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.

 

Source, Creator, God, is IF

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   
This simple concept is difficult to articulate so I hope you get the gist of what I'm trying to conceptualize. I'm positive someone out there has already thought of the idea and can give me a few thoughts on the idea.

What if? What if God IS the embodiment of our understanding of IF? What if the the Source or Creator is defined by the meaning of if?

IF has no beginning, no end, is the Alpha and Omega, Yin and Yang, Light and Dark. What if, IF is God? Not only God the idea, but the true name of God/Source Creator.

When considered this way, everyone's version of the Creator fits perfectly and without contradiction.

In the realm of IF, anything is possible and no thing or idea is irrelevant or impossible. For such a small word, IF carries huge significance and is ever-present. What would it be like if IF were the all-powerful, all-seeing, magnificent Source of All That Is?

If has so many definitions and is used so often, we barely notice it taking it for granted, yet it is used to describe possibility and to define exceptions.

In the world of possibility, IF is supreme. A Definition of IF

[edit on 29-5-2009 by Hazelnut]




posted on May, 29 2009 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Interesting Idea and Thread. But, What If your Wrong?

Just playing there. Great thread. Might take me some time to digest and get a good reply to though.

Rekar



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by rekar
 


You're right. What if? That is the point isn't it? In a world where anything is possible until someone decides otherwise, anything can happen.

I had the idea a few weeks ago and it just keeps growing on me. It is hard to put into writing and make it sound reasonable.
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate it.

About a year ago I started seriously investigating different religious ideologies and the result was more confusion than before. I mean, with all the ideas about God, Creator, Source seemingly opposing one another, the idea that "IF" actually defines all of the ideas occurred to me.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Your supposition is interesting but flawed in my opinion.

It would seem to me that if a person believes if is our creator that is nothing but the same as an agnostic view,

How can if be anything as it might or might not be something?

If could also be maybe or possibly.

It either is or it isn't. If hasn't happened yet.

Oh my, I'm getting confused.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by dizziedame
 


LOL! I hear you and you could be right. It is confusing isn't it. The concept of IF is unlimited, without restriction until we create them.

What if our greatest ideals about a loving creator who provided us with choice and free will were an actual entity that embodies every potential and bestowed that potential upon each and every one of us?



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Even more confusing but I will entertain the idea.

Thank you for the mind food.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   
OK, I'm confused, From your initial post, I got the impression you were saying that 'God' is nothing but the 'Source of everything'? (Taking that further, if we are all still connected to the source, via some means, then in actual fact, we are a part of this God?)

That bit I agreed with, I believe a similar thing myself, but what do you mean by 'IF'? IF as a concept? IF, as the human word? Or IF as an actual entity of some form? I am really confused lol.

Either way, interesting thread, anything is possible afterall, who's to say who's right or wrong.

EMM



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by ElectroMagnetic Multivers
 


It is confusing yet intriguing. I'm philosophising and imagining because I can't find my true point of focus. I believe in creation and nature and possibility. But who is God? From vastly differing cultural perspectives the answers are always similar. Each unique viewpoint sharing basic ideals with varying histories, traditions, rituals and superstititions.

So, if there are so many variations all claiming to be the real ONE and also assuming that individuality is a good thing, then why can't GOD be IF?

Whether the actual entity or the concept is another of the things that will have to wait for personal experience to show the truth.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Hazelnut
 


I pretty much agree with the way you put it.

To me god is the explanation of the unexplained which, in turn cannot be explained so the best title we give is "God". That is taken and then tried to be explained hence, organized religion.

I think god should be titled the "Unknown" instead of being explained by perspective and skewed or tainted understanding or lack thereof. But someone will always think they know what this "God" character is and will always try to explain the defining qualities. What is not understood is that you cannot explain something you don't understand and you cannot understand something you cannot explain too well. Those ones that try to do so end up with religion or something like that.

But the "If" God is also rather mind boggling. From my explanation of "God" as being unexplained, I have explained it from my personal perspective, hence creating another definition of something I am not entirely knowledgeable on.

The "If" god is seemingly the god of the "Possible". The problem with God IMHO is that we have created a term for something not understood and then tried to explain that term further and further with a lack of understanding on how the term came to be and with twisted personal definitions, creating a repetitive cycle of fallacious explanations and opinions or the lack thereof.


Sometimes the best route to take is waiting for time to reveal its mysteries and just accept that we don't know some things.

I think from this repetitive and circular logic I just spewed I have entered the mind daze. Either way S&F!

Thought provoking nonetheless.

[edit on 29-5-2009 by N3krostatic]



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   
I like your theory, even if it is slightly confusing.

But in all fairness, i dont see myself bowing down to the "almighty IF" any time soon...

Love&Light.

Jacob



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by JacobNH
 


no, but many religious people do; take for instance a Christian praying to god that a certain thing will happen in their life, or for an event to go their way. Are they not bowing down in appeasement to an IF, the 'if' being a possible outcome to circumstance?
I guess also the people who are religious for the sake of 'being on the right side' are doing so to appease the IF, like how a previous poster likened the idea to agnosticism.

I guess heavy gamblers, the ones who look at everything in life as Odds and line everything up as a bet, could be worshippers of this same IF god.



posted on May, 29 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hazelnut
reply to post by dizziedame
 


What if our greatest ideals about a loving creator who provided us with choice and free will were an actual entity that embodies every potential and bestowed that potential upon each and every one of us?


Yeah, this is true. within esoteric spirituality, this is recoqnised. there is divinity within all of us. In fact, my own name on here, Reiki, it's our own spark of divinity that is accessed in it, to effect a spiritual expereince, that materialises as healing.

'The Tao that can be named, is not the Tao'. This means, when we look to the creative force, in our limited capabilitites, we can never fully articulate or conceptulate, it's comprehensivness.

Quantum physics is showing us there is a field in which we are all connected, almost a membrane. Max Plank said that he felt that there had to be intelligence behind it. It's wuite possible we are all a part of the creative force, merely aspects, perhaps pale refelctions, and are all within the creative force, literally.

take care
Wayne



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Hazelnut
 


I think you're on the right path. In quantum physics, everything pretty much exists through our consciousness, what we see and how things work is pretty much the result of what we do. Like, all possibilities are happening at all times, but when your consciousness focuses on it, all possibilities collapse into one final outcome. That final outcome depends conscious observation.
All the possibilities rely on something. IF, plays a large role in how all those possibilities collapse into one reality.

Quantum physics seems to put our reality on a conscious level, I tend to agree at this point, and look at our consciousness as pieces of God (Created in his image?) that we were given as a gift, and our lives in this world are nothing more than than a journey that I have no explanation for as far as the reason why we're doing it. I just want to enjoy it as much as I can.

I think you are on the correct path though with your idea. Very well done.

God bless,
Task.

[edit on 30-5-2009 by Taskism]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 08:46 AM
link   
I think god is within the now, so "is" would maybe fit. Not removing ourselves from what is. "If" is more than.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 


I hadn't thought about that but I will now. You may have a very valid point. IF and IS may be the polarity or duality we see in nature repeated throughout physical reality. Hmmm? Thanks for that idea. It fits even more nicely with my theoretical assumption.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 10:24 AM
link   
We may not want to pray to the almighty "if". However, I do think we should bow down to "is" - "what is" and "i am". To allow the now, the space (in us and outside of us - there is no inside/outside, this is where we think up seperateness) and then just watch. Observe what is and watch your thoughts. It is " I am" that observes, it does not get fooled by the silliness of thought. It just is.

[edit on 31-5-2009 by Itisnowagain]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
We may not want to pray to the almighty "if". However, I do think we should bow down to "is" - "what is" and "i am". To allow the now, the space (in us and outside of us - there is no inside/outside, this is where we think up seperateness) and then just watch. Observe what is and watch your thoughts. It is " I am" that does not get fooled by the silliness of thought. It just is.


What IS. Very difficult task to master for dreamers like me. Watching my thoughts and reserving judgment on them takes a lot of practice. Often, my thoughts seem like infinite, unorganized data streams. But every now and then I get a glimmer of IS.

There is a deity in my heart. I would like to find the correct way to address this question with the faith that I have not chosen incorrectly based on ignorance or persuasion.



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 06:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hazelnut

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
We may not want to pray to the almighty "if". However, I do think we should bow down to "is" - "what is" and "i am". To allow the now, the space (in us and outside of us - there is no inside/outside, this is where we think up seperateness) and then just watch. Observe what is and watch your thoughts. It is " I am" that does not get fooled by the silliness of thought. It just is.


What IS. Very difficult task to master for dreamers like me. Watching my thoughts and reserving judgment on them takes a lot of practice. Often, my thoughts seem like infinite, unorganized data streams. But every now and then I get a glimmer of IS.



just because something is may seem difficult to master, doesn't mean it shouldn't be explored. Usually, spiritual 'gifts' have to be worked for. Via dilligent practice,
.

'what' is' seems like another excellant spiritual approach to 'If'. both statements immedietely give more questions than answers, which is the whoel initial point is Zen koans for example.

Keep up the good topic!

take care
Wayne



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   
To have a discussion about God. One first have to agree on what or who God is.
You have to know for sure who or what God is to make all the connections right. If not.... God just becomes a argument of who or what God is.

If you dont know who or what God is! The Bible just becomes a fictional discussion about who has the best argument of opinion.

Who or what exists to even mention or have the though of "IF" to begin with?





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Jun, 1 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


It seems like everyone has an individualized notion of who God is or isn't. We can name the personality characteristics of an infinite, all powerful creator yet on the entire planet there is no concensus. This makes me think the "creator" IS IF. IF I can see The Source OF All one way and you see God another way, then all we have done is divide ourselves FROM the deity and each other unless we agree that varying ideals about God are acceptable and even worthy.

I can't really believe there is one true way to believe in God. There are too many opposing traditions and doctrines.

As a young child, I lived in Taiwan for 3 years, very close to the villages where the people visited their small temples in the bamboo forest. They came every day bringing fruit and flowers and burning incense in those temples. I didn't know why they did that, but I felt the reverence.

By the time I turned 10 I had no formal education regarding God, never been to any church or even thought about religion at all. One early morning, I was lying in the grass just as the fog was lifting. From my prone position I watched the world reappear, first close to the ground, then a little more as the fog rose above me. After about 20 minutes, the fog had lifted and became clouds again, high in the sky.

That was when something happend that made me feel my connection to God for the first time. Since then (38 years) I've been convinced that God is in me, and in you, and in everyone. Subject to personal heartfelt interpretation.

I don't feel insulted that people don't agree with my assumption because no one else is me, has felt what I feel, knows what I know. Yes, the knowledge is there, yet interpreted individually and singularly. My experience does not need to reflect anyone else's, nor does anyone else's experience cancel out mine. We are unique. God, Creator, Source is valid in every interpretation.

My theory of God, Source, Creator, is IF works because we all view the deity from an internal, personal perspective. Without religious dogma, doctrine and tradition (unless you want that), God is all potential and awareness. There need be no division, argument or hate about religious ideals unless one wants those states of mind to continue forever.

IF connects us to IS.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join