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.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: reddragon2015
I always thought it was funny how fantasy books that explore the concept of gods interacting with humans tend to explain away this inconsistency by saying that the gods need the humans' faith to survive and thus get their power from it.
originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: spygeek
In thoery, He would exist outside of our 4 dimensional sandbox, though He can directly interfere or interact with things in the sandbox if He chooses to.
Our belief is that Prophets could only perform miracles if God allowed it. So in this example, it would be like the Creator giving cheat codes to specific AI vessels (the Prophets), then giving those AI vessels instructions on how to interact with other AI vessels (the rest of us). But the Creator can also program Himself directly into the simulation, though He rarely chooses to. After all, too much direct interaction would defeat the purpose in us choosing our paths based on our own free will.
So if He exists outside of the 4th dimension and outside of our sandbox/simulation (the Universe), He would appear immortal to us.
Same for the other Creations that exist outside of our 4th dimensional sandbox. So Angels, Heaven, Hell, and the such would be "immortal" beings and realms from the perspective of 4 dimensional creatures (us).
The Qur'an states that Humans literally don't have the capacity to see Him, as He exists beyond our capabilities. But He is also around us all the time and knows everything we think & do. So it's hard to say what He really is.
I rationalize it that we 4 dimension beings are like movie clips in a video editor to Him. So those extradimensional beings can see any part of our lives, the same way we can jump to a specific scene in a specific episode of a specific season of a specific TV series.
The maker of the following video, "Qualiasoup", received death threats after publishing it. It's very unfortunate, although not surprising, considering the above.
Correct, logic is logic. But leaders control education and the media. They have muddied the waters so that me, a non believer assumes all religious people believe in the same God, that all religious people believe outlandish things which require a leap of faith.
originally posted by: spygeek
originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: spygeek
There is a difference between controlled contrived religion (the tool of control) and real religion. Modern society and its 'satanic' leaders have muddied the waters. So any 'believer' is now a lunatic with no logic within. Therefore simple arguments against religion will always win on the face of it.
"Leaders" can not control or influence basic logic.
How is the logic of "controlled, contrived religion", different from "real religion"?
How does "real religion" logically justify that a non-physical entity is omnipresent? That an omniscient being is capable of choice? That a "perfect" being requires worship?
What is the fundamental difference between controlled, contrived religion and real religion?
In what way does a simple argument against religion win "on the face it", but lose on a another (real?) level?
originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: spygeek
Funny how you quote peoples responses that sound like you were talking to Christians and yet....the threats to the makers of the video were received from a Muslim apparently.
Is there a particular reason why you were reluctant to mention their religion?
originally posted by: and14263
originally posted by: spygeek
originally posted by: and14263
a reply to: spygeek
There is a difference between controlled contrived religion (the tool of control) and real religion. Modern society and its 'satanic' leaders have muddied the waters. So any 'believer' is now a lunatic with no logic within. Therefore simple arguments against religion will always win on the face of it.
"Leaders" can not control or influence basic logic.
Correct, logic is logic. But leaders control education and the media. They have muddied the waters so that me, a non believer assumes all religious people believe in the same God, that all religious people believe outlandish things which require a leap of faith.
How is the logic of "controlled, contrived religion", different from "real religion"?
When reading the bible as a non believer it becomes apparent that underlying religion is about love. Love for others and helping those in need. That is what I would call real religion. Contrived religion is about controlling people with the threat of sin. Contrived religion is not learned through experience but drummed into is from being young.
How does "real religion" logically justify that a non-physical entity is omnipresent? That an omniscient being is capable of choice? That a "perfect" being requires worship?
That's the thing, it doesn't. I mention the bible above, the underlying message is clear but the idea of worshipping an idol is skewed. It is about worshipping love. So the idea of an omniscient being, creationism, these are to me like the theory of a sonic weapon pulling down the two towers. It serves to distract.
What is the fundamental difference between controlled, contrived religion and real religion?
As above.
In what way does a simple argument against religion win "on the face it", but lose on a another (real?) level?
A bit like what we've just been through. Or going deeper, a believer believes in something which they feel is right and true. Their belief is strong but because contrived religion has muddied the real religion they assume they have to believe (or are conditioned) into believing all the things in taught religion which defy logic.
I'm trying to look at this with an open mind. I'm new to this.
If He exists outside of our time and space, then how can He interfere or interact with things inside our time and space?
originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: spygeek
-- Yes, It would mean God is Space itself and everything that fills it.
God never said "I am" a being.
Nothing can be conceivable hypothesied to exist out side of God when God is infinite. How do you do that?
You are not God, you are formed from the Properties of God.
Everything that exist as finite is from the Properties of God.
Our universe had a beginning and everything that was formed at that time is made from the Properties of God.
We are Limited to create, build and explore from only what is within Our universe.
When Our universe was formed all the Properties to form life as we know it today was formed. Evolution proves that to a Limited degree.
--- Yes, God is a verb: I am.
--- When you say: This in effect renders the definition of the term "God" both everything and nothing. There is nothing He isn't, and everything He is. This effectively makes "God" a pointless nonsentical term of describing anything at all.
The definition between finite and infinite is very Limited i Guess.
We dont have a full understanding of the definition of infinite, but we have a good grasp of what finite is. It probably would explain why some have problems getting around this.
Our definitions are Limited to Our knowledge.
a reply to: spygeek
Text
So everything, by definition, is God.
What exactly did God say about Himself?
So God created the universe out of His own properties of space and time? Therefore God has the properties of being spacial and temporal? How can He also have the properties of being non-spacial and non-temporal, when this is a logical contradiction?
There is no getting around the fact that "infinite", like "nothing", cannot literally exist, without the rejection of logic.
Precisely. This is why God is indefinable. What is indefinable cannot be hypothesised or claimed to exist.
How can something that cannot be defined be a something?
originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: spygeek
Text
So everything, by definition, is God.
Yes. by definition God is everything, even the Properties of finite.
What exactly did God say about Himself?
God said: "I am what I am".
So God created the universe out of His own properties of space and time? Therefore God has the properties of being spacial and temporal? How can He also have the properties of being non-spacial and non-temporal, when this is a logical contradiction?
God is absolute infinite empty space and absolute time, and is absolute neutral. This gives God a specific ID that can only be related to him. When God is infinite and takes up all Space there is, only God can form finite. Since God is absolute infinite and absolute neutral, finite can only be created by his Choice.
A absolute empty infintie Space will never form finite randomly on its own since a absolute empty infinite Space is absolute neutral as well.
What would be common understanding of such a space..... ?? And it would be physically impossible as well for such a Space to form finite randomly.
For People who dont beleive in God will search for other solutions to this. The absolute empty infnite Space can be given many names. But no mather what, its property will never change.
There is no getting around the fact that "infinite", like "nothing", cannot literally exist, without the rejection of logic.
Correct.
Precisely. This is why God is indefinable. What is indefinable cannot be hypothesised or claimed to exist.
How can something that cannot be defined be a something?
I Guess only time can change and update Our defenitions of how much we will know further on. We have just not reached the time yet, to put a accurate defenition on God.
Therefore, I am God. So are you.
This means, "I am a being that is being".
Any being that is infinite can not have the power of choice.
There cannot be any understanding of such a space at all, common or not, as it cannot logically exist.
You again are refuting your own claim, as you state that God, by your definition, would be physically impossible.
People who do not believe in God generally do not concern themselves with definitions of things like "absolutely empty infinite space", which cannot logically exist and are not required to exist to explain anything they believe.
originally posted by: spy66
a reply to: spygeek
No, being of God is not the same as being God. That is not even logical. You are not Your mom or Your dad, You are You.
You are who you are With a mind of Your own. You are made in their image With their properties.
Yes. But God is not a human being. God is all that exists.
That is not logical at all. You are now putting limits on the Power of the infinite.
A property that is absolute and is all Space there is. Can never change randomly because, it is absolute neutral.
Every change must be a Choice or there will never be any changes at all. It is absolute impossible for a absolute neutral infintie Space to change randomly by it self.
I agree that we have problems understanding such a Space. But that is a part of Our limits. Our knowledge of Space and everything that fills it is Limited to time. We need time to learn and grasp, we dont know everything there is at this stage in time. Since we are Limited to knowledge and understanding, should we reject what we dont know or understand right now? I think we should have a open mind.
I am not saying God is physically impossible at all. I am trying to explain to you what God is. I would say it is we (some more than others) who are physically Limited to understanding this.
You wanted me to tell you what God is. And i did so. God always was and always is, and never changes.
There is only one physicall state that can have this property. I also explained this to you.
This state is not true any more. because God formed finite. So Space is not absolute empty any more.
But as you agreed earlier.., Finite is not infinite. This means finite never always was and always is.
We know that what we observe and study within Our universe was formed 13,799 billion years ago. So the Logic sense should tell you that what we know is Limited to that time frame.
We are also Limited to only study a Limited spec of Our expanding universe. We will never find a absolute empty Space within Our universe. And there is a Logic behind that to.
To compare the finite state within Our universe to a absolute infnite empty Space is not comparable. They are two different physical states. With two totally differnt time frames.