It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by unityemissions
The conclusions they reach are usually so nonsensical.
A bit like Sunday at church
"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.
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
Proof of non-locality or transluminal interconnectedness
Originally posted by Condemned0625
reply to post by kallisti36
I also find joy in my friends and don't much care if they don't exist based on your limited understanding of reality, in that case I will reject your "reality" for my own and become a whimsical solipsist.
My understanding of reality is not limited. Are you implying that yours isn't and mine is? By the way, I never called you childish. I merely stated that religion has no evidence and there are too many absurdities for me to believe any of it. Having a closed mind and basing your understanding of reality on one conceptual book IS a limited understanding of reality. I do no such thing.
Solipsism - the theory that only the self exists, or can be proved to exist.
Are you sure you want to go that route?
Originally posted by kallisti36
This is the same reason why I believe trying to understand the nature of an eternal omnipotent being is impossible.
God cannot be explained. He cannot be argued about. He cannot be theorized, nor can He be discussed and understood. God can only be lived... (Bhakti..?)
To understand the infinite, eternal Reality is not the GOAL of individualized beings in the illusion of Creation, because the Reality can never be understood (and why would we want to and ruin the suprise)l it is to be realized by conscious experience.
Therefore, the GOAL is to realize the Reality and attain the I am (of) God state in human form."
~ Meher Baba (parentheses added by me)
Originally posted by The Djin
reply to post by awake_and_aware
So? Deepak Chopra is an idiot, if a well meaning one. He's a New Age self help guru who writes patronizing fan-fiction about religious figures. Like many of these New Age self help gurus, he's theologically ignorant and would fail an entry level class on theology.
Originally posted by bogomil
["sorry must have had a close name and I assumed you knew what a Gideon NT (New Testament) was, yes that invisible Jesus mentioned in there, just like what Paul heard (in Acts9, John5) when he first believed that only said he was Jesus from invisibilty of whom he called Lord as I did of which no one can say or confess by their own natural power"]
Personally I consider Paulus as one of the greatest scammers in historical time.
Then this circle-argumentation claim of using specific names on/about Jesus as a 'proof'. Your formal reasoning is void, and your specific use of it 'majic'.
You see, ......I, Bogomil the enlightened, but somewhat confused at times,....am in reality the first cousin of the spaghetti monster, send here to chasten all who are egg-noodle enthusiasts.
I can prove this: Only true believers in the spaghetti monster can say his name, without being struck with lightening. As many actually HAVE said the real name of the spaghetti monster, without being struck by lightening, this proves two things. !/ That the spaghetti monster exists, and 2/ That spaghetti monsterism is numerically superior to christianity, when it comes to the amount of 'true' believers in the 'true' spaghetti faith.
My logic is as impeccable as yours. Now we can switch to competing on intrinsic holiness.
There is no way in hell that the universe went from atoms to Shakespeare out of random stabs. This is an extraordinarily driven process. And all of this, without exception, is driven by love.
~ Ken Wilber.