The Truth Concerning What Humans Worship As God

Originally posted by NewAgeMan

Originally posted by MamaJ

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
"I was with you (first father) from before the very foundation of the world!"
~ JC

So are you saying Jesus is saying he is God?

No, I interpret this as Jesus saying that God is love, and that love to be love involves a relationship between two or more, as that between a beloved and beloved other, and that this love, as his true essence and character, or his real and authentic self, is timeless and spaceless (eternal). In this area the Hindu Mystics, who studied the depths of the human being for 1000's of years, would agree. They call it "Bhakti" which is the love of dovoted selfless service. There is no Atma without Brahma and vice versa.
"It always takes two to tango."
And it always takes a conscious being, to join the circle.
"To be is to be percieved."

edit on 26-10-2011 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

I'm having trouble understanding how two people can talk so much about Jesus, but don't read the Bible?

God, Jesus, Holy Spirit = One (Holy Trinity)

Isaiah 48:16

"16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me."

Originally posted by NorEaster

A full-on thread hijacking.

That's okay, none of you were offering anything worth a damn in response anyway.

Hopefully someone benefited from the opening post. If not, then that's okay too. I did what was required here, and that's all that really matters. No sense in spoiling the fun with any more responses.

Maybe you folks can make this a double-slit experiment debate thread?

Sorry, NorEaster! You can't separate the two no matter how hard you try, because you can't have one without the other. You'll never be able to explain it away just for that reason.

reply to post by NorEaster


Wow, glad I found this thread before it exploded.

NorEaster, thanks for this thread. I am actually doing the work, at present, to engage with you over this and I was actually dying for a thread wherein I might test my chops.

Nice work. I will cut to the chase. Didn't Plotinus already handle where you are going with your premise when he wrote this?

thriceholy.net...

Your floor plan seems to eschew a continuous emanation from The One, and seems to suggest you would like to segregate the floors.

I smell the whiff of a microcosmic demiurgos in your description of how The Intellect sees its reflection and finds itself to be God.



This miraculous ability of the PHC to utilize its subjective creativity is exemplified in all of your posts. So you got that goin' for ya.

Dude, don't go. I have been dying to have fun with this stuff with someone that is into it too. You're stuff rocks. I see it as post-post-modern cyber-punk neo-platonism at the moment. Change my mind if necessary.

reply to post by NorEaster


After reading all that thread I still don't have a clue what you are talking about.Can you just put it in a sentence or two or even three? Jesus. It ain't that hard is it?

reply to post by Deetermined

I'm having trouble understanding how two people can talk so much about Jesus, but don't read the Bible? God, Jesus, Holy Spirit = One (Holy Trinity) Isaiah 48:16

I have read the Bible,(s) yes, there are plenty of them, and most are different. I have several questions here, Deetermined. Would these three MALEs be the ones who created Woman? I do not know of any man who understands women at all. Can you explain to me how three males can do this? And, for your information, we all have the Holy Spirit, we call it our Soul. And how could "Jesus" be a part of this, the letter "J" is only 500 years old, and there are no vowels in Hebrew? And one more question, if God is the Father, what happened to the Mother? It is a scientific fact that a Woman can become pregnant and give birth to a child without a man. But a man cannot do this. Ad if we are all created in their image:
It won’t come as a surprise to anyone who has read the Bible that it contains two creation stories. Most Christians overlook this, but if the Bible is to be taken literally, this has to be considered. In the book of Genesis God is said to say, "let us make them in our own image." Who was God talking to here? If woman is made in an image of the Divine, then there has to be a Goddess, isn't that right? God had a wife, Asherah, whom the Book of Kings suggests was worshiped alongside God in his temple in Israel, according to an Oxford scholar.
Mention the Goddess to most Christians, she becomes a whore. Why is this?
I submit that Divinity is composed of both male and female. Otherwise woman, as a gender, could not, and would not exist.

To All:

I hate to say it guys but it is all in there. If you aren't used to reading this type of stuff then you are going to find it challenging.

Read a little then walk away. If you grasp something and then continue reading you are going to get confused. Read it thrice. read it slowly.

Don't get on NorEaster just because you are not a disciplined reader. It is an acquired thing. Try again.

Thanks.

Very interesting read indeed! I have thought along the same lines, though it might take me some time to digest the whole (no pun). From what I read I gather that it is similar to a matrix like program but not one done by a computer or other advanced 3 dimensional technology or anything like it; moreso a mental projection of a dream like muddled experience which is participation in the actual while at the same time separate in a greater reality not yet known to the individuals (PHC) which are actually the whole fragmented (sorry for run on). The dream and or simulation in turn becomes the "objective' reality (assumed by the individual but relative in scope) as opposed to the somewhat subjective mystery that glues the fabric of experience together.

That's my interpretation on what you were trying to get across (again I have to read it a few times more). There will always be the question of whether there exists some greater "whole" that manifests itself or by creations - through the lives of intelligent consciousness and whether "It" is personal or impersonal. I might be both - we can never know really at least not in this corporal body we associate ourselves with and while on this physicality that is our envirnoment (3D). Similar to the experiment and the observer in that you cannot separate them to form a truly "objective" conclusion. All and all I know that our somewhat simplistic view of God is based more on natural (what is natural?) phenonmenon, the unexplainable, and past archtypes (loving God, Vengeful God etc..), but I believe that just as you cannot explain calculus to a 3 year old, we in our somewhat limited mental capability and are not currently able or ready to understand to true meaning of life and all it's msyteries contained therein.

I think that you would be interested in read a book called Crack in the Cosmic Egg which touches on the OP subject matter and asks similar questions to the one being discussed here. Again I am sure you do not agree with everything I mentioned here and vice versa but it's good to try and get deeper into something that we all experience and all question.

How about: God is really a cloud server and we are just computers accessing its information. Meanwhile, God the Server's agent Google logs our every thought, experience and movement and stores it for later regurgitation into the world wide web consciousness.

Originally posted by LeftySinister
How about: God is really a cloud server and we are just computers accessing its information. Meanwhile, God the Server's agent Google logs our every thought, experience and movement and stores it for later regurgitation into the world wide web consciousness.

Beautiful, I love the analogy .

Yep who needs complex philisophical terms and rantings when you can simplify it into one sentence, and make it work. I like it so much it's my new sig - Kudos dude

reply to post by LeftySinister

Are you saying that consciousness is not housed exclusively in the scull or under the skin and that the human being is something other than an evolved animal and meaning making machine ie: a thing, and that there's more going on than meets the eye of first impressioned, superficial, subjective only, experience?

How dare you!

Originally posted by NorEaster

reply to post by NorEaster

 

The mechanics of progressive development are simple, even if the actual structure that arises from those mechanics ends up being amazingly complex. Simple default response to the suite of survival imperative expressions. Nothing that physicists don't already know about. Only thing they've missed so far is the true nature of the sub-structural units involved. Subject of a different thread, and I've definitely addressed this before. A post search will show you what I believe concerning that issue.

hm, what i wanted to express by talking of the near infinite complexities of reality is to really take it all in with wonder and amazement,, you can say yea physicists know all about this and that, but im more impressed with
the smoothness and the style of all that exists,things do not have to be, things may not be, but what we know on earth to be, in the style that it is, is beyond remarkable. I had no hand in the creation of the universe so I stand in awe at its awesomeness , i cant imagine anything more intriguing, the gift of imagining is given to us by this process we find ourselves placed in , the mystery in every speck, the macro and micro size scale is unfathomable in itself, and to think all energy in all its forms in all its sizes and scale is in swirl right now, has been and will, is. Im impressed by viewing flames of fire dance,how smooth and refreshing water tastes and feels, we were made for and from it, the "natural" way and design of things is so beautiful, the aesthetics of a women, the aesthetics of all things, how tree bark mimics skin cells on a larger scale, how humans or monkeys maybe nothing more then head lice in the tree hair of mother earth, I am honored to witness this existence and be apart of all, have the oppurtunity to spend a lifes time in and outside of my mind, I do not think i am better or greater then a thing that can be, a way in the animal kingdom to attempt to prove betterness is to eliminate another from the plane,
but i believe the truth to be, not one thing better then another, a human not better then a cat or a rat, in any way,
how can they be, what does it mean to be better, or different, what does it matter,
perhaps the nature of a worm or slug is a paradise, when one is given that existence,
The real truth is that all truth is only speculation

below I think I can understand perhaps how there can be dynamics of for better and for worse, perhaps it is better to experience time through the perspective of highly evolved biological entities then single celled sludge,
perhaps there is "better" forms to come,

i think any full belief in a continuation of a personal soul identity is nothing more then a hope, if God is good he'd let you be apart of reality again,

We're all free to view reality as we wish. It doesn't change reality, but there's no law against believing what you wish to believe.

This is true and the average modern mind is proof,
all we know is taken from our experience. from our perspective, I wish and hope your belief in a continuing experience after this one to be true ... but what can it even be, this is where we can speculate?
i want to stress the fact that because all things we have thought from a human standpoint are relative,
we are trapped to our opinions and likings,upon death what then is beauty?; symmetry,rarity,mathematical closeness to perfection? , or what can relate to hunger?,what matters desiree for anything earthly and physical, what is important, what can possibly matter what can one want to do? why would anything want to do anything? what would it mean to do something? think of the process of life, all its moments of experience, we are given a semi strict time frame for being, all our experience must be crammed into, the goal to sling your seed into the future states of your host plane, but the realness of it all, the passion, emotions, feelings of fear or strength, why would you possibly want to put yourself through this or what may want to put you through this and why?

or do you think mobile consciousness carrying creators are the fruit of massive and micro physical displays of furious force and power, That we are in our own area on our own cutting edge of original experience?, and it is our task, destiny and priviledge to decide for ourselves and our domain what is important and what matters, compared and contrasted to divine perfection and supremecy,
that the greatest thing a bundle of energy can hope for is to be swept into the position of being a biological entity in and on a somewhere, I think all the clues are within our reach, but i think we must make our own answers, and we can only learn from our surroundings and ourselves,
the patterns within it all,
I think all things follow a similar pattern or routine, like the way our society willfully evoloves technologically, medicinally, scientifclly( the things that are good true and safe; nothing that is harmful, currupt,evil) is similar to the way different and distinct energies willed its way into forms, structures, ideas, systems, realities.


being human one can semi understand why one would want to do anything, why one should strive to be "godly"
to be, create and delite,
perhaps its to be the energy, the will,the concentration, the determination, behind being impressive, to make others wonder and question how what was done is done, the magician, the athlete, the artist, the musician, the writer,
the surviving animal or plant and their characteristics, traits, ability and nature,

reply to post by NorEaster


Finally someone else that understands, it been so long waiting here. Welcome to the real you OP... ::does the happy foot dance::

reply to post by NorEaster

You should look into John Allegro and what he says about this subject. He was one of the original translators to work on the Dead Sea Scrolls and he claims that Christianity is based upon magic mushrooms, but he was silenced as a whacko - mainly by the christian/catholic church. His theories have gained some newfound respect however in recent years as it turns out his translations just may be correct. It's actually a great conspiracy itself, probably deserves it's own thread.

reply to post by NorEaster


I'm on a break, but to try to give you some quick feedback ...

I like how you are still using Amazon's "Look Inside This Book" (as you admitted to doing in your response to that Members forum thread from over a year ago)

I have the book and I read it. Perhaps you're thinking of someone else. Also I purchased it from CreateSpace back in late 2010 before you had it on Amazon. So it's not even possible me for to have done what you're suggesting, as there was no preview at that point. If you doubt I have the book just ask me to quote from a page that isn't on the Amazon's "Look Inside This Book" or ask me for the order confirmation #. Though I suppose I could also just take a picture:

Also, please explain how HTEC differs from TEC, and why HTEC inevitably emerged as a corporeal matrix? Oh, and why did I call HTEC a matrix, anyway?

You never define your usage of matrix. You don't appear to be using the mathematical meaning of matrix. So all I could garner from your usage of the word in situ, is that your idea of a matrix is some sort of interconnecting web or synthesis which is a fairly loose definition. Also you allude to a bio-feedback mechanism, but never state specifically how such a system was instantiated.

I dismissed it because you stopped me cold by making erroneous references to aspects of what I've published. That was enough.

Ok, so what parts specifically? If you're referring to my first post in this thread I wasn't talking about your book. Rather I was talking about the thread and how the OP comes across to a person reading it with no familiarity of the book.

Let me know by way of private message if you'd like to be involved in my expanding effort to prove or debunk this thing.

I'm not much in the debunking business these days. I think you have a potentially interesting concept. My time is somewhat limited. So, at best, all I could do is provide a high-level critique and the occassional more nitty complaint. If I only had the opportunity to make two recommendations. I'd first recommend reading a book on symbolic logic and then I'd suggest learning some basics about heuristics. Once you have an understanding of how basic AI works. Try to apply it to the domain of cognitive science. After you've done that you'll start to see how the book skips around and has a lot of holes that are superficially plugged with hand-wavy verbiage. Please don't interpret this as a knock. It's more than evident you were trying to elucidate your thinking in a genuine manner -- it just doesn't carry across.

edit to add: I find many of your writings to be interesting. So this is in no way me trying to rip you a new one. I'm trying to present an honest first assessment. I'm sure wording confusion can be overcome, but that would probably require a lot of collaboration between a large group of specialists. I can only speak to a more computational AGI perspective.

Originally posted by sostoned
reply to post by NorEaster

 

You should look into John Allegro and what he says about this subject. He was one of the original translators to work on the Dead Sea Scrolls and he claims that Christianity is based upon magic mushrooms, but he was silenced as a whacko - mainly by the christian/catholic church. His theories have gained some newfound respect however in recent years as it turns out his translations just may be correct. It's actually a great conspiracy itself, probably deserves it's own thread.

You've been reading, "The Transmigration of Timothy Archer", by Philip K. Dick, haven't you?

In death, ALL things will become Clear!

reply to post by NorEaster


So basically you have proof that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does exist, and that it has an ego. I always liked them pastafarian's, there religion at least sounds...... delicious.

reply to post by NorEaster


Your argument is purely subjective. You've revealed nothing but your interpretation of what you think God is or isn't. You have no proof of what you are saying. Lifetimes (emphasis on the plural) have been spent trying to understand the universe, God, Cosmic Consciousness, and so on by scientists, philosophers, and theologists.

"Therefore, the wondrous light that awaits the faithful, with love and acceptance, is not the One who may or may not have willed us into existence." Dude, this is so contradictory and your rant makes less and less sense as I read it.

"Here's a very brief overview of what the god of our fathers actually is." Stop the press!

There are a lot of ATS people who genuinely like to discuss topics like this. Your post just sounds like another rant for whatever reason, while sounding completely blah.

Blah! Why do people bump stuff like this?

Originally posted by kisharninmah
reply to post by NorEaster

 

Your argument is purely subjective. You've revealed nothing but your interpretation of what you think God is or isn't. You have no proof of what you are saying. Lifetimes (emphasis on the plural) have been spent trying to understand the universe, God, Cosmic Consciousness, and so on by scientists, philosophers, and theologists.

"Therefore, the wondrous light that awaits the faithful, with love and acceptance, is not the One who may or may not have willed us into existence." Dude, this is so contradictory and your rant makes less and less sense as I read it.

"Here's a very brief overview of what the god of our fathers actually is." Stop the press!

There are a lot of ATS people who genuinely like to discuss topics like this. Your post just sounds like another rant for whatever reason, while sounding completely blah.

Blah! Why do people bump stuff like this?

edit on 27-10-2011 by kisharninmah because: (no reason given)

For the same reason they would spend $1800 on shoes... To hit the catwalk or put on a fabulous show. NE is worthy of debate just as everyone else is. There's a handful of us not buying into it though.

I clearly define the contradiction at the top of page 2.