It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


A Perplexing Thought on Life/God/ and the Reason for Existance

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 05:54 PM
reply to post by The Endtime Warrior

True. Very intriguing indeed. This process was installed to help each of us to evolve spiritually and move on to the next step of existence.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 05:56 PM
I thoroughly recommend 'conversations with god' by Neale Donald Walsch, i PROMISE you will not regret it.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:03 PM
reply to post by thedoctorswife

Funny you bring that up. I began reading Conversations with God about six years ago and I never finished. Maybe its time to pay another visit to this literature. Alot has changed since then.

Thank you. I appreciate the reference material.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:05 PM

Originally posted by UnknownPhilosopher

if I created everything, why do I need to use other vehicles ( which happen to be myself ) for experiencing my own creation? Wouldn't I already know my own creation since I am the ultimate architect of it?

If we were created in God's Image, if we are pieces of God, if God lies within us, if God is us and we are God... why must we only compare ourselves to God? Shouldn't we also compare God to us?

To focus on the comparison of "mortal humans" to an omnipotent God is... unprovable. But to compare God to us is tangible because we can observe, experience, interact, and know ourselves and our fellow humans.

To give my thoughts on the above quoted question, let's take the example of an engineer. An engineer can imagine, draft, and formulate a design. The engineer can have absolute control over the absolute creation. Yet, "to create" differs from "to experience." The engineer can design a jet and every aspect of it, but if he never flies it he will never know the experience. He can design the engine, but he will not know the feeling of G-force until experience occurs.

Why compare us to God? Let us compare God to us. He created, but He lacked experience. He knows every subatomic detail of infinity, but unless He steps away from the drafting table, He will only Know creation and never know experience.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:05 PM
I will refer you to the reason i started spending time on ATS the Q&A session with Hidden_Hand
edit on 15-11-2010 by co_creator because: missing link

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:12 PM

Originally posted by UnknownPhilosopher
For my first Topic ever posted, I wanted to start with the grand daddy of them all. I've had a truly perplexing thought on life, God, and our mere existence for quite a while that I in no way have been able to answer with my limited knowledge. The mere thought of existence is a troubling one at that. I think there is purpose. I think there is reason and meaning to life. Yet I cannot pin point why this has all come to be. I've often heard that we ourselves are God. We have come from this "source" so that we may experience its creation which just so happens to be itself in every fashion imaginable. So in essence, since I came from God, an I am part of God, then I must be God. Thus, I ( god ) am experiencing the world, this reality, which just so happens to be my creation, which in turn again comes from me which means it is me, so I am experiencing myself in every conceavable fashion. Yet if I created everything, why do I need to use other vehicles ( which happen to be myself ) for experiencing my own creation? Wouldn't I already know my own creation since I am the ultimate architect of it?

This mind boggling thought also goes for the whole theory of Love being the reason for existence. If we all come from this "source" and in essence, are all one, then we ourselves, as a whole, are God, source , creator, whatever you may call it. If this much is true, then why try to learn how to love others because obviously we have expressed this emotion through the creation of it? Why try to learn something that is already known?

Because knowledge and experience are two different concepts. This is the lesson we experience ourselves (in these vessels) to learn. There are many lessons to learn throughout our collective existence as God, but on this plane we are meant to acknowledge that Thought and Emotion, Idea and Feeling, etc. are essential to getting closer to the "logic of God".

At this point we cannot understand the full mindset and will never be able to with these vessels, but once you understand the meaning of love and experience- one of God's most basic concepts- you will be one step closer to embracing the Universe.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:15 PM
reply to post by UnknownPhilosopher

First; Star and flag....

You wrote;

Wouldn't I already know my own creation since I am the ultimate architect of it?

Consider the "Centre" and "Outer" of something.

The "Outer" (Father) has Form whether in just the Conceptual sense or even the so called material sense containing All, including the knowledge of all.

But on the other hand the Centre has No Size or Shape being the "Opposite" of the "Outer" and knows Nothing at all, except perhaps the awareness you have, which I do Not disagree with in what you have written.
You that is your state of "Awareness", "Consciousness", "Spirit" or whatever people wish to call it, is certainly a “partition” of God. i.e. a Child (Little one) of God.

Your "Awareness" is a “Partition” of the All. One of the "Partitions" in a huge "Partition Map" of the First Born.

The ancient Christian writings were actually about the History of the “Metamorphoses” of the Soul, The Structure of the Soul given the title of "MAN" ( Not A’Dam who was/is of the primate family ), and the Language of the Soul which most people are not aware of today.

The writings have been interfered with in many different ways, and mix both the Soul and Flesh as though one.

MAN is Not A'Dam.

The "LIFE of God" is the "LIGHT of MAN", that is to say that the "LIGHT of the SOUL" is "The LIFE of God".

But the Life of A'Dam was the Air, Not "The LIGHT of MAN" or "LIFE of God".

The “Metamorphoses” of the Soul, involves the Return of “The Son of MAN” and Not the return of one of the offspring of A’Dam.

The Soul purpose of this world is “The Metamorphoses of The Soul”.
In other words the Contents of this World invokes "The Metamorphoses of the Soul".

This Drawing which is 100% accurate, shows the “Partition Map” of The Soul and the MAN Child (The Son of MAN) in the Centre. Note The MAN Child is rotated 45° with respect to the Partition Map of the Soul.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:20 PM
reply to post by Sahabi

Well put. I have considered this myself. Its a reasonable solution but at the same time if there is a creator then not only did this creator put into existence the tools to create but also fabricated the nature to experience. So in turn, God must be experience as well as creation. So in order for god to need to experience its own creation then experience must be a whole seperate thing from god, which means it didnt create experience and something else did.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:30 PM
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller

Wonderful reply. I certainly appreciate the point of view you bring. Presuming from your response, I take it that you are a mystic. If you wish not to respond through this setting, you can private message me. If my presumption is erroneous, please dont take offense to it, I would enjoy talking more in depth with you on the subject.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:34 PM

Originally posted by UnknownPhilosopher
Wouldn't I already know my own creation since I am the ultimate architect of it?

Veil of forgetfullness, allows you to experience the concepts such as "discovery" for example. You deilberatly chose to forget it.

Why try to learn something that is already known?

Time. How did it originally become known. Think outside of our time illusion. Are you the learner of the original knowledge? If your experience is unique in just one small way then arent you adding experience knowledge to god..... who in fact already knows it from you as your jouney finished the same moment it started, all is simultaneous, there is no 'before' or 'after' only now.

Maybe you got bored and are just doing this to yourself for fun, though infinite concept of fun lacks polarity and so may not seem like your finite human duality concept of 'fun'.

original question as to why and how this thought was provoked and purpose for its existance.

Purpose is finite, very human concept, cant it just be? Could it have infinity purposes (thus any one purpose renderd infinitesimally significant)? And no purpose simultaneously?

edit on 15-11-2010 by polarwarrior because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 06:46 PM
The clues to why you exist are scattered all around you right now. They're everywhere, and they are represented in redundancy, with all sorts of versions and expressions of the same single basic notion. And why not? If there is such a thing as a fundamental reason for existence, then of course it would be laced throughout existence at all levels of manifestation.

And it is. It's right there in front of you. All you have to do is open your eyes and see it.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 07:02 PM

Originally posted by UnknownPhilosopher
reply to post by theUNKNOWNawaits

What satisfaction would a creator/god/deity have ( if a seperate entity does exist ) in creating lower suborodinates to transverse its creation?

"God" is fully unknown. Well, except to those that have a "personal relationship with Him". What does He look like? Where is He? What are His means of communication, creation, power, and existence? All unknowns! Unknown unless your answer is "All".... All Knowing, All Powerful, All Mighty, Always has been and Always will be. Still a lot of unknowns. So let us focus on "knowns", because to understand a thing, you must know the thing. We know us. We know humankind. We are the Image of God, God is unknown, but we are known.

Everything us humans have created has been for the purpose of us to experience it, or have others experience it. We create catalysts for experience. Paintings, Poetry, Movies, Sport Cars, Clothing, Gardens, Weapons, Cooked Food... all catalysts for experience. We create to experience.

God is a Creator, We are Creators. God has created to experience. If we are a creation of God's own making, then we are His catalysts for Him to experience. Are we God or a creation of God? That answer may never be fully answered, that is once again dealing in unknowns. Dealing in knowns; we are creators.

Why have a "lower subordinate traverse it's [God's] creation"? We are creators, we do the same thing. Computing, Digital and Virtual technology... our most triumphant creation. How do we experience it? Video Games, MMORPGs, and The Sims.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 07:07 PM
Trying to understand existence assumes a (full and true) understanding of reality and the universe we exist in. As we are such a long way from comprehending either of these things then we are never going to understand existence. How much do we even understand about ourselves?

We cannot even agree on some quite basic things about the very nature of reality, of even about our own minds.

It's fun to play with philosophy on this subject but I think it is akin to an amoeba trying to comprehend quantum physics.

EDIT: on the idea that we are created in the image of god.... if you look quite closely we are created in the image of everything else in the universe, everything has more or less the same base if you look close enough. To think that that line from the bible (if it is even remotely true) means that god has a human-like form is so arrogant to the point of being completely absurd to me. It could mean something entirely different.
edit on 15-11-2010 by Frakkerface because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 07:16 PM
before learning anything about what i now know i had a close friend who was going to graduate school for some type of computer/math major. he dealt with concepts on AI in his free time. looking back on his ideas i see that he wasn't researching and creating ideas about AI he was making a blue print for the human experience/3rd density reality. His concepts involved the idea of through randomness a pattern emerges and that the way to influence this random program is to offer input. The only input that is connected to the program (the universe) is your conscious thoughts. This was my first introduction to the concept of being a "co creator". When you can take a step back and look at the program as a whole you will see that you are the controller. NOW answer me this are you putting in the input you want to see or are you AFK?

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 07:25 PM
Resistance is futile. You have already been spiritually assimilated. If you argue, you have hatred in your heart. That pretty much sums up the "oneness" response I commonly see.

edit on 15-11-2010 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 07:39 PM
reply to post by co_creator

Artificial Intelligence, mankind's most ambitious attempts at creation! I was curious, did your friend give any opinions or ideas of how to input conscious thought into a program? Would this conscious thought be generated by/in the program or would the program be a catalyst for conscious thought by a human?

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 08:10 PM
reply to post by UnknownPhilosopher
oh please go back to the Neale Donald walsch books. Look im not saying hes actually having conversations with our actual god it may just be wisdom that comes from deep inside him, however i believe anything is possible and maybe the big guy is talking to him. i just read his newest book ' happier than god' and Ive NEVER in the whole 42 years of my life read such incredible truths, all questions are answered, even the reason why God created is given and it is amazing and astounding and i believe you will never read something that resonates as truthfully than the words written in his books. One of this first books caught my eye in Waterstones about 7 years ago and it changed my life and how i see God and existance. Ok so ive spent a small amount of money on his books, but Donald even has an answer for why he still sells books and doesnt just give them free on line, its because he believes that things that are valued are taken more seriously and worth more. This guy was once a bum (sorry Donald) but he changed my life, hes a cool guy.... I like him.

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 08:39 PM
reply to post by UnknownPhilosopher

I've posted this before, but I think it has a place here regarding these considerations..

"The God Theory" by Bernard Haisch

Haisch is an astrophysicist whose professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Deputy Director for the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, and Visiting Fellow at the Max-Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany. His work has led to close involvement with NASA; he is the author of over 130 scientific papers; and was the Scientific Editor of the Astrophysical Journal for nine years, as well as the editor in chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

an excerpt

If you think of whitte light as a metaphor of infinite, formless potential, the colors on a slide or frame of film become a structured reality grounded in the polarity that comes about through intelligent subtraction from that absolute formless potential. It results from the limitation of the unlimited. I contend that this metaphor provides a comprehensible theory for the creation of a manifest reality (our universe) from the selective limitation of infinite potential (God)...
If there exists an absolute realm that consists of infinite potential out of which a created realm of polarity emerges, is there any sensible reason not to call this "God"? Or to put it frankly, if the absolute is not God, what is it? For our purposes here, I will indentify the Absolute with God. More precisely I will call the Absolute the Godhead. Applying this new terminology to the optics analogy, we can conclude that our physical universe comes about when the Godhead selectively limits itself, taking on the role of Creator and manifesting a realm of space and time and, within that realm, filtering out some of its own infinite potential...
Viewed this way, the process of creation is the exact opposite of making something out of nothing. It is, on the contrary, a filtering process that makes something out of everything. Creation is not capricious or random addition; it is intelligent and selective subtraction. The implications of this are profound.

If the Absolute is the Godhead, and if creation is the process by which the Godhead filters out parts of its own infinite potential to manifest a physical reality that supports experience, then the stuff that is left over, the residue of this process, is our physical universe, and ourselves included. We are nothing less than a part of that Godhead - quite literally.

Next, by Ervin Laszlo

Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything, 2004

And, his other seminal work
Science and the Reenchantment of the Cosmos: The Rise of the Integral Vision of Reality

Ervin Laszlo is considered one of the foremost thinkers and scientists of our age, perhaps the greatest mind since Einstein. His principal focus of research involves the Zero Point Field. He is the author of around seventy five books (his works having been translated into at least seventeen languages), and he has contributed to over 400 papers. Widely considered the father of systems philosophy and general evolution theory, he has worked as an advisor to the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2004 and 2005. A multidisciplinarian, Laszlo has straddled numerous fields, having worked at universities as a professor of philosophy, music, futures studies, systems science, peace studies, and evolutionary studies. He was a sucessful concert pianist until he was thirty eight.

In his view, the zero-point field (or the Akashic Field, as he calls it) is quite literally the "mind of God".

Naming Hal Puthoff, Roger Penrose, Fritz-Albert Popp, and a handful of others as "front line investigators", Laszlo quotes Puthoff who says of the new scientific paradigm:

[What] would emerge would be an increased understanding that all of us are immersed, both as living and physical beings, in an overall interpenetrating and interdependant field in ecological balance with the cosmos as a whole, and that even the boundary lines between the physical and "metaphysical" would dissolve into a unitary viewpoint of the universe as a fluid, changing, energetic/informational cosmological unity."

an excert from Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything

Akasha (a . ka . sha) is a Sanskrit word meaning "ether": all-pervasive space. Originally signifying "radiation" or "brilliance", in Indian philosophy akasha was considered the first and most fundamental of the five elements - the others being vata (air), agni (fire), ap (water), and prithivi (earth). Akasha embraces the properties of all five elements: it is the womb from which everything we percieve with our senses has emerged and into which everything will ultimately re-descend. The Akashic Record (also called The Akashic Chronicle) is the enduring record of all that happens, and has ever happened, in space and time."

Laszlo's view of the history of the universe is of a series of universes that rise and fall, but are each "in-formed" by the existence of the previous one. In Laszlo's mind, the universe is becoming more and more in-formed, and within the physical universe, matter (which is the crystallization of intersecting pressure waves or an interference pattern moving through the zero-point field) is becoming increasing in-formed and evolving toward higher forms of consciousness and realization.


According to James Oroc's experiences (Tryptamine Palace), when the ego is dissolved in consciousness through the temporary formation of a type of neurological "Bose Einstein Condensate", there is no real dilineation or distinction between individual consciousness and God-consciousness or the universal "akashic field" (Lazslo) aka Zero Point Field.

Personally, I've come to the conclusion that "boundary dissolution" has its limits and that given our position as individuated beings in the illusion of creation, the most appropriate and ah doable proposition is that of an I-Thou relationship with the absolute ie: God as higher power than the self. I also think this type of relationship between the self and God as a higher power of one's own understanding or lack of it (since no one can comprehend the absolute) has a direct application by extension within a framework that I refer to as the relativity of human being. How precisely that works I haven't quite figured out yet, but it's getting closer and closer I feel to a ah HA moment.

To use another metaphor or analogy, it's some sort of self referential eternal recurrence, according to the phi ratio ie: to use a Christian oriented POV, Jesus the man is as son of God as son of God is to the father as a first/last cause, spirit of the universe, whatever you wish to designate the Absolute.

Furthermore, there is only one reason why a mere human being or personage would wish to try to replace God, and that would involve a rebellious quality or a willful pride of self, that is unwilling to submit itself to a power greater than the self, and as the old saying goes "pride always goeth before the fall" or "he who exalts himself will be humbled but he who humbles himself will be exalted."

But I am with another poster who suggested that a complete boundary dissolution relative to another, in his case I think it was his son, is absurd and totally uneccessary, if not a violation of individual boudaries and personal integrity.

Love to be love requires two, and the wave equation that collapses reality also requires both an objective and subjective observer ie: it always takes two to tango ("I was with you since before the very foundations of the world").

Perhaps the best way to think of it, might be in terms of a divine extension and proportion (phi ratio aka golden mean), within an eternally recurring evolutionary framework that is fractal in nature, and as such, there is no getting to the end of it, only a continual exploratory process of increasing mutuality, and love, forever, and ever, "world without end, amen".
edit on 15-11-2010 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 15 2010 @ 08:51 PM
reply to post by Sahabi

Could you imagine climbing into one of those VR's without ever having the capacity to escape into death, and therefore something novel?
Even if you could program it from within... and let's say they sent it into a wormhole or something from which there would be no escape, ever.

Me I prefer to do it with faith in my creator, that he knows best, even if it would mean the end of "me" as I presently exist.

There may be a certain relief in death, as a neccessity for the creation of new life and new possbilities.

Also man is inherintly insane. I would not trust any such program with my own consciousness, to try to escape death. I am absolutely convinced it would lead to the worst horror imaginable.

P.S. I realize the apparent contradictory paradox I just present, in relation to my previous post! However in the former case, it's on God's terms or from the perspective of a PERFECT will, and in the latter, on my own terms.

"Let it thy will, and not mine, that is done."
edit on 15-11-2010 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 16 2010 @ 12:59 AM

Originally posted by Sahabi

Originally posted by UnknownPhilosopher

if I created everything, why do I need to use other vehicles ( which happen to be myself ) for experiencing my own creation? Wouldn't I already know my own creation since I am the ultimate architect of it?

Why compare us to God? Let us compare God to us. He created, but He lacked experience. He knows every subatomic detail of infinity, but unless He steps away from the drafting table, He will only Know creation and never know experience.

Are you saying we were created in His image so He could experience the world that He created?

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in