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.

 

We are made in the image of The Creator - The Creator is NOT The Destroyer (A New Philosophy Creativ

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   
god is the creator, maintainer, and the destroyer/transformer.




posted on Jul, 4 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
you need to crack an egg to make an omelette....

you need to burn energy to obtain more energy....

life needs death to live,,,,



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme

Second, you don't 'need' to destroy something, in order to create something else.

If you disagree, tell me why that is.



Because your arguement, although well voiced (as said before), is naive.

"You can't make an omelett, without breaking some eggs".

Life itself, is more about destruction than it is about creation. To live, you need to eat ... to eat, you need to destroy. To build a house, you need carve stones ... destroy a mountain. Carve out turf, destroy the grass field. Your naivité, is that you only look at the outcome and ignore the broken eggs, cut down wheat fields, milk starved calves, jailed and enslaved animals ... that were all part of creating your little omelett.

You and I have many similarities with the Cow. The cow lives in a house, and she does not have to plow the fields for herself ... it is brought to her. She doesn't even have to move, she can sit there and eat and think ... I bet in the Cows minds, she's very creative. She probably is enslaving man-kind, in her mind ... just as the cat, is probably our master ... in his. But the analogy still applies, that the domesticaed animal doesn't have to fend for itself ... it's much safer for the Cow, than to live in the wild and possibly be eaten by predators. But, what a smart predator it is ... that fooled the cow, to imagine she's living in safety ... while the predator eats all her offspring, and only keeps a selective few calves that breed the best meat.

The philosophic question, that always sits in our minds ... is, are we not God's cows? And if we are, Gods cows ... what does that make the religious? Does it make them "The domesticated cows", or ... "The judas goats". ... And ... if I AM God's Cow ... does that mean I have to like "the prick" ? If I do, will he give me a better job ... as a "slave herder of my fellow man" perhaps? A similar job, to the "milk bringing cow", instead of the "meat bearing cow"?

The true philosophic question is, isn't it prudent to think that what is below us in the hierachy of existance ... also is above us?

But the out-of-order suggestion in your thinking of creator vs. destroyer is, that which existance is better?

* A blooming flower, that gets eaten by a goat?
* Free as a fly, that gets cought in a spiders web?
* Free as a fish, that always gets eaten by a bigger fish.
* Free to quack as a duck, and get buck shots in the butt.
* Inocent as grass, that gets burned in the summer and freezes to death in the winter, and eaten by cows in between.
* Or inocent as an electron, where an excitement will kick you out of balance and disrubt the equilibrium of your host.


edit on 5/7/2012 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by mr10k
Only one type of energy exists. How something manipulates this energy determines if it is destructive or creative. Also, you must destroy something to create something new. The way you are describing things make it hard to comment because you are not making a lot of sense


I don't think so. This energy is destructive. It's a giant. A collective consciousness. If by "manipulating energy" you mean "humans", "the environment", and sometimes even "animals", and also putting negative thoughts and inspiring people to destruction, then yes, it is manipulating "energy". It has its own intent which is destruction, which is why I called it The Destroyer. There is not "one" type of energy, there are many different types of energy out there, all deviating from the Creative which was the starting energy which created the beginning (of existence as we know it today).

You do not need to destroy something to create something else. Just because there are some examples of people abusing materials and eating animals, that does not make it a 'need'.

Connecting with The Energy of The Creator means having the intent to CREATE rather than destroy. It is feeling Creative instead of Destructive.

By the way, there are examples of creating something without destroying something else, such as drinking water that is not "destroying", and smiling which is also not "destroying". But, depending on how far away you are from The Spirit, you may try to even debunk that in order to justify your perspective.

By the way, bjarneorn, you are not a "cow" of The Creator. You are created as free, which is why, even though the natural order is to create, there is this destructive energy. Eventually, ALL will understand (not be forced, but actually have the knowledge of) their Creative Soul.
edit on 5-7-2012 by arpgme because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Essentially star wars had it right with there "midichlorians" theme and there light side and dark side, its all about balance and perspective. And when we manage to build pico scopes i bet we spot something simalar in our own universe. But something from nothing.......Maybe if black/white holes somehow interact/function at the quantum level, dont see it myself though, there is allways a price.
edit on 5-7-2012 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:02 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


You chat rim mate. When you drink water, your body breaks down the water molecules (which is a destructive, or rather, deconstructive act) and uses them to your advantage, regardless of the millions of microbes that are killed unintentionally in the process.

edit on 5-7-2012 by ashleygwsmart because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   
reply to post by ashleygwsmart
 


Why are you feeling a negative emotion? Is it because I disagree, and you can't force me to see things your way? I can't "force" people to see my way either, but if people think it is nonsense or have more questions, I'll calmly explain.

I am called close-minded for explaining my perspective. It's not like I just ignore logic and hold my ears and whistle, I actually explain from my perspective and yet they still claim that it makes no sense, and they claim that I am close-minded, meanwhile I am being creative and they are choosing from the box of mainstream philosophy - the current "fads" so to speak.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


Truth is objective...but the reality you are living in is a subjective experience! That is why creation and destruction are one and the same a lot of the time, and morality is a subjective perception. Go back and read my previous posts and think again about what I and others have said. I am sorry if I haven't explained it well enough. Please come back with any questions or responses you wish to ask.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


"Why are you feeling a negative emotion? Is it because I disagree, and you can't force me to see things your way? I can't "force" people to see my way either, but if people think it is nonsense or have more questions, I'll calmly explain. "

you cant disagree with truth....... you can,,,,,, but by definition you would be false,,,

arguments like this arent about subjectivity and beliefs,.,.,.,. of course everyone is trying to force you to see things there way because thats all an argument is,,,,, a means of understanding,,, you are ignoring their evidence, and logic,,, by refusing to "see there way" , you are not able to understand the way they see..... you both are attempting to see things the way they really are,,, hence i said this is not about beliefs,, rather how the truth of the matter is,,,,,,,,, they are giving you all of these examples going against your premise , that are good examples and relevant to this topic and reality,,,



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


I could not of laid it out any better arpgme

NAMASTE
LOVE LIGHT ETERNIA*******



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by arpgme
 


you cant disagree with truth....... you can,,,,,, but by definition you would be false,,,


I'm not convinced that being against The Creator's Creative Energy is "truth". This is deviation from truth.



Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by arpgme
 


arguments like this arent about subjectivity and beliefs,.,.,.,. of course everyone is trying to force you to see things there way because thats all an argument is,,,,, a means of understanding,,, you are ignoring their evidence, and logic,,, by refusing to "see there way" , you are not able to understand the way they see..... you both are attempting to see things the way they really are,,, hence i said this is not about beliefs,, rather how the truth of the matter is,,,,,,,,, they are giving you all of these examples going against your premise , that are good examples and relevant to this topic and reality,,,


An argument is not about "forcing" your view on someone, it is simply about using reasoning to get people to see your point. There is no reason to feel anger and putting a red steamy face. A person can do it if they want to, but I am just saying it's no point to be so angry about such a thing if we are using reasoning instead of just emotional basis. Those are not examples going against the premise, these are misunderstandings which I've already addressed. Seems like people are trying to ignore my point of view.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


No you keep ignoring my replies, which is why I am frustrated. You keep using all these wishy-washy terms, pretending you have some mystical answer to the workings of the universe, that none of us are understanding, when your premises are so fallible. You also have failed to incorporate anything we have said into your argument. Once again, being 'creative' is not always good. If you create something which infringes on my happiness, I will disagree with it and be forced to take a destructive action, in order to prevent this happening. That is why morality is subjective. Creative (good) for you may be destructive (bad) for myself. See?

I refute the stance that your argument holds objective moral truth. That is all.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by mileysubet
 


thats absurd, are you joking? trolling? things can be created with out desruction



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by DocHolidaze
 


No they cannot.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
is this all because there is a finite of energy? matter has to be borrowed from somewhere,,,,,,

energy cannot be created or destroyed on change forms.,,.,.,.,.,.

so whenever we make something new we were destroying the previous form that matter was created in?

and your philosophy is not new,..,,. its basically the idea of god and the devil,,, ying yang,,, positive negative ,.,.,,.,

I think the destroyer of all things might be time? because time is needed for original creation,,, and the creation of new things,,,,,, yet its only a matter of time before those things are destroyed or changed via time( entropy) ,..,.,,.
edit on 5-7-2012 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


Thankyou! You explained it a little more concisely than I did. Your point about time is interesting. If we didn't perceive time, we would never perceive change, therefore there could be no creation nor destruction.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ashleygwsmart
 


how does the creation of a thought destroy anything?



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ashleygwsmart
 


yup,,, im a bit right and a bit wrong,,,, time has a big role,,,, but also,,,, material/energy/ force itself can cause destruction,..,,.,.,. water causing erosion,,.,.,. lightning striking a tree,,,,,, a lion killing a gazelle ,,,,, a nation bombing another nation,,,,,,,, having sex ( destroying calories,,, creating life..... destroying 9 months of a womens life)

i guess my line of thought was,,,.,.,,. once the possibility for things to exist in a stable manner,,,,,,, all the destructive processes occur in and because of time,,,,, the given nessatation of energy needing to do something,.,,.,, the lion needs to eat something,,.,.,.,. the water needs to travel a path.,,.., the lightning needed to strike the tree at that moment.,,..,,. all for a number of reasons,,,, cause and effect,,, internal and external events,.,.



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by DocHolidaze
 


only took you 3 hours to think of one.,..,,..,,.,.,

thought requires the transfer of energy,,,,,,, for a human to live for more then hours after birth,,, things need to be destroyed to be burned as energy for this human,,,,,, this process does not stop until this human is destroyed and nature gets its revenge.,..,



posted on Jul, 5 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by mileysubet

Originally posted by arpgme

Originally posted by mileysubet
To create something means that you have to change/destroy something.

Your argument although well voiced is invalid.


First off, 'change' and 'destroy' are not the same thing.

Second, you don't 'need' to destroy something, in order to create something else.

If you disagree, tell me why that is.



Seems like a simple concept to me. If you use anything to create something else then you have changed what it was thereby effectively destroying what it was.

Although you are creating something "new" you have changed or destroyed the old.

Life if is a cycle, always creating, always destroying, unless you are a god creating from "nothing".


i added a bedroom and a bathroom onto my house... i changed my house, but did not destroy it.
i lost 40 pounds 0f body weight on a diet...i changed my body, but i did not destroy it
do you need more?
edit on 5-7-2012 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join