It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What if 'God' simply wants to experience everything?

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:03 AM
link   
I do not believe the theory I'm going to present here. I'm only presenting this theory as a thought experiment. In order to consider this theory, you need to make some assumptions which are summed up in the following sentence:

The creator of the universe designed the universe for one consciousness (the creator's consciousness) to experience every possible experience subjectively.

What that means is that every living thing contains part of the creator's consciousness. The creator can therefore simultaneously experience what it's like to be every living thing from the unique perspective of that thing (that's the subjective part). The creator can then learn what it's like to be every animal, every plant, every insect, etc. in a very genuine way.

That assumption is not a unique thought on my part. But, I believe the rest of the theory I'm presenting in this post may be new.

What if "God" simply wants to experience everything?

The way I see that question could shine a whole new light on everything that's happening in the world. It seems like many people have questions about life such as:

Why does "God" allow bad things to happen to good people?
Why does "God" allow so much suffering?
Why does "God" allow so much disease?
Why did "God" create such a "dog eat dog" world?

With my theory, there is one answer to all of those questions and many more and it is simple and understandable:

"God" wants to try out everything for self-growth and to see what he/she/it likes.

If really realistic virtual reality existed, would you like to try out your fantasies? Would you like to try out your nightmares? I would. In a virtual reality environment, why put limits on it?

If you were the kind of powerful being that "God" must be, perhaps you would want to try everything too. You could be a bear hunting for fish and be the fish. You could be both sides of a sporting event. You could be both sides of a war. It could sure be a cure for boredom at the very least.

If you were an all-powerful kind of being there may be no way that you could ever personally experience fear. However, within the context of existence in an animal's body, you could experience fear. And, you could experience joy, pain, and every other feeling and emotion imaginable.

What could the benefits of that be? How about developing empathy, sympathy, compassion, and lots of other things that you never could have experienced without the virtual reality you created.

I think this is an important theory to consider because it may answer all the questions people have about the world without making too many assumptions.
edit on 29-1-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion



Why does "God" allow bad things to happen to good people?
Why does "God" allow allow so much suffering?
Why does "God" allow so much disease?
Why did "God" create such a "dog eat dog" world?


Let's reword this...

Why does "Mom & Dad" allow bad things to happen to good children?
Why does "Mom & Dad" allow allow so much suffering for their kids?
Why does "Mom & Dad" allow so much disease to infect their sons and daughters?
Why did "Mom & Dad" create such a "dog eat dog" world?

We have the means at our disposal to avoid bad things happening to anyone. We today have the technology to prevent horrid diseases, to live in a world that is not dog eat dog.

But, we choose other paths... which is exactly what a child does when angry at life; blame other kids, blame teachers, blame Mom & Dad, blame anyone else. Anyone at all.

At this point, it becomes more than obvious that the human species has no wish to assign blame upon itself. For anything at all.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:22 AM
link   
a reply to: redoubt

Sorry, but the "God as a parent" analogy does not cut it when it comes to explaining the plight facing humanity.

Also, how can you expect humanity to collectively take responsibility for the bad things some humans do? Isn't that just guilt by association?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Dark Ghost

I was applying it as a side-by-side comparison... offering an example of how blame could be reassigned at will and render up the same ending.

Nothing more, nothing less.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I've pondered this question many times and I believe that, if there is a god, this is the only possible answer. it would explain many religious beliefs, such as the concept of enlightenment.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

taking your premise on faith - then it becomes impossible to defend the argument :

god is good

this is unacceptable for a certain demographic



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:47 AM
link   
You know OP, that thought has crossed many people's minds. The only gripe I have with this [possible] explanation of god is that true christians believe in the bible. In which god is actually communicating with humans. He even writes them stories to adhere to [via angels
] and tells them what is right and what is wrong, then punishes them when they don't do as he wishes.

Without the bible, even I as an Atheist [apparently that is what I am called if I don't believe in god] could come up with very plausible explanations for a god being.


- The universe could be god, meaning that it is a very big person, so big that we only see the atoms [stars and planets]. This would explain the omnipotence and the creation of us [albeit unaware]. But such a god won't know us at all.

- god could be a being somewhere using a computer program and each of us has either their own 'user' or we are all 'played' by one. This also explains omnipotence and creation, plus more. A user-god may be a bastard and have his creation suffer because he likes it, after all we are apparently made in his/her/it's own image.

- god is just another name for Nature. In which case I prefer calling it Nature as there would be no reasoning behind anything and it would just happen because it can. Calling it god and giving it attributes would be sacrilege, because nature works just fine without a mind.

- god could also be a man in the sky with a beard who came up with a really cool formula that Nature can't help but follow. Again, creation, omnipotence, all there. However once it's running there is nothing he/she/it can do.


But none of the above can be used to explain god, because of the bible. The christians can't deny that their god is apparently fully aware what every single human is thinking and have an opinion about that. The biblical god IMO is very substantial. He/she/it has offspring and meddles a lot with our lives.
Such a creature can not be responsible for the creation of humans, because it has fecked up big time with so many and has given humans the ability to suffer, knowing fully well what horrors some of us o through.

Such a creature is aware of suffering and just doesn't give a damn.

I am also interested if god regrets not keeping the dinosaurs who roamed this Earth for Millions of years very successfully, whilst it's newest creation [in his/her/it's] own image is such an embarrassment.

To cut a long story short: I could be persuaded to call something logical a god but it would have nothing to do with the egocentric sadist from the bible.
edit on 29-1-2016 by Hecate666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 06:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion


"God" wants to try out everything for self-growth and to see what he/she/it likes.


If we are going to presuppose God, then we would have to presuppose God would have no reason to see what it is like, because being all knowing, they would already know what they like.
Why?
Because if God was not all Knowing then they would not really be God, but rather just a powerful, cosmic entity.

So really your question is to my thinking, Why is God Evil, instead of Good.
In effect the post seems to me that you have presupposed (maybe even unknowingly) an evil or at very least a careless God, before the first "Why Does..." Question was asked.


edit on 29-1-2016 by Punisher75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Profusion
What if "God" simply wants to experience everything?

The God Presence that exists beyond this universe is everything.

Through the Blood of His begotten Son, Jesus He has already saved those mortals that have faith in His Son.

The Annunaki (Lucifer, Yahweh) who transformed this Day 6 paradise into a slave hell on earth, are allowed to exist so that mankind can see just how evil the Draconians, Annunaki and Archons really are.

The only way humans will learn good from bad, is by being surrounded by evil elitists that work for Lucifer 24/7 at Ground Zero - Earth.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Punisher75
I see a flaw in there. Because I know how riding a bike feels. But maybe I want to experience it again?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   
If a being choose to force souls into bad experiences and suffering to know those things then I would call it more of a parasite or demon and not a divine symbiotic being. All beings can be judged by objective judgement and that includes the higher level awareness that have reached a higher level than us.

I make a distinction between the divine that can unite in oneness with awareness vs the flawed ego ones who cannot create symbiosis regardless of the size.

If creation on all levels is not self aware then it needs to become it on all levels. If not suffering will continue.


edit on 29-1-2016 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:17 AM
link   
Why is this posited as a theory?

All cosmology, regardless of childish exclusivity and partisan invention, has this very common denominator running through it.

Å99



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Punisher75
a reply to: Profusion


"God" wants to try out everything for self-growth and to see what he/she/it likes.


If we are going to presuppose God, then we would have to presuppose God would have no reason to see what it is like, because being all knowing, they would already know what they like.
Why?
Because if God was not all Knowing then they would not really be God, but rather just a powerful, cosmic entity.

So really your question is to my thinking, Why is God Evil, instead of Good.
In effect the post seems to me that you have presupposed (maybe even unknowingly) an evil or at very least a careless God, before the first "Why Does..." Question was asked.



There is no reason "god" needs to be omnipotent. Just that he was the first cause and a necessary being.

In fact an omnipotent God is a good arguement against Christianity since it voids out free will. If God knows everything there is no free will. This is where theology made a misstep in logic



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:20 AM
link   
I think now we may get problems because of the definition of GOD.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Punisher75
a reply to: Profusion


"God" wants to try out everything for self-growth and to see what he/she/it likes.


If we are going to presuppose God, then we would have to presuppose God would have no reason to see what it is like, because being all knowing, they would already know what they like.
Why?
Because if God was not all Knowing then they would not really be God, but rather just a powerful, cosmic entity.

So really your question is to my thinking, Why is God Evil, instead of Good.
In effect the post seems to me that you have presupposed (maybe even unknowingly) an evil or at very least a careless God, before the first "Why Does..." Question was asked.



There is no reason "god" needs to be omnipotent. Just that he was the first cause and a necessary being.

In fact an omnipotent God is a good arguement against Christianity since it voids out free will. If God knows everything there is no free will. This is where theology made a misstep in logic



...but, specifically the logic of hardline christian theology...

Å99



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Punisher75
I see a flaw in there. Because I know how riding a bike feels. But maybe I want to experience it again?


Again this is already assuming that God is inherently evil or careless.

It also assumes that God is not God via way of limiting Gods Power to experience without the need to actively do anything to make it so. Omnipotence is by definition not something that need to be activated.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:30 AM
link   
a reply to: LittleByLittle

Once you are omnipotent through such concepts of good or evil would seem rather irelavent, quiet frankly beneath you. Just a thought.



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

There is no reason "god" needs to be omnipotent. Just that he was the first cause and a necessary being.

In fact an omnipotent God is a good arguement against Christianity since it voids out free will. If God knows everything there is no free will. This is where theology made a misstep in logic


No God is defined by certain attributes, especially if we are going to link God to Christianity as you have done in your post. If we Are talking about the Christian God as opposed to say a Hindu God then why would we change the attributes? It makes the conversation intellectually dishonest.

I would also reject your claim that an Omnipotent God is an argument against Christianity since it voids out free will. Unless it is your opinion that Calvinist are not Christian?



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Punisher75

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Punisher75
I see a flaw in there. Because I know how riding a bike feels. But maybe I want to experience it again?


Again this is already assuming that God is inherently evil or careless.

It also assumes that God is not God via way of limiting Gods Power to experience without the need to actively do anything to make it so. Omnipotence is by definition not something that need to be activated.

Omnipotent God equals no free will.

If God knows everything he knows what you will do in any situation. It's a logical paradox when combined with free will.

God has no set definition. Thats my point. There are problems in logic with some representations of what God is when combined with theological aspects of religion.

The Hindu God Brahma is similar to pantheism
It is everything.
edit on 29-1-2016 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2016 @ 07:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Punisher75

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Punisher75
I see a flaw in there. Because I know how riding a bike feels. But maybe I want to experience it again?


Again this is already assuming that God is inherently evil or careless.

It also assumes that God is not God via way of limiting Gods Power to experience without the need to actively do anything to make it so. Omnipotence is by definition not something that need to be activated.

Omnipotent God equals no free will.

If God knows everything he knows what you will do in any situation. It's a logical paradox when combined with free will.


Not strictly true, at all...

Å99
edit on 29-1-2016 by akushla99 because: Forgettins of at



new topics

top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join