A symbolic philosophical, view on what god is and why it created this existence.

I had a bit of a think this morning and it came to me that what I’m about to share with you.

I apologise if I go in too deep

Please keep an opened mind an just visualise the story and let me know what you think

God creating physical reality is analogous to a mind wanting to create a body to experience rather than just know.
God at first was only equivalent to a mind (infinite raw energy which somehow clumped up enough to gain conscious thought. Once this conscious mind came to be, the first thing it realized was that It was all things, hence when looked at differently it was nothing, alone, there was nothing but its own consciousness, one consciousness (a way to imagine this is imagine if you had lost all your senses but still had your mind, you would be in your own little isolated universe).

So eventually this one consciousness realized that it was not content with this and needed to expand. It needed to procreate in at a consciousness scale. It needed not to feel alone, it needed purpose (as any ego does) it realised it could create any story or dream within its mind as there was no outside its mind.
So it decided so that it would split itself into an almost infinite amount of pieces with all pieces having the same god type consciousness, not dissimilar to how a hologram works. In a hologram, each piece has the whole contained with it.

It also realized that each piece couldn’t have any memory it where it came from or how it made the decision to come into this new form. It would also instil an innate thirst for knowledge, to learn everything would be its driving force; curiosity would be life’s motivator. Perhaps the bible may be referring to this when it speaks symbolically of the story of Adam and Eve and the tree of knowledge they ate the fruit they would have to leave the garden and be mortal, leaving the garden is akin the state of the one conscious mind splitting to us with no memory of it and then with a thrust for knowledge to eventually remember what it really is.

Now going back to the mind/body reference, it would seek out to create and extension of itself that could be expressive. Akin to a mind creating a nervous sensory system where it could experience, just like our bodies are the vessel for our minds to experience a physical reality, without the senses there can be no physical experience at all. The universe is God’s vessel to experience.

If we take a look at a fractal, we see a never ending cycle of creation, a factual is simply a symbolic representation of what the infinite flow of energy (creation) emanating from this one consciousness looks like.

Thank you for taking the time read

That pretty much sums up what I think is the best interpretation of "God" that our minds can handle.

A single, conscious entity that is everything- so in order to experience itself, it creates separation by creating us. Hence why there is a duality to everything- without opposites, we could never understand what a concept really is.

Without fear, we would never know love.

It's beautiful, really!

exactly right, thanks for the reply

reply to post by Monts


By the same theory it means God created evil...
Though that is more reasonable than most believe..

It also suggests that Hell was created by God..
Ahh, the beauty of religion...

Wow amazing post, I couldn’t have said it better myself…unless the theory is true, in which case I am you and you are me.

“All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There's no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves.”
-Bill Hicks

reply to post by MouldyCrumpet

Yup. Agreed. I've reached the same conclusion.

"The God Theory" by Bernard Haisch
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249274834&sr=8-1

Haisch is an astrophysicist whose professional positions include Staff Scientist at the Lockheed Martin Solar and Astrophysics Laboratory, Deputy Director for the Center for Extreme Ultraviolet Astrophysics at the University of California, Berkeley, and Visiting Fellow at the Max-Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics in Garching, Germany. His work has led to close involvement with NASA; he is the author of over 130 scientific papers; and was the Scientific Editor of the Astrophysical Journal for nine years, as well as the editor in chief of the Journal of Scientific Exploration.

an excerpt

If you think of whitte light as a metaphor of infinite, formless potential, the colors on a slide or frame of film become a structured reality grounded in the polarity that comes about through intelligent subtraction from that absolute formless potential. It results from the limitation of the unlimited. I contend that this metaphor provides a comprehensible theory for the creation of a manifest reality (our universe) from the selective limitation of infinite potential (God)...
If there exists an absolute realm that consists of infinite potential out of which a created realm of polarity emerges, is there any sensible reason not to call this "God"? Or to put it frankly, if the absolute is not God, what is it? For our purposes here, I will indentify the Absolute with God. More precisely I will call the Absolute the Godhead. Applying this new terminology to the optics analogy, we can conclude that our physical universe comes about when the Godhead selectively limits itself, taking on the role of Creator and manifesting a realm of space and time and, within that realm, filtering out some of its own infinite potential...
Viewed this way, the process of creation is the exact opposite of making something out of nothing. It is, on the contrary, a filtering process that makes something out of everything. Creation is not capricious or random addition; it is intelligent and selective subtraction. The implications of this are profound.

If the Absolute is the Godhead, and if creation is the process by which the Godhead filters out parts of its own infinite potential to manifest a physical reality that supports experience, then the stuff that is left over, the residue of this process, is our physical universe, and ourselves included. We are nothing less than a part of that Godhead - quite literally.

Next, by Ervin Laszlo

Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything, 2004
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1249275852&sr=8-1

And, his other seminal work
Science and the Reenchantment of the Cosmos: The Rise of the Integral Vision of Reality
www.amazon.com...=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1249275852&sr=8-6

Ervin Laszlo is considered one of the foremost thinkers and scientists of our age, perhaps the greatest mind since Einstein. His principal focus of research involves the Zero Point Field. He is the author of around seventy five books (his works having been translated into at least seventeen languages), and he has contributed to over 400 papers. Widely considered the father of systems philosophy and general evolution theory, he has worked as an advisor to the Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. He was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize in both 2004 and 2005. A multidisciplinarian, Laszlo has straddled numerous fields, having worked at universities as a professor of philosophy, music, futures studies, systems science, peace studies, and evolutionary studies. He was a sucessful concert pianist until he was thirty eight.

In his view, the zero-point field (or the Akashic Field, as he calls it) is quite literally the "mind of God".

Naming Hal Puthoff, Roger Penrose, Fritz-Albert Popp, and a handful of others as "front line investigators", Laszlo quotes Puthoff who says of the new scientific paradigm:

[What] would emerge would be an increased understanding that all of us are immersed, both as living and physical beings, in an overall interpenetrating and interdependant field in ecological balance with the cosmos as a whole, and that even the boundary lines between the physical and "metaphysical" would dissolve into a unitary viewpoint of the universe as a fluid, changing, energetic/informational cosmological unity."

an excert from Science and the Akashic Field, an Integral Theory of Everything

Akasha (a . ka . sha) is a Sanskrit word meaning "ether": all-pervasive space. Originally signifying "radiation" or "brilliance", in Indian philosophy akasha was considered the first and most fundamental of the five elements - the others being vata (air), agni (fire), ap (water), and prithivi (earth). Akasha embraces the properties of all five elements: it is the womb from which everything we percieve with our senses has emerged and into which everything will ultimately re-descend. The Akashic Record (also called The Akashic Chronicle) is the enduring record of all that happens, and has ever happened, in space and time."

Laszlo's view of the history of the universe is of a series of universes that rise and fall, but are each "in-formed" by the existence of the previous one. In Laszlo's mind, the universe is becoming more and more in-formed, and within the physical universe, matter (which is the crystallization of intersecting pressure waves or an interference pattern moving through the zero-point field) is becoming increasing in-formed and evolving toward higher forms of consciousness and realization.

------------

According to James Oroc's experiences (Tryptamine Palace), when the ego is dissolved in consciousness through the temporary formation of a type of neurological "Bose Einstein Condensate", there is no real dilineation or distinction between individual consciousness and God-consciousness or the universal "akashic field" (Lazslo) aka Zero Point Field.

I also think it's important to consider free will choice, as a "joining of the circle" in actualizing existence within the framework of a monistic idealism (consciousness, not matter, is primary).

In other words, everything is whole and complete, with nothing missing, so once you find yourself "in it", then you might come to see that it cannot be any other way, and that any thought of escape is absurd and meaningless.

@Mouldy : thats crazy man, honestly you just killed it completely with this insight, I don't think ones mind can comprehend a much deeper thought process than the one you just presented. Makes perfect sense to me and I do wonder about what spawned god into being which eventually lead to this existence into being. Thanks for that.

The intuition that "god" would find him/herself "alone", and want "company", is what's behind the pluralistic religious concepts.

The ancients had no problem with a pantheon of gods of course, and when philosophy coalesced into monotheistic thinking, it still snapped back with the idea of the "Trinity".

The other way to put it is that "relationship" is an important good that we enjoy, and we can't really imagine a "god" that can't enjoy such a thing too.

The problem with the more pantheistic notions (as expressed in the OP) is that genuine relationship is only relevant amongst equals. We might enjoy our pet for example, but we could never enjoy the kind of relationship with our dog or cat, that we could have with another human.

In Christian theology, the matter gets specific enough to say that God "needs" Someone to love that is like Himself, hence the Father/Son idea, that later was supposed to at least insinuate yet another "Person" within Godhead, the Holy Spirit, which was mutual god-love personified.

The point being, humans aren't nearly enough to provide "relationship" for a god. Perhaps we can imagine ourselves as "pets", but that can only go so far.

I'm not a religionist myself, but I have studied various ideas, and usually I can see reasons why people have come to develop the ideas that we have. I do tend to think that the older pantheistic notions were replaced for a reason. Not that pantheism couldn't still yet again be revived as a platform for something still to come, but once you have surveyed the history of religious thought over the millennia, the evolution of these ideas, as they actually have come down to us, make plenty of sense.

I guess what might be nice for me to see is something that looks forward, not backward. Nonetheless, I certainly commend the OP for being someone who is thinking about these matters, there's probably still a long ways for humankind to go!

JR

Sorry to bump this thread I just wanted to thank those who responded and for their kind remarks and Im very happy to hear many of you have had similar ideas

I am mostly scared of what was taught to me I have since created a different perspective, and have different realizations. I can no longer depend on words, thoughts, and sayings that have been told to me. I am aware that fear, and not knowing has been my main teachings.

Belief and faith was to be my main understanding in life, instead of knowledge, and self awareness. I have questioned myself as have others and now we find ourselves in limbo. We are in between truths. Our separation was intentional. Now we have to find our own way.

Peace, NRE.

reply to post by MouldyCrumpet


Love you start......

I had a bit of a think this morning

Not enough people actually sit down and have a think about thing's nowadays.
Anyway, brilliant post. I have always thought that God was lonely and felt a bit sorry for himself so he divided part of his consciousness or energy into little sparks (us) so as to have companionship and experience. But then i thought God is pure love, bliss consciousness, why would he feel sorry for himself? Could he feel sorry for himself? And this is where i am at, believing in God but not understanding the reason for his creation...........lol