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.

 

Some questions about existence

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:01 AM
link   
I'm not expecting to have answers to these because obviously no one can. Just interested in your opinions.
These questions are to be looked at in the context of all being part of the source (god, if you wan't) and including principles of karma - reincarnation. Why? Because that is what I think is what is. But few things puzzle me. Actually infinite things puzzle me, but here's couple:


- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?

Does this mean it is not omnipotent?
Does this mean it is fallible?

What do you think?




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
If all things are possible to an omnipotent being, then this implies that at some point, nothing is also possible - or in other words, for all things to be possible, then the impossible must contribute a possibility.

therefore, it's not going to solve itself even with our help. Now I've got brain fuzz..




posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Yep. That is a paradox I've been thinking before.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Spiff
 


Haha I spent more time wording that convoluted thing just to avoid using the word paradox

It felt a bit obvious.. but fitting.

It is indeed a tricky thing to ponder, however.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Spiff
 


Not trying to take the easy way out here, but you guys aren't factoring in that time is a construct of your mind. If you understand the universe to be infinite, you know that it can't perceive time. It can create it, but not be bound by it.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Spiff
 


All there is, is this moment, and you and everything is an appearance appearing within it/on it. That is the totallity.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:02 AM
link   
this is obviously just my personal belief.......


Originally posted by Spiff
- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


It is the body/mind which is barbaric, the soul itself is as close as we can be to the source without becoming one with it again. Humans in a physical sense are just another animal, but with some sweet little add-ons such as large brains and opposable thumbs which allow us to do cool stuff. But humanity as a whole still operates on a fairly baseline, instinctual, reactionary level as do all animals. Our hoarding of material goods, our preening, our superficial hopes, dreams and anxieties are all evidence of this.



- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?

Does this mean it is not omnipotent?
Does this mean it is fallible?


Just because you are omnipotent, doesn't mean you realise this. In fact a complete understanding of this fact would be fairly counter to god experiencing himself as you, or me, or anything else in this universe for that matter. The poster above me had a good point relating to time. Time is relative to the observer. It is my belief that everything is has already happened and we are just an awareness experiencing this through the illusion of time and space. The following is something I posted not too long ago but it has a lot of relevance to your question

The meaning of life according to me is experience.....

In the beginning a there was nothing but an awareness. It was the infinitely everything and nothing all at once. But how can one know one's self if nothing else exists, if you are everything and nothing all at once? In order to experience everything inside one needs to understand everything on the outside. But one cannot do that if one is everything.

So this awareness began to divide itself into smaller separate parts (aka the Big Bang) using the illusory dividers of time and space. Firstly quantum particles to understand what it is to just be. More complex forms arose - atoms, electrons, molecules, matter. And now we have an understanding of movement and energy. Eventually simple life arose, and now we understand stimuli and response. Animals - basal emotions such as fear, lust, hunger, contentment. And finally higher life forms such as humans and all the complexities that go along with them.

Now as everything is still one and the same, there is an attraction to everything else. And this attraction is love. Nothing more nothing less. But this attraction, this love, is what eventually will lead us back to the source. When each separate soul has finally experienced its little part of the puzzle it will follow the path of love, its own in built attraction to everything else, back to the source, and the veil will be lifted. And once again everything will become one again. And then you know what will happen? It will all begin again.....

This is somewhat different to many others ideas of what the meaning of life is. I do not believe one should chase 'enlightenment' at the expense of living ones current life to the full. I believe enlightenment is an inevitable process and there is need to rush it - unless of course you feel in your heart this is where you want to be. Some may feel there heart pulls toward being a mechanic, or a teacher, or a Gold Level Contributor on ATS, or to understand and actively pursue enlightenment. All are equally valid and just as important as each other. I also do not believe love is the meaning of life, it is simply the attraction felt by all the different parts of the whole and is what will eventually lead us back home again.

Though we are, imho, all one, we are meant to live as separate beings to experience what it is to be a separate beings. The ups and the downs, the (perceived) good and bad. The meaning of life is life itself. To live it, experience it and embrace it fully.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:08 AM
link   
The human soul represents every truth. No soul is evil.

2nd its one thing to know who you are its another to experience it.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiff
I'm not expecting to have answers to these because obviously no one can. Just interested in your opinions.
These questions are to be looked at in the context of all being part of the source (god, if you wan't) and including principles of karma - reincarnation. Why? Because that is what I think is what is. But few things puzzle me. Actually infinite things puzzle me, but here's couple:


- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?

Does this mean it is not omnipotent?
Does this mean it is fallible?

What do you think?


1. Every soul has an inner light that is divine, but the soul chooses to be fascinated with outside material more so than its inner light, which gets it into trouble, because material objects can not provide lasting happiness, because true happiness is a state of mind not a material possession.

2. Who ever said God does not know itself? Even an animal or insect knows itself, so it is presumptuous to assume that the Nature principle does not contain self-knowledge if even a dog knows itself. However, to use the Platonic phrase "To know thyself" then that is something an animal can not comprehend, and not even all humans can comprehend this, but when they do come to know thyself completely, they know God. God just is, so there is no knowing necessary. Knowing indicates subject and object. God is simply subjective awareness in the purest sense.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   
- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?

None are barbaric. It is all familiar and good to Source. Yup, all souls are always at the same level.

- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?

Source is expressing itself and expanding, not exactly learning about itself.


edit on 1/9/11 by masqua because: fixed bb code



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiff
I'm not expecting to have answers to these because obviously no one can. Just interested in your opinions.
These questions are to be looked at in the context of all being part of the source (god, if you wan't) and including principles of karma - reincarnation. Why? Because that is what I think is what is. But few things puzzle me. Actually infinite things puzzle me, but here's couple:


- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?

Does this mean it is not omnipotent?
Does this mean it is fallible?

What do you think?


No No ! What do you think first ? It's your thread and what you think should be there.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   


If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


The universe is an image of light. Genesis 1:27 27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

Birth, death and renewal happens at all levels. Life progresses to its highest point to learn by experience. Confucius said, "I hear and I forget. I see and I learn. I do and I understand." This process is a bestowal of love from God. We are incapable of producing our life apart from the two things that we actually do: think and move. All the rest is produced by God for our benefit and as a demonstration of His goodness to us. We are expected to bestow this love back as a reflection in the image.

Barbaric men represent a falling away form this original intention. They will suffer judgment, which is the reaction to the action. We reap what we sow. "You must be born again" is not an option. We can only be where we go in life. We think and we move. All life travels this path in the wilderness by the leading of the Good Shepherd. We can let Him lead or we can lead ourselves. Either way, we walk with God. If we choose to lead ourselves, we walk in toil. If we allow Him to lead, peace follows.



- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?


God is infinity at rest. We are a soul that contains the spirit of God. The body is a vehicle. As I said earlier, we do not produce this part of the process. We only think and move. Mankind collapses the indeterminate wave of possibility by making a choice. The choices are contained within infinity at rest. This is all structured by the laws of God. Our free will cannot make a choice that is not already answered by the universal laws of action and reaction. It is a self-correcting system with destiny set into the motion. We ride the wave of 'now' as we make choices behind us. The ancient Hebrews saw the past as in front because it was seen. The future was behind because it was unseen. This is not a temporal way of looking at the world since the entire fourth dimension is set by destiny. We look back to know how to make choices in the future.

God draws the future into the past for us to see as it passes us by. Prophecy allows us to experience foreknowledge. God already sees the entire fourth dimension in totality. We only see a slice. As we progress along the wave, we learn the story God tells. We think and we move. We do not walk. We are walked. LINK



edit on 1-9-2011 by SuperiorEd because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   
These are all most fascinating! Thanks.

What do I think? For the first question, I think all can't be blamed only for the vehicle - the body. I think it's the soul that needs to mature too and maybe we are placed in a vehicle that represents best the souls maturity. ...something like that.

For the second. I honestly have absolutely no idea and no opinion except that everything is possible and not, untill I know for certain.
edit on 1-9-2011 by Spiff because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Fair enough.


Originally posted by Spiff
I'm not expecting to have answers to these because obviously no one can. Just interested in your opinions.
These questions are to be looked at in the context of all being part of the source (god, if you wan't) and including principles of karma - reincarnation. Why? Because that is what I think is what is. But few things puzzle me. Actually infinite things puzzle me, but here's couple:


- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


No, there are obviously levels of existence. Mankinds sentient existence is above every creature on earth, the highest on earth. With that whole universe out there, does it make sense that mankinds existence, is the highest possible ?
I don't see how that could make sense. So whatever existence is above ours is God. Gods existence is the greatest existence. In fact there should be an existence that even owns existence it self. If I create something is it not mine to do as I wish. I automatically own that which I create.



- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?


Yes he is omnipotent but God is also a Creator. Shot caller what have you.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Spiff
 


Good questions. Here are some related questions for anyone who feels like taking them on. (I'm not trying to take away from the strength of the OP's questions, but just to further amplify the nature of them. They're important questions)


In the larger presentation of a timeless god, we have a spectacularly brilliant, conscious being that has simply always existed. In fact, time doesn’t even exist in the realm of this being. He experiences a forever now, with all that was, all that is, and all that ever will be, in physical existence as a permanent now. Not only does He experience this now, He experiences it as an all-knowing, and all-experiencing hyper-awareness that is expressed as dynamic and unique personage. This suggests that what began for humanity, what is for humanity and what will be for humanity, always is for God. This, logically speaking, suggests two completely incompatible existential being states that can never become reconciled. Or so it would seem.

In fact, there is one issue that presents itself immediately when conceiving of this relationship between that which is, and that which becomes as time progresses. In His physical involvement with humanity, which now (as in a human time-centric now, since humanity is an ongoing result of tightly bound causal progression and interaction) would this god deal with? If this god selected a now for physical interaction, how would He separate that specific slice of now out from the entire equal and logically inseparable now that would always be present in this timeless god’s perception of the human’s on-going trajectory and then resulting (for Him anyway) continuum?

How would this god even perceive (let alone, respond to) this trajectory/continuum structure if causation is impossible in His realm? Or is it a case where this god can become causal-centric (as a fully expressed and foundational basis of what He is) at will, but if so, how does He establish His own individual historical context (back-dating Himself, as it were) in order to form His own unique projected trajectory, before fitting His own inimitable contextual identity into the contextual whole of each previously established continuum within the contextual environment? (as is the case with all else that’s collected within that environment – having established that environment as an environment to begin with)

Or is it a case of God being able to do whatever the hell He wants to, and just doing it in spite of all that’s come into being within this tightly woven causal environment that contains us and everything we know to exist? But then, if that’s the case, then why do religions each have their god focused on critical mission-centric dramas designed to engage humans in activities that are meant to satisfy a very specific need that only humanity can fulfill for the god of said religion? Or am I in danger of losing my eternal existence by even bothering to puzzle any of this out?

excerpt from Taking Down the Curtain


This is tough stuff to nail down, and I thank the OP for launching this discussion.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   
From SuperiorEd;
"The universe is an image of light. Genesis 1:27 27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.."

Now,taking this statement from Christian scripture,how is it that God(male half of divinity)is embraced fully and Goddess(female half ofdivinity)is denied? It says right there that god made mankind in-his-own image..male AND female he created them..

Why Christians etc. don't get what is being said there is beyond me. When the book was written,by men,the fact that god is always referred to as he/him etc. seems to be all anyone is fully influenced by in this regard.

'God,the divine creative force' concept is rather a conundrum,as there must be male/female polarity in order to create life. This is in evidence throughout nature. Life cannot be without this polarity. I have seen the reasons people have stated;that the female half was humanized(Mary)in order to subjugate women,who once experienced high standing in society and so on. Thoughts?

Really great topic OP..it gives us alot to think on,and in my case,one thought leads to many others before coming full circle back to the original question. I'll give it more thought and then see what I might offer you from my understanding/perception on the subject. As always,I am here to learn.

S/F~



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by Spiff
 


Good questions. Here are some related questions for anyone who feels like taking them on. (I'm not trying to take away from the strength of the OP's questions, but just to further amplify the nature of them. They're important questions)


In the larger presentation of a timeless god, we have a spectacularly brilliant, conscious being that has simply always existed. In fact, time doesn’t even exist in the realm of this being. He experiences a forever now, with all that was, all that is, and all that ever will be, in physical existence as a permanent now. Not only does He experience this now, He experiences it as an all-knowing, and all-experiencing hyper-awareness that is expressed as dynamic and unique personage. This suggests that what began for humanity, what is for humanity and what will be for humanity, always is for God. This, logically speaking, suggests two completely incompatible existential being states that can never become reconciled. Or so it would seem…………..


excerpt from Taking Down the Curtain


This is tough stuff to nail down, and I thank the OP for launching this discussion.


NorEaster I've read and re-read this passage a few times but the writing style and words used were slightly above my comprehension level. I think I got the general gist of it but you will have to forgive me if I've missed a few key points......

The passage itself seems to assume a god that not only is conscious but exists, at least to a certain degree, as separate from his creation. This to me seems counter to the very point of creation, and I guess you have to ask yourself why would god create all of creation if his consciousness already knows what will happen? For a being that is beyond time, then the end will have already have happened the moment you think about starting.

To me at least it makes much more sense that this god is itself 'lost' in its own creation, and is only conscious of the true nature of its higher self in rare fleeting moments.

For if time (and I believe space) are an illusion, they are what spread out the ‘source/god/energy across a linear* space time continuum in order for it two exist and experience itself as separate entities .

(*I am yet to be convinced that anything is truly random or that freewill exists; and believe that every situation can and will only ever have one outcome. Multiple realities do not make sense to me)

It is my belief that we are simply an awareness attached to a physical form within our own reality. We are all God, but the illusory dividers (time/space) give us what we believe to be freewill (ego), which has resulted in an awareness separate from the whole which merely inhabits and moves through a specific location in the time/space continuum.



posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Do not confuse soul and spirit....Your spirit is the source...you are the God, the Omnipotent! The soul is the mechanism that binds the physical to the etheric spirit. The soul is the very thing that makes you forget about your all encompassing spirit or oneness. It is truly the go between entity or tool between the physical and the spirit.

Apparently this go-between is needed...otherwise the true, pure light of the spirit would be overwhelming...overpowering and incomprehensible...

So basically, I believe the soul is an entrainment mechanism used to dumb us down....bottom line.

I'll admit, I've only read this...but it kind of makes sense to me.



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 12:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiff
I'm not expecting to have answers to these because obviously no one can. Just interested in your opinions.
These questions are to be looked at in the context of all being part of the source (god, if you wan't) and including principles of karma - reincarnation. Why? Because that is what I think is what is. But few things puzzle me. Actually infinite things puzzle me, but here's couple:


- If all is from the source it must include all lifeforms. Us, some ascended etc. and we humans are considered barbaric by more ascended beings (if you believe in that stuff). Is it the souls that inhabit human bodies barbaric or is it only the body of a human that makes us act barbaric? Are all souls in the same level always?


- If the source/spirit/god is all there is and is omnipotent and it created existence and karmic cycle to experience itself with self aware particles (souls) of itself, doesn't this contradict the idea of omnipotency? If you are all there can be, how can you not know yourself? Or how can you not know something so that you have to go through all this hassle to experience it?

Does this mean it is not omnipotent?
Does this mean it is fallible?

What do you think?


The answer to your first question relates to the way we view the development of babies to children to adult. it's not a case of being barbaric, but, less informed.

The answer to the second question is probably much more intricate to describe and/or comprehend.
Omnipotence exists despite the apparent splintering...think in terms more of an original fire, from which you can light many candles...same flame, but not the fire!

Source is not fallible.
It can appear that way from where we experience it...hence all the 'hand-wrung' questions over little babies dying and so forth.

Akushla



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 07:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1littlewolf

Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by Spiff
 


Good questions. Here are some related questions for anyone who feels like taking them on. (I'm not trying to take away from the strength of the OP's questions, but just to further amplify the nature of them. They're important questions)


In the larger presentation of a timeless god, we have a spectacularly brilliant, conscious being that has simply always existed. In fact, time doesn’t even exist in the realm of this being. He experiences a forever now, with all that was, all that is, and all that ever will be, in physical existence as a permanent now. Not only does He experience this now, He experiences it as an all-knowing, and all-experiencing hyper-awareness that is expressed as dynamic and unique personage. This suggests that what began for humanity, what is for humanity and what will be for humanity, always is for God. This, logically speaking, suggests two completely incompatible existential being states that can never become reconciled. Or so it would seem…………..


excerpt from Taking Down the Curtain


This is tough stuff to nail down, and I thank the OP for launching this discussion.


NorEaster I've read and re-read this passage a few times but the writing style and words used were slightly above my comprehension level. I think I got the general gist of it but you will have to forgive me if I've missed a few key points......

The passage itself seems to assume a god that not only is conscious but exists, at least to a certain degree, as separate from his creation. This to me seems counter to the very point of creation, and I guess you have to ask yourself why would god create all of creation if his consciousness already knows what will happen? For a being that is beyond time, then the end will have already have happened the moment you think about starting.


I'm examining the traditional Western view of what God is. I'm not embracing it.


To me at least it makes much more sense that this god is itself 'lost' in its own creation, and is only conscious of the true nature of its higher self in rare fleeting moments.

For if time (and I believe space) are an illusion, they are what spread out the ‘source/god/energy across a linear* space time continuum in order for it two exist and experience itself as separate entities .

(*I am yet to be convinced that anything is truly random or that freewill exists; and believe that every situation can and will only ever have one outcome. Multiple realities do not make sense to me)

It is my belief that we are simply an awareness attached to a physical form within our own reality. We are all God, but the illusory dividers (time/space) give us what we believe to be freewill (ego), which has resulted in an awareness separate from the whole which merely inhabits and moves through a specific location in the time/space continuum.


I deal with your version of what God is in another passage in the book. Everyone gets their own moment of attention. That was the Christians' moment of attention.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join