The complexity of being God

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Riffrafter
 


I have sent a U2U with a link. Thanks.




posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:15 AM
link   

Pachomius

DeadSnow
I'd believe the Sumerian tablets before I believed the Bible as truth!

Can anyone tell me what the word 'God' originally meant? Oh right then therefore only the brainwashed masses give this word meaning. Accept the fact that you like everyone else on this site, are a mere mortal that has nothing but control of the decisions you make, what comes next (after death) is a mystery but over here I can assure you that you're not in control.




This thread in effect is about whether the attributes ascribed to God by man can be reconciled at all.

But the author has not presented to readers what his concept of God is.

The poster of above, Deads, is asking about "what the word 'God' originally meant?"


I propose that we all posting here work together to concur on the concept of God prevailing today among Christians.

What do you folks posting here say?


Pachomius


Perhaps it might be best for you to start a new thread. My OP is really about the mechanics of the God manifestation not the source of the word "God". Thanks.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:49 AM
link   

crowdedskies
The bible tells us God created man in his image.

There is only that one image. What you are seeing is the whole screen (image) moving. You are the screen on which the image appears. You are not actually appearing on the screen - you are the screen.
Imagine for a moment a tv screen before the tv is switched on - the screen is still and empty. Now if the tv is switched on the image appears and there is movement, it appears as if there are things moving in the image - but the image is just one image appearing on the screen.
When the tv is switched on the screen seems to disappear but the moving image cannot actually appear without the screen (which is always present and still) - the screen gets overlooked when the appearing things are moving on it.

The screen is seeing the moving image that appears on it - this is God - the screen is the father and the moving image on it is the son - the screen and image is one, they cannot be separated.

There is nothing else, there is nothing separate to that screen.


You know it is just a movie.

edit on 9-11-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Itisnowagain

There is only that one image. What you are seeing is the whole screen (image) moving. You are the screen on which the image appears. You are not actually appearing on the screen - you are the screen.
Imagine for a moment a tv screen before the tv is switched on - the screen is still and empty. Now if the tv is switched on the image appears and there is movement, it appears as if there are things moving in the image - but the image is just one image appearing on the screen.
When the tv is switched on the screen seems to disappear but the moving image cannot actually appear without the screen (which is always present and still) - the screen gets overlooked when the appearing things are moving on it.

The screen is seeing the moving image that appears on it - this is God - the screen is the father and the moving image on it is the son - the screen and image is one, they cannot be separated.

There is nothing else, there is nothing separate to that screen.


You know it is just a movie.

edit on 9-11-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)


Good analogy - like a million TVs switched on to a single available channel. An individual soul is like a TV . When switched on (incarnation) , it diffuses the image.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:00 AM
link   

crowdedskies
Good analogy - like a million TVs switched on to a single available channel. An individual soul is like a TV . When switched on (incarnation) , it diffuses the image.



God is the screen on which the movie is appearing - the play of light is known to be happening.
You are God seeing the play of light.
There is only you - the rest is just a movie happening - you have no control over what appears on the screen - you just get to watch.

The movie has everything in it.

Has Mooji appeared in the movie yet?
edit on 9-11-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:06 AM
link   

crowdedskies
An individual soul is like a TV . When switched on (incarnation) , it diffuses the image.


You can only know the image appearing on you.

It is like you are deep in the ocean looking up and seeing the waves moving - you are not being thrown about by the waves - you just see the waves dancing.

If you were up there on the surface you would be thrown about by the moving waves.

Being caught up in the waving one seeks the stillness of the depths of the ocean.


The source of all the waves (apparent individuals) is the ocean (one).

edit on 9-11-2013 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   

crowdedskies
The bible tells us God created man in his image. Esoteric science tell us the same thing but using different jargon.

Ummm... NO.

Science tells us that man created God in his (man's) image.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Pachomius
 


The word "God" has a number of etymological roots. Some experts say that it is based on the Sanskrit word hu, which means "to invoke, call upon, implore". Which is interesting in that it doesn't exalt or differentiate God. In fact, it implies that God, whomever or whatever you may call by such a name, is actually very closely related with any other being whom you would address in such an emotional or purposeful fashion.

In other words, by its roots, "God" is more a reflection of how it is regarded than what it actually is. We define "God", and in doing so, define ourselves, if that makes sense to the participants. The complexity of God is our complexity. There's a very powerful reason I venerate the circle, and this is one facet of that reason.
edit on 9-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I like that theory! Very interesting.

Thanks for the post



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
reply to post by Pachomius
 


The word "God" has a number of etymological roots. Some experts say that it is based on the Sanskrit word hu, which means "to invoke, call upon, implore". Which is interesting in that it doesn't exalt or differentiate God. In fact, it implies that God, whomever or whatever you may call by such a name, is actually very closely related with any other being whom you would address in such an emotional or purposeful fashion.

In other words, by its roots, "God" is more a reflection of how it is regarded than what it actually is. We define "God", and in doing so, define ourselves, if that makes sense to the participants. The complexity of God is our complexity. There's a very powerful reason I venerate the circle, and this is one facet of that reason.
edit on 9-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)





    We define "God", and in doing so, define ourselves, if that makes sense to the participants.





For folks who claim to know God exists, when they use the word God they are saying that in the objective reality of existence there is an entity which corresponds to their concept of God.

Now, humans use words to refer to concepts in their mind, and further to refer to the entities existing in the objective reality of existence which entities correspond to the concepts in their mind, if they are talking about things which they know to exist in the objective reality of existence.

For example, we humans use the word book and the word centaur, we refer to concepts in our mind, and also to the entities existing in the objective reality of existence -- if there are indeed existing entities corresponding to the concepts in our minds.

In the case of book there is a thing existing in the objective reality of existence which corresponds to the word/concept book; but in the case of centaur, to date there has not been located an entity corresponding to the word/concept of centaur.


Now, in the case of God, there is a concept of God, to which concept folks who claim to know God exists in the objective reality of existence, for them there is the entity corresponding to the concept of God in the objective reality of existence.

Now, there are folks who claim that God does not exist in the objective reality of existence, against folks who claim the opposite, namely, that there is an entity corresponding to the concept of God in the actual objective reality of existence.

In such a situation of conflicting contact with the objective reality of existence, which actual objective reality of existence is common to both folks who are knowers of God to exist, and folks who deny God to exist, then both sides must work together to come to concurrence on what is the concept of God they are talking about in using the word God.



Pachomius



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Spookybelle
Well I believe the Bible is rather clear about someone considering themselves a God. If I remember correctly, it was quite frowned upon.
Perhaps someone more versed in the Bible could elaborate on that particular passage.


Youd have to believe in the false missive; and was written to decieve or/and confuse the human. The whole point of human existance is to realise one is a partical and parcel of the God aspect that created it. Why would God allow this, freewill, throw everything at the human (including the kitchen sink) and see what comes of any (if any revelations regarding itself and its creator).



posted on Nov, 12 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by crowdedskies
 


crowdedskies; I agree with EVERY ONE of your points in your opening OP. You have commited a major error. Not only did you tell my truth but you answered all of your own questions (were there any) and so leaves very little doubt or wiggle room that now you are only recieving 'allocades' so far (from your readership). You never lever/offer up the total contents of your thought pattern and then leave your (left hand) to answer it using your (right hand) to qualify: "who seconds this". Its too neat and reads as rhetorical; no needing of additional dialoge by others (not a problem at all) more like it belongs as a missive in the new testament) Profound and complete; 'The Book of crowdedskies' (IAM serious).
edit on 12-11-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 01:56 PM
link   
We're all familiar with the Lucifer story, right? Lucifer got kicked out of heaven for challenging God for favoring the earth-made humans over the fire-made angels. Humans, earth. Angels, fire. But God liked earth more than fire. So Lucifer got jealous out of pride, and he got kicked out.

Now let's look at something else here. God says to worship no other gods before him, because he's the best of the best, right? You could say he's the equivalent of fire. And heaven forbid that we end up worshipping earth-made gods. I mean, God just might get jealous out of pride.

So how about it? Has God become Lucifer?



posted on Nov, 13 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
We're all familiar with the Lucifer story, right? Lucifer got kicked out of heaven for challenging God for favoring the earth-made humans over the fire-made angels. Humans, earth. Angels, fire. But God liked earth more than fire. So Lucifer got jealous out of pride, and he got kicked out.


Not sure Lucifer was challenging as much as commiting suicide by taking the 'humans condition' into consideration (unfair potencial manipulation of by the angelic). One is material (cannot alter its gross matter surroundings as it takes years/eons) as 'instantly' as the higher etherial realms can alter their own--poof, and so one has a abode to live in or satisfy any desire at a whim (not that housing is necessary for them being only of a gasious ideaform). I will always think of Lucifer as incredibly simpathetic to the human condition of having to Survive (feed, clothe, house and put up with outside interference by others much more knowelegeble and unwilling to help them). Freewill was a tremendous gift. Some think God implemented this and it would be true if Lucifer is infact God in disguise and merely MERRILY testing the angelic.


AfterInfinity
Now let's look at something else here. God says to worship no other gods before him, because he's the best of the best, right? You could say he's the equivalent of fire. And heaven forbid that we end up worshipping earth-made gods. I mean, God just might get jealous out of pride. So how about it? Has God become Lucifer?


This is Genesis biblical, is this Moses quoting God or Moses as a powerplayer, 10 commandment style? Earth made Gods would be Pagan; Osiris, Zeus, greco-roman etc, Earth, Sun, Thor, Odom those we dreamed up ourselves; but long after Lucifers fall. I can see a jealous God, it wants to be the revered one, not the 'Greenman'. Problem is it just wont show itself, so what are the humans to do? Put something in its place to justify the sun coming up in the morning (or become psychotic in trying to understand its own reason/purpose/suffering for being). I think Lucifer and *the higher* Original God that created all universes are the same. Not the GOD that ruled this one only; and is the posterchild for "dictionary definintion: a Jealous God exemplified". Our Boss God (higher level management) had a CEO Boss God as well (and so on and so on). The merriment continues.
edit on 13-11-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   
I saw this earlier and thought that it reflected a great deal of how I feel about this "God" everyone thinks is so great. There are merits to having to make sacrifices...I mean real sacrifices. To be able to be challenged is to be great. Perfection...pfft. What integrity is there in being all-powerful simply by existing? How do you appreciate the consequences of such attributes when you've never faced them yourself? A general who has never lost is a general who has never had to make the choices that make a leader...well, a leader. Ever seen that scene from the new Star Trek, where Kirk cheats at the simulation? That's the principle I'm talking about. The impossible choice that determines who you are.

Here is Lex Luthor talking about the detriments of being born a perfect being.

edit on 14-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 06:43 PM
link   

vethumanbeing
reply to post by crowdedskies
 


crowdedskies; I agree with EVERY ONE of your points in your opening OP. You have commited a major error. Not only did you tell my truth but you answered all of your own questions (were there any) and so leaves very little doubt or wiggle room that now you are only recieving 'allocades' so far (from your readership). You never lever/offer up the total contents of your thought pattern and then leave your (left hand) to answer it using your (right hand) to qualify: "who seconds this". Its too neat and reads as rhetorical; no needing of additional dialoge by others (not a problem at all) more like it belongs as a missive in the new testament) Profound and complete; 'The Book of crowdedskies' (IAM serious).
edit on 12-11-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)


Surely, you mean "accolades" but I forgive your typing error. You are absolutely correct in your assessment. I was not seeking an answer. You are perceptive and gifted with words.



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
I saw this earlier and thought that it reflected a great deal of how I feel about this "God" everyone thinks is so great. There are merits to having to make sacrifices.


God is not making sacrifices, its children are as the supplicant extended portions of itself (NO FOUL upon itself).


AfterInfinity[/i;]
I mean real sacrifices. To be able to be challenged is to be great. Perfection...pfft. What integrity is there in being all-powerful simply by existing? How do you appreciate the consequences of such attributes when you've never faced them yourself?


That is the thing, it hasnt had to have real sacrifices or be challanged, not as a whole being; its part and parceled itself out as trillions of particals, each reporting back their death their triumphs (all so miniscule as not to actually affect a death of the greater being "GOD") more an amusement factor to consider, this one relinquished its life this one profligated.


AfterInfinity
A general who has never lost is a general who has never had to make the choices that make a leader...well, a leader. Ever seen that scene from the new Star Trek, where Kirk cheats at the simulation? That's the principle I'm talking about. The impossible choice that determines who you are.


The impossible choice you would face is the acknowledgement that you have some control over your circumstances, proclaim yourself as being able to adjust them or change them, Freewill in action "Self Determined".



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
I saw this earlier and thought that it reflected a great deal of how I feel about this "God" everyone thinks is so great. There are merits to having to make sacrifices.


God is not making sacrifices, its children are as the supplicant extended portions of itself (NO FOUL upon itself).


AfterInfinity
I mean real sacrifices. To be able to be challenged is to be great. Perfection...pfft. What integrity is there in being all-powerful simply by existing? How do you appreciate the consequences of such attributes when you've never faced them yourself?


That is the thing, it hasnt had to have real sacrifices or be challanged, not as a whole being; its part and parceled itself out as trillions of particals, each reporting back their death their triumphs (all so miniscule as not to actually affect a death of the greater being "GOD") more an amusement factor to consider, this one human (very tiny) relinquished its life and the other one (the big one GOD) profited by its experience.


AfterInfinity
A general who has never lost is a general who has never had to make the choices that make a leader...well, a leader. Ever seen that scene from the new Star Trek, where Kirk cheats at the simulation? That's the principle I'm talking about. The impossible choice that determines who you are.


The impossible choice you would face is the acknowledgement that you have some control over your circumstances (do you believe they are fated), proclaim yourself as being able to adjust/alter or change them, Freewill in action "Self Determined" or are you mounted upon a treadmill at fun/run fast speed and cant negotiate a JUMP OFF PUSH THE BUTTON point without breaking your neck?
edit on 14-11-2013 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 14 2013 @ 07:10 PM
link   

AfterInfinity
There are merits to having to make sacrifices...I mean real sacrifices. To be able to be challenged is to be great. Perfection...pfft. What integrity is there in being all-powerful simply by existing? How do you appreciate the consequences of such attributes when you've never faced them yourself? A general who has never lost is a general who has never had to make the choices that make a leader...well, a leader. Ever seen that scene from the new Star Trek, where Kirk cheats at the simulation? That's the principle I'm talking about. The impossible choice that determines who you are.


That is true and no one can claim to be virtuous if they have not deliberately put themselves in the path of temptation.
BTW my favorite Star Trek moment is when Kirk and co. are stranded after Genesis is stolen. When everybody thinks there is no hope, Kirk suddenly pulls it off. "I don't like to lose" he then says.



posted on Nov, 17 2013 @ 12:21 PM
link   
    (QUOTE)
    AfterInfinity
    reply to post by Pachomius

    www.abovetopsecret.com...

    The word "God" has a number of etymological roots. Some experts say that it is based on the Sanskrit word hu, which means "to invoke, call upon, implore". Which is interesting in that it doesn't exalt or differentiate God. In fact, it implies that God, whomever or whatever you may call by such a name, is actually very closely related with any other being whom you would address in such an emotional or purposeful fashion.

    In other words, by its roots, "God" is more a reflection of how it is regarded than what it actually is. We define "God", and in doing so, define ourselves, if that makes sense to the participants. The complexity of God is our complexity. There's a very powerful reason I venerate the circle, and this is one facet of that reason.
    edit on 9-11-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)





    We define "God", and in doing so, define ourselves, if that makes sense to the participants.

(UNQUOTE)



For folks who claim to know God exists, when they use the word God they are saying that in the objective reality of existence there is an entity which corresponds to their concept of God.

Now, humans use words to refer to concepts in their mind, and further to refer to the entities existing in the objective reality of existence which entities correspond to the concepts in their mind, if they are talking about things which they know to exist in the objective reality of existence.

For example, we humans use the word book and the word centaur, we refer to concepts in our mind, and also to the entities existing in the objective reality of existence -- if there are indeed existing entities corresponding to the concepts in our minds.

In the case of book there is a thing existing in the objective reality of existence which corresponds to the word/concept book; but in the case of centaur, to date there has not been located an entity corresponding to the word/concept of centaur.


Now, in the case of God, there is a concept of God, to which concept folks who claim to know God exists in the objective reality of existence, for them there is the entity corresponding to the concept of God in the objective reality of existence.

Now, there are folks who claim that God does not exist in the objective reality of existence, against folks who claim the opposite, namely, that there is an entity corresponding to the concept of God in the actual objective reality of existence.

In such a situation of conflicting contact with the objective reality of existence, which actual objective reality of existence is common to both folks who are knowers of God to exist, and folks who deny God to exist, then both sides must work together to come to concurrence on what is the concept of God they are talking about in using the word God.



Pachomius





This board is about philosophy and metaphysics.

I see that the posters here are not into philosophy much less metaphysics, but into frivolity at the expense of logical thinking based on truths and facts.

I still propose that you everyone who have posted here get to philosophy and metaphysics, by working together including yours truly to concur on the information there is available of the concept of God in the Christian faith today, then going forth in the actual objective realm of existence to locate the object God as corresponding to the concept God.

Now, you can bring forth a lot of the attributes of God in the Christian faith today, but insofar as man and the universe are our concern, and where they came from, then the concept of God today as always from the beginning of the Christian faith, God in concept in relation to man and the universe is the creator of everything that is not God Himself.

So, if we want to do philosophy and metaphysics and be logical and keeping to truths and facts, then God in concept insofar as the origin of man and the universe are concerned, again, God in relation to man and the universe in concept is the creator of everything that is not God Himself.

With this concept of God in our mind, we can and may proceed to look for evidence for an object in the actual objective realm of reality and existence, to search for God grounded on evidence.



Pachomius





new topics
top topics
 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Radio Presents - Bushcraft On Fire Radio ***On The AIR !!! ***
read more: Bushcraft On Fire Radio : 04/17/2014: Basic Packs, More on Police Encounters and PLANTS!!!!