senses of a priori integers so the religious trivium may conclude to an rational and empirical nature. And, the empirical and rational trichotomy of the religious experiences that is acquired passes through the pure intuitions of the conceptual acquisition of amplitive and collective religious judgments to formulate the sensory experience of the conceptual construction as each spherical attribute of amplitive and collective has collected and borrowed the rule of exception from the harvest of a priori religious experience.
Yet, it is nevertheless, that the rational manifold of sense perception in the mental acuity in the conceptual construction of the amplitive duality of the perceptual mass of positive integers bears the proper conceptual construction of a priori axioms of the perceived religious experience, and the rational dichotomy of the perceptual and conceptual substance (Descartes) allows the amplification of religious judgments through the dualism of perception and apprehension, as well as the religious phenomena that is heighten upon the activation of the rational manifold when it is determined to grasp upon the conceptual framework of rational awareness. And, in the mental conceptual construction of sense perception in an amplitive religious judgment, the perceptual phenomena strikes the rational integers to gravitate towards epistemic constructions of a priori epistemology where the rational manifold sparks the conceptual construction of major premises based on the pure intuitions of religious experience. But, it is to aforementioned in the conceptual construction of the rational manifold of sense perception in a rational manifold, the amplitive religious judgments decreases in the conceptual processing of the rational phenomena of a priori as the sense experience must borrow the rule of exception from the collective religious judgments that are binding in the empirical manifold as the conceptual formulation of the a priori in amplitive and collective religious judgments relate in abstractive terms not rational and/or empirical terms as the concrete notion of the conceptual manifold amplifies the beginning of the religious investigations in rational and empirical manifolds. And, in consequently, the rational manifold in the conceptual phenomena of amplification of the religious judgments of sensory perception in a pure intuition, sparks the collective religious judgments in the primary and secondary qualities of the dualism of rationalism (Descartes), whereas the collective manifold of sense perception increases as the collection of secondary religious judgments (rational and empirical judgment sets) support the mental construction of the rational phenomena from the primary religious judgments (amplitive and collective sets) of the conceptual perception of religious experiences. But, the collective formulation of the religious phenomena in the sense perception of religious experiences formulates from the initial spark in a pure intuition of a given subject and/or object to the collective preambles of the perceptual constitution of religious experiences, and the rational method of epistemology amplifies the rational manifold in a collection of religious judgments that originate in pure intuition, and designates in the pure intuition of the rational and empirical manifolds of correlating religious experiences based upon previous religious experience where the collection of the informative judgments formulate into the pure intuition of the given subject and/or object.
And, the religious phenomena of the conceptual manifold of amplitive and collective religious judgments construct the mental apprehension of pure intuitions into a conceptual synthesis of the apprehension and phenomena, but the collection of the religious phenomena towards the perceptual gravitation of the active agent of phenomena must be amplified in the collection of the religious judgments in the formulation of the religious experiences that sense perceptions underlies the transformation of the religious experience. For how is it so that the formulation of religious experiences in the conceptual phenomena correlate towards the collection of a priori intuitions in any given sense? For how is it so that formulation of religious judgments constitute an assigned classification in order to be interpreted in a religious manner? For how is it so that the religious formulation of a given concrete notion adheres to the classifications of the rational and empirical manifolds under the religious investigations of the pure religious experience? Henceforth and in consequently, all religious judgments of an empirical and/or rational conceptual construction relate to the pure intuitions of religious experiences in a manner where the rational and empirical manifolds conceptualizes the concrete notions of a subject and/or object, and the formulations of empirical and rational evidence must conform or reform to the conceptual construction of the pretenses of the religious comprehension of the pure intuitions that are activated and acquired upon religious investigations.
I.D.) Of the Four Postulates of Transformulative Logic
I.D.I.) Of the Primary Postulate of Religion in Transformulative Logic
But, in the mental phenomena of religious experience, there must be designation of the metaphysical primary and secondary qualities of religious experiences that amplify the essential origins of the conceptual phenomena of a priori knowledge, and the reclusive religious judgments of the conceptual manifold heightens the epistemic assertions of the religious axioms of the sense perception that whole-heated convictions of the metaphysical wonders of religious experience. And, in the religious convictions of the mental phenomena of the rational and empirical conceptual construction, there must be an active agent of phenomena to reform the totality the religious experiences in the religious experience without regards to the rational and empirical evidence of the supposition of religious convictions. Yet, moreover, it is to conventionally assert in a religious investigation of blinded-beliefs, that the rational and empirical canons and axioms must oblige to the reformation of the religious conviction of a pretense of religious knowledge to acknowledge the collection of religious apperceptions and judgments so they may acquire the constitution of an active religious phenomena. For is it not that all religious experiences forgo the collection of religious convictions without regarding the designation and destination of the essential convictions that are necessary to the completion of religious canons and axioms? For is it not that all religious experiences provide the religious evidence of a omni-presence and omnipotence of a religious experience that cannot be comprehended in a mere vague and shallow religious investigation of the sense and conceptual perceptions?
But, to which it is to be religiously asserted in a collective religious investigation of the manner of rational and empirical conceptual construction of religious phenomena, the presuppositions of the religious convictions of a priori knowledge can formulate into the religious canons and axioms of a metaphysical supposition, rather than, a religious formulation of a subject and/or object alone in the conceptual construction of sense perceptions. And, the presuppositions of religious terms alone without the rational and empirical evidence necessary to complete the religious investigations, can formulate into the synthetical conception of religious experience(s) while regarding the insufficient evidence of the religious conviction in an rational and empirical manner, as well as the religious comprehension of the rational and empirical convictions of the religious phenomena of the necessity of a perfect being. Yet, it is to aforementioned in all religious experiences that certainty and doubt correlate with the canons and axioms of a posterori comprehension in the empirical manifold of disbelief as the sense perceptions gravitate towards the negative integers in the idea of pure and practical reason, and the pure intuitions of the rational manifold provides the reinforcement of whole-heated convictions because the positive integers regulate the rational manifold to a collection of religious judgments necessary to comprehend the idea of a perfect state. But, yet it is evermoreso, in the conceptual constructions of the rational and empirical manifolds of sense perceptions in religious epistemology, that all religious investigations conclude necessary evidence for a religious state of perfection, as well as disprove the essential state of perfection of a possible canon and axioms of a perfect order and being.
I.D.II.) Of the Secondary Postulate of Religion in Transformulative Logic
And, in the conceptual construction of the rational and empirical manifolds of an essential and perfect idea and being, there inhibits the fault-finding judgments of sense perceptions in the trichotomy of the substances of rational and empirical congregations, but it is to formally assert in a delicate manner of religious investigations that the perfect idea of being fore-calls rational and empirical conceptions of fault-finding causality. For how is it so that religious evidence of a perfect idea and being amplifies to the correction of an uncertainty of a religious investigation, and the collective religious judgments must support the initial pure intuitions of a priori knowledge in a collective bargaining? For how is it so that the pure idea of a perfect being must be completed with the collection of religious judgments in comparison to the internal foundations of religious which require the essential breath of empirical and rational conceptions in sense perceptions? For how is it so that the initial birth of the rational and empirical manifolds spark an illumination of apparent conclusions in a perfect idea of being only to fall short of the designation when processing the empirical and rational evidence when religiously investigated? Henceforth and in inherent terms, the perfect idea of being lies in the processing of the collection of religious judgments that formulate into the conceptual construction of it, and the conclusive canons and axioms of the religious experience endeavors to fore-ground the perfect assertions of that idea of a perfect reason and being in all practical tenses of the religious investigations.
But, yet it is evermoreso, to fore-claim that all religious experience rests on an apparent certainty of religious evidence that channels through the rational and empirical manifolds of the conceptual phenomena in sense perceptions, as well as the short-comings of factual evidence that disproves the conceptual constructions of apparent a priori knowledge in the rational manifold as empirical evidence rests in the impossibility of the factual judgments to dispel the essential evidence of a perfect idea and being. Yet, it is evermoreso, that the empirical manifold supports the collective religious judgments of sense perceptions whereas, the rational manifold asserts the unveiling of a priori knowledge in the whole-hearted convictions of the metaphysical covering of religious epistemology in a perfect slate of pure intuition of a perfect reason and being, and the trichotomy of the rational and empirical manifolds along with sense perceptions endeavor to not only disprove religious assertions, but to provide the support of the essential findings of the rational evidence of the religious assertions in a priori epistemology. And, in the separation of the rational and empirical manifolds through collective bargaining in all religious experiences, we may find that the essential support of religious evidence in the empirical manifold is equal to the rational manifold in the amplification of the religious canons and axioms, as well as providing the essential support of the religious conceptual construction of the perfect idea of being in all religious experiences which have been ontologically experienced. But, it is nevertheless in religious experiences, that the collective religious judgments must reform to the subject and/or object in the conceptual constructions of sense perceptions where the informative regulation of conceptual frameworks of rational and empirical schema comprehends the religious assertions of a perfect being. And, in the inherent religious judgment of religious epistemology, the perfect idea of being must be collectively endeavored in the essential proof of a concrete and faultless religious judgment of the idea of perfect religion as the secondary religious substance of religion provides the mental constructions of the rational and empirical conceptual manifold in a trichotomy of essential parts of conceptual perceptions.
I.D.III.) Of the Amplitive Judgment of Religion in Transformulative Logic
But, in the course of religious mental constructions of the rational manifold in all religious experiences of a perfect idea and canon, there must be the religious certainty of the metaphysical covering of religious phenomena in the religious terms of a trichotomy of rational, amplitive, and perfection judgments to prove and/or support the religious trivium of a priori religious experience. And, in the religious aspect of religious fervor of the conceptual manifold of sense perceptions contained in the religious subject and/or object that religious reformation, there must be the intuitive awareness of a proposed assertion of a perfect idea or being in all religious experiences where the mental acuity does not categorizes in the short-comings of religious experiences (although, all fall under scrutiny) in the rational phenomena of conceptual construction. In one inherent respective hand of informative phenomena, the conceptual construction of sense perceptions contained in the religious subject illuminates the empirical manifold as the suppression of it breaks accordingly to the transformation of the rational conclusion of a perfect idea and being, while on the other inherent introspective hand of informative phenomena, the conceptual construction of sense perceptions contained in the religious subject darkens the conceptual shadow of religious experience where the religious short-comings disregard the reformation of the religious canons and axioms of the idea of a perfect of being. But, in the conceptual manifold of perceptual phenomena, the heighten mental acuity sparks and ignites the faculties of the mind into the teetering of the conceptual constructions of the power of the perfection of religious judgments to support the proposed assertions of the perfection of reason, and the conceptual manifold of the rational method provides the illumination of the rational constructs of a priori epistemic waves pulsating through the faculties of the empirical and rational synthesis. Henceforth in consequently, the conceptual construction of the idea of a perfect being rages in the faculties of religious judgments, although the illumination might expire through the empirical method of epistemology as it never ceases to expire in this religious manner of perfect investigations of a perfect idea and being because the factual judgment of it is to assert that perfect order of the universe is necessarily asserted in a manner where the religious truth of it overcomes the onslaught of a posterori knowledge.
But, yet it is nevertheless, that all religious experiences provide discrepancies of religious certainty in the canons and axioms, which, either dispels and/or proves the essential conceptual construction of sense perceptions in religious experience, as well as tame the faculties of religious judgment to process the informative details of the conceptual schema contained in the rational substance of a priori epistemology. In the latter, the conceptual construction of religious judgment heightens the mental acuity of extraordinarily sensitivity of a religious subject and/or object, while the former only serves as a religious baseline for the essential conceptual construction of unproven sense perceptions in religious phenomena. And, the mental acuity of the rational manifold searches for the axiom attachment of religious experience in the propositions of practical self-evident terms of religious comprehension of a religious subject and/or object, yet it is not only to provide the essential religious substance of a given assertion of a religious subject and/or object, but to as well disprove any falsification of obscure canons and axioms of a proposed religious manner regarding the idea of a perfect being. In short, all religious experiences must provide the illumination of a perfect being in the synthesis of pure intuitions of a omni-potency of the religious assertion of the state of perfection in all religious canons. In a word, all religious phenomena regarding perfection formulates into a pure intuition of religious epistemology.
I.D.IV.) Of the Collective Judgment of Religion in Transformulative Logic
And, in the course of religious investigation of the conceptual manifold of empirical synthesis of the trichotomy of sense perceptions, perceptual ideas, and a posterori epistemology, there lies the fundamental collection of religious judgments that collectively disproves or asserts proposed causality of a perfect idea of being, whether or not, in the collective bargaining of a religious subject and/or object it suspends the religious judgments of the faculties in the powers of religious judgments to reason without plight in an obscure destination. But, yet it is to fore-mention in the conceptual construction of empirical methods of religious investigations that sense perceptions configure to the totality of perceptual experiences of the empirical nature of doubt and skepticism, as well as the short-comings of a posterori knowledge in the decree of the religious perfection of a perfect idea of being regarding the suspension of convictions of religious canons and axioms. Yet, in the illuminating conceptual constructions of sense perceptions of religious systematic order, the empirical method provides the proper major premise regarding the idea of a perfect being, and the short-comings of a priori knowledge must acknowledge the religious findings of the empirical manifold of perfect simple and complex ideas of perfection in religious matters where the rational manifold cannot escape the truth of empirical religious findings. And, in the conceptual makeup of religious perfection, the empirical manifold falls short of essential evidence to dispels the truth of religious experiences of a perfect being, while the counter-intuition of empirical manifolds provides the essential datum of sense perceptions needed to dispel the religious idea of a perfect being. But, it is to exclaim, that all religious experiences in conceptual phenomena, cannot be dispelled on experience alone as the illumination of pure reason not only supports the religious findings, yet it is nevertheless, to act counter-intuitively on the formulation of religious canons and axioms from the religious origination of the perfect idea of being with reason soaring through the heavens and resting on the collection of essential evidence of the idea of a perfect being.
Yet, in the course of collective conceptual sense perceptions contained in the epistemic revolutions, there must be the empirical manifold which the adhesiveness of the religious conceptual convictions provides support for the terms of certainty in an idea of a perfect being, and the epistemic clarity of the idealization of perfect conceptual sense perceptions delivers the essential axioms for the collection of a posterori knowledge where the ideal collision of a priori and a posterori admixture enhances the illumination of essential truths of the idea of a perfect being. But, it is to cautiously assert in the conceptual synthesis of sense perceptions, that the collection of all religious judgments in a conceptual construction of rational and empirical manifolds will not only collide with the idea of perfection, yet it will admix the idea of imperfection of a perfect being as well in the religious investigations of the conceptual manifold of epistemology which cannot escape the due process of investigation. In the latter, the resurgence of assertion are grounded in the clarity of proof of a perfect idea of being, while, in the former, it will serve the doubting of religious comprehension of a perfect being that must be acknowledged in all religious collective testimony. In short, all religious experiences of a perfect being in a collective religious judgments must be a totality of the empirical manifold that cognizes the conceptual cognition of sense perceptions in an idea of a perfect being. In a word, all religious experiences are to be collectively investigated in pure intuition alone.
I.E.I.) Metaphysical Exploration of Transformulative Logic
In the vast scope of epistemology of a priori knowledge, the synthetical construction of the rational and empirical manifolds have been interdependent of each others short-comings to formulate the totality of the conceptual construction of sense perceptions, as well as formulating the necessary causality of certainty within the polarizing aspects of conceptual constructions of a priori knowledge through the practical utilization of negative and positive terms. Now, let us reexamine our previous example we have used in the Critique of Practical Religion, of 2+2=4 so we may strive to find the necessary formulations of a priori knowledge even though experience has taught us to utilize previous experience to formulate the correct solution not only in mathematics, but also in the solutions of abstractive conceptions of religion. But, yet in the formulating of a synthetic concept, there must lie universal terms that transform a priori conceptions and sense perceptions into a singular conception, and the formulating of the abstractive terms relies on the borrow rule of exception of empirical nature as the support of a posteriori knowledge provides the necessary solution to terms of mathematics and religion. And, it is to mention in the exclamation of formulating synthetical concepts, that all religious knowledge is a collection of amplified judgments in the a priori processing of initial ignitions, while yet it in the initial production of abstractive tenses a formulation of synthetic concepts, there is the rational conceptual construction that cohesion of the rational and empirical manifolds to grasp epistemic wonders a priori without regarding the sense perceptions of empiricism. But it is to exclaim, that all a priori knowledge in the synthetic tenses of mathematics and religion seem to coincide with the formulation of abstractive solutions while the sense perceptions of practical sense falls into it's warranted designation when sensing valid conceptual constructions of abstractive sense constructions.
Let's us now reexamine the proposed mathematical term of 2 + 2 = 4 in the initial ignition of the mathematical conception of this synthetical construction of even and positive integers (all even numbers are positive), as well as use the proposed mathematical term of 3 + 1 = 4 (all odd numbers are negative) to aide in the comprehension of positive and negative concepts that are universally soluble in mathematical certainties. And, if we investigate 2 + 2 = 4 and 3 + 1 = 4, we will find that the abstraction of both sets to be aligned with the same solution of the mathematical conceptual construction, yet each containing the universal integer of 1 in both proposed mathematical terms that can be a totality of the abstractive tenses of synthetical a priori knowledge. For how are both sets formulated in the designed proposed solution of the mathematical concept that a solution forms? For how is it so that the mathematical certainty of the proposed solutions formulate even though the abstractive tenses that the deferential terms hold another design? For how are the mathematical sets formulated into the proposed solutions when there is no universal terms available in the proposed mathematical sets?
But, in the mathematical set of 2 + 2 = 4, the positive integers and terms are relative to the universality of the concrete certainty of 1 for each positive mathematical term, and the formulation of the base numeral of it formulates into the synthetic conceptual construction of universal terms, as well as the universality of abstractive tenses of rational and positive numbers as all numbers whether positive and negative utilizes an interdependent relationship with each other in mathematics and religious experiences which the formulation of the mathematical terms 2 is a certainty of conceptual construction. Yet, it is nevertheless, in the formulation of 1 in any given conceptual construction towards the totality of the mathematical certainty of the proposed solution, it is the only universal number in the scope of mathematical certainty, - and can serve as a positive and negative integer, rational and empirical, and even and odd numbers – in the totality of conceptual constructions in sense perceptions of mathematics and religion. But, if we were to individualize 2 in a proposed conceptual construction, then we may find that it already individualized by 1 and is a consonant of mathematical terms in the conceptual construction, and the universal adage of formulation of the individual terms has formed a conceptual manifold of a complex idea in mathematics and religion that a universal term(s) is needed to finish the conceptual construction and solution. And, in the formulation of 2 towards the same mathematical term, there lies the individualization of each singular mathematical term of 1 that forms the singular term of 2 which combined with the same mathematical term in itself (2) formulates into the totality of the proposed solution of 4 in mathematical certainty. Yet, it is evermoreso, in two different mathematical sets that proposed the same mathematical certainty with different integers and rational numbers, the formulation of the conceptual constructions of the mathematical terms ends in a blissful state of certainty when the conceptual manifolds cognizes the mathematical solutions.
Now, let us take the following two mathematical terms and concepts in our investigations to further our understanding of conceptual constructions of mathematics and religious experiences (as the two are relative in a priori knowledge) and the mathematical terms of 2 + 2 = 4 and 1 + 3 = 4 are two different formulations of proposed mathematical problems that are designed towards the same result even though each contain positive and negative integers. If we were to utilize the positive and even number of 2 in a formulation of addition to find the universal number for the problem's body (2 + 2 is “the body” as “=” is the conceptual idea) then, we would calculate 2+(2) + 2 (2) = 8 to formulate the proposed solution of 8 in the conceptual construction. But, in the mathematical synthesis of this complex idea has now transformed into the solution of eight and can be divided by the original number of 2 to formulate the conceptual origin of 2 when divided by the mathematical term of 4 that was the original proposed solution. Now, if we were to formulate the same technique to the body of the negative and even number in the mathematical term of 3+(3) + 1(1), we will find that the conceptual designation of the proposed solution is 8 when adding all the singular terms, as well as the same universal term of 2 as the solution is divided by the positive and rational integer to formulate the same conceptual manifold. The universal mathematical term of 2 holds the formulation of both proposed mathematical terms where it can both be divided to a singular conceptual manifold of mathematical perceptions of a priori knowledge as the synthetic a priori contains the solution outside the subject in question. But, in the complete investigations of our proposed mathematical problems, there lies the proposed solutions of formulating mathematical uncertainties into conceptual manifolds of proposed a priori solutions in all mathematical and religious subjects, as well as in the religious experiences of the conceptual active agent of the synthetical a priori so the religious experience maybe interpreted in the inserted solutions of religious judgments that mathematics and religion adhere too.
Now, let us take into conceptual consideration of our proposed mathematical terms as if we were to insert both mathematical problems with the set(s) of the other, then we will find that the certainties are aligned in the conceptual constructions of perceptual a priori knowledge as the first set of 2 + (3) + 2 +(1) = 8 and the second set of 3 + (2) + 1 + (2) = 8 is equal to one another in the proposed mathematical solutions as the positive and even number of 2 is universal in both mathematical conceptions. And, in the conceptual formulation of mathematical and religious concepts, there is a universal term that can be inserted and constructed to formulate abstraction into concrete conceptual perceptions in mathematics and religion. But, yet nevertheless, in the conceptual constructions of perceptual formulations, there must be a concrete and synthetical a priori that will be the transforming active agent in the perceptual epistemology of mathematical and religious experiences, while the rational and empirical manifolds act accordingly to the interdependence of each other in the transformulation of abstractive concepts. And, with the proposed mathematical examples that we have transformed into two individual sets of mathematical certainty, the formulation of conceptual constructions of the given mathematical formulations presents the synthetical a priori with a concrete notion and idea that can be transformed into the formulation of a proposed solution of conceptual manifold. But, in the proposed mathematical examples that we have investigated in our conceptual manifold of them, we must also conclude that the subtraction, multiplication, and division of the two sets is also valid where it is no matter what completer discourse is found, the conceptual construction of the proposed mathematical terms provide the same result throughout the formulation of concrete and abstractive evidence.
I.F.I.) Mathematical Conception of Transformulative Logic
And, in the adventure of the synthetical manifold of apperceptions and intuitions of formulating mathematical terms in the rational and empirical conceptual constructions, there are the concrete and asbstractive forms (Plato) which the synthetical a priori formulates on the baseline informative judgments interchanging between the mathematical conception and solution, as well as in the conceptual manifold of sense perceptions as the pure intuitions formulate abstractive forms with concrete perceptions in the formulation of pure intuitions. But, yet it is evermoreso, that all mathematical forms in pure intuitions of mathematical and religious terms provide a synthetical manifold of perceptions in the abstractive tenses of the appreception that the synthetical phenomena formulations partial abstractions of intuitive senses of concrete ideas and notions, and the synthetical appreception of pure intuitions regulate the conceptual constructions of sense perceptions towards the intuitive foundations of the empirical and rational manifolds, which the formulation of abstractive tenses of the synthetical apperception is a designation of a priori knowledge. For how it so that all mathematical terms of the synthetical manifold relate to each other in a manner of the rational and positive manifolds in accordance to the synthetical apprehension? For how is it so that all mathematical solutions forgo the empirical manifold in the pure intuitions of the synthetical phenomena? For how it is so that rationalism in the mathematical method of epistemology provides the essential support of the synthetical manifold of all mathematical terms and religious experiences so that we may be provided with an origination of a priori knowledge?
But, yet in the due course of epistemology in mathematics, there lies essential formulation of mathematical terms which formulates a possibility into an absolute term in the pure intuition of the phenomena manifold, and the pure intuitions of the synthetical a priori provides the essential abstractive mathematical markers of the solution when the concrete notion is sparked in the rational manifold. We shall venture in the religious investigation a formulation from possibilities to absolutes in mathematical and religious, as well as identify the components of supportive informative judgments that synthetically enhance the pure intuitions of the abstractive and concrete manifolds. Let us now propose the formulation of synthetical pure intuition of mathematical and religious certainty, as the formulation of E 1/2(a)(b)(c)=1/2(a)(b)(c) shall serve the designation of formulation for both sets of any equation to equal one another in mathematical and religious certainty as the extension of our previous example and formula of Transubstantiative Logic (Critique of Practical Religion) formulates into a broader and discursive pure intuition of an abstractive trichotomy. And, in the formulation of possible conception of sense perceptions of abstraction in mathematical terms and religious experiences, the possibilities of absolution in any given mathematical equation is universal in the infinite possibilities of mathematical certainty, and the abstractive tenses of any negative and positive integer possess the universal abstraction of the epistemic manifold on conceptual constructions. Yet, it is nevertheless, in the perceptual constructions of the abstractive manifold, the mathematical and religious certainty of possibilities can be transformulated into another conceptual manifold through the universality of negative and positive integers to provide an absolution to a clause of probability.
Let us reexamine our previous example of the two sets of mathematical equations to further our mathematical investigations in the formulation of abstractive possibilities into concrete absolutions in mathematical investigations as we will provide another term to the two previous sets of (2 + 2 = 4), (3 + 1= 4), and (4 + 0 = 4) to provide the formulation of possibility to abstraction. And, if we were to add (2 + 4) + (2 + 0) = 8, the we will exclaim that all sets of abstractive certainty can formulate into a concrete conceptual manifold of mathematical solutions as the universality of the positive and rational integer of 2 provides the formulation of absolution into mathematical possibilities. It seems to be in the perceptual manifold that mathematical certainty of our example is formulated into the certainty of the positive and rational mathematical terms of 2 as the universality of it formulates any set of possibility into a concrete absolution. Yet, it is to aforementioned in the realm of mathematical terms and epistemology, that not only mathematical even numbers are absolute, positive, and rational, but it is to exclaim that they are the universal mathematical terms that can formulate possibilities into mathematical certainty, as well as positively-charge empirical short-comings of sense perceptions in the conceptual manifold of the apperception where the perceptual confusion will subside after the proper amplitive and collective judgments are utilized to adhere to the principals of the synthetical manifold. But, the formulation of a conceptual manifold of mathematical certainty rests only the rational perception of pure intuition of the synthetical a priori as it collectively accounts for the rational abstraction of pure mathematical conception in the sense perceptions of the rational manifold, and the mathematical certainty is provided to the grasping comprehension of the synthetical analytic in all mathematical solutions to the subjects outside-itself.