CHALLENGE: Prove That You Are NOT God

reply to post by HyphenSt1


The first answer that came to my mind when reading the title of the thread was "Which god?" but then I read your actual post. You aren't really asking people to prove they are not "god"; you are asking people to prove they are not connected to a divine source. That's a totally different question.

I can't prove that I'm not connected to a divine source and I know that I am so it's moot. But I can prove that I'm not Odin, Ganesh, Jesus, Inanna, Buddha, etc simply by showing you that I'm not one of them. Connected as we may be, we still retain individuality and to argue that point is to change the question entirely.

and I'm back! you didn't think you get rid of me that easy eh AI?

I believe that is the longest post I have seen you write... I should read it maybe I'll find out the conclusion to the mystery novel?

...yes folks I had a bad day, got a flat tire in this piece of junk truck I'm working on... 5in of snow on the ground, not gloves!

it's all the commies fault!

no who do I see about rearranging this website? this kind of discrimination is akin to racism! don't these people think? can't we have a little more balanced design team?

I'll be praying for ATS tonight

reply to post by AfterInfinity


I'm amazed that no one finds this post worthy of answering. Everyone treats the word "god" like its modern incarnation/definition/application is the only one that has ever existed, or is the only one that ought to exist. I thought I gave a reasonably rational and insightful response...particularly given that it's one of my more coherent and polished pieces.

What gives? At least question it, if nothing else. This is me asking for people to take a moment and really reflect on my words in the post I'm responding to. Let it bounce around your head a few times before you just ignore it or dismiss it.

reply to post by Cuervo


Each god is like each individual person on the earth. They all represent a side of god. To understand god you have to use each individual as a puzzle piece.

Let's use vikings for example. Gods and real people. Treasure was never gold. It was love. God is the one that drops his sword for his lost love. Anunnaki gold was never gold it was life.

Why would else would I still be here?

Pantheons are a way to say the christian belief that everyone is god. Only they represent a higher existence of person.

But even gods have kings. Odin/Zeus?

AfterInfinity
reply to post by AfterInfinity

 

I'm amazed that no one finds this post worthy of answering. Everyone treats the word "god" like its modern incarnation/definition/application is the only one that has ever existed, or is the only one that ought to exist.

What gives? At least question it, if nothing else.

edit on 10-12-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I am betting they are not your words... your mismash of comparative religion and pseudo psychology is just to far out there... you're speaking from an extreme and dare I say limited point.

93% of the worlds population do not make good shrinks...

reply to post by Bybyots


that's very interesting and I had never heard of this before! though I don't really think it stands against what i'm saying.. life at all scales is equal, it is just a matter of Scale, and whether or not we can relate to one form of life, in contrast to another. obviously our bodies ARE a colony of cells, which were the first design-scheme for life, but like I said, we are the most advanced technology available because we are built upon everything that came before us (microorganisms, fish, lizards, birds, mammals)

look up en.wikipedia.org... and you will see that life gets even harder to pin down and define..

TheWrightWing
I have just attempted to create an entire universe, complete with a custom set of physical laws.

I failed.

I am not God.

I just tried to play Beethoven's Fifth despite not practicing piano in a long long time.

I failed.

I need practice.

AfterInfinity
reply to post by BlackArrow

 

I have a list of contentions with theism, one of the most prominent of which is the definition of the word "god". By which I mean, there is none. "God" has no clear cut definition, only a perspective. Each theistic organization has its own definitive understanding mired in vague and abstract euphemisms designed to lend that understanding a flexibility which caters to the purpose for which they have adhered to such a philosophy.
Simply speaking, the god is defined by the follower, which is why the follower has chosen that god. If it turned out that the Christian god in fact hated anyone who wasn't homosexual, covered in tattoos, and a chronic alcoholic, how many Christians would continue to swear their souls in allegiance with that entity?

I am neither of those things and tbh i really dislike/hate (I don't really hate anything, but fundies are a trigger, because they don't care) the christian god for the simple fact of fear mongering, "do what i want or suffer for eternity" type of deal, among other things. It seems to *me* in the 'bible' that god and satan have been swapped places at least at written word(very possible considering satan has been deemed as the father of evil and what not, and is permitted to live, as god and satan sit at their holy throne playing a simple game of chess with our lives). Yes there are gaming references in the bible, tbh forget the chapter, but that was when God and Satan made a deal with each other.

Yet despite that my 'hate/dislike' isn't really a hate at all, its more of an honest dislike for various reasons, and i've never picked up a beer can and started spewing out why my life sucks and blaming it on god. Or have tattoo's, or have ever been a plague to society.

People still will follow a leader because of told lies, thus lets take a look at politicians all tell lies yet no alternative comes up, and we are still forced to choose the lesser of the two evils. As far as looking for a 'follower' everyone in life has someone that looks up to them wiether they realize it or not. That two year old napping in their crib, the cousin, the friends, the family of those that are around. Everyone has someone that follows in one footsteps, weither its family or other. Example the first doctor to the last have all followed the same path, origionally starting in hopes of helping others.

Scientist want answers to questions, thus they follow that path. Every Astronaut that went into space once dreamed of seeing the stars, seeing the sight of leaving the earth behind. Thus despite the dangers, they have worked and succeeded in those paths.

Each of us treads the paths of those that came before us weither we would like to admit that. Thus I quote Robert Frost. "Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, be one traveller long I stood looked down one path far as I could until it bent to the undergrowth. Then took the other just as fair for the grass was greener and wanted wear"

"Grass was greener and wanted wear" does not mean that the path was not previously taken. Only that the path was less travel. This should compel you to look more at philosphical/common means. Weither its good or evil, profession choices, life choices, one always tries to do whats best for their family (usually). Some don't look down the path as far as they should before making choices in life

Another example: Often it is easier to hate and smear, then it is to love and forgive. Thus grudges can be held more easier and for longer periods of time. Even when one forgives yet still holds doubts and bad thoughts in their hearts its not truely forgiving, or loving. Thus that path is still taken, until they truely learn to forgive the other for their wrong doings.

When the term "god" first came about in its original incarnation, it meant nothing like what it means today. Gods of cultures long dead and mostly forgotten were relatively feeble and finite in comparison to gods of today. That strikes me as a curious observation, given that gods aren't supposed to change. Not only that, but gods aren't supposed to have limits either. And yet you see limits in Quetzlcoatl, Thor, Athena, Krishna, Buddha, and all sort of other deities. They apply to very specific qualities and no other. So another question I feel is very much worth asking is, why were deities changed from something resembling superpowered aliens to omnipotent abstract entities which no definitive source or nature? How did that happen?

Gods change during the ages for simple facts of smearing. Origionally let me start with 'greek' gods, when christianity came into play they destroyed Diana's temple 3 times, and the last time they put up a temple to worship (teressa or mary) in its place. For the longest time they feared that pilgrimages to the location would be to worship the old deity Huntress Diana, thus they shoo'd off every visitor who did not declare themselves christian.

Thus origional teachings of Goddess Diana/Artimis (whomever you prefur) was lost.
These changes we encounter are from the people. Gods and Goddesses were origionally designed to help bring people hope and to help fill dark voids in their hearts. All religion was founded on this, and that is why it is as easy today to fill the hearts of people with lies. Because when people have questions that plague them in that 'black hole' in their heart they will take whatever means necessary to fill it.

You can consider it like an addiction, some of the origional stories of the god of thunder date back from before humans could even build fire. When they heard the sounds of the storm, because they could not explain it. The only answer that made sense to them at the time was "the gods are angry". Thus the birth of sacrifices to appease the gods were born. Human sacrifices were made because it lightning and thundered in the sky, which back then we did not have the technology to explain. If you look into Aztec culture which is easier to find traditions on it. You will see that they had their culture warped enough that they didn't play their games to survive, they played their games to honor their god and to die, as such games in their belief promised a better harvest for the coming year.

If you want to get into more technical details of different gods and goddesses, I can do that. The bible is actually made up of the myths and legends of over 40 different gods and goddesses of the time, merged into 1. Nothing in the book is origional, at all. If you do your own research from gods and goddesses that date back even further then christianity you will see for yourself.

Last but not least, Christianity is not that old as you are lead to believe. However, most of the gods and goddesses of the past have a larger mark on the timeline then the christian god, and a handful of them are still being worshipped today.

You really need to remember, that until recently in our history after Christianity took over we had no say in what we were allowed to believe for most of the rein of christianity. If you believed in anything else you were killed as a 'witch', and these murders over the controlling of belief wiped out entire cities. So don't forget most of these worships were done in secret. Even today, people fear the term witch. Look at the news over the past year.

reply to post by MamaJ


I appreciate your contribution to the conversation, but forgive me if i'm misunderstanding your point:

It's obvious we are not God. We lack certain attributes even though we can create and procreate. We are in error and until the error is deleted from his-story we will be limited.

Which "attributes" do humans consistently "lack" which prohibit us from considering what I said true? Who is to define error, but our own Mind(s)? Indeed history can be seen as His-Story, and that is essentially what i'm suggesting in the OP. No different than the Hindu idea that the history of life is a drama, and we are each God playing different roles..
Not to mention, your first comment seems to exactly illustrate my entire point.. although I think that ALL elements can be seen as "the spirit", water is the most obvious..

Jesus said "the kingdom of God is within you". He said it wasn't here or there but within each of us so what man did with his interpretation of Jesus words and with the Bible ( thousands of years later) is in error. Man is in error.

What is a kingdom? Where one resides? We have mostly water. Water = spirit. God's spirit is within each of us.

reply to post by TheWrightWing

Are you saying that God is capable of creating a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it?

Did Philosophy 101 class let out early, at the community college located in that strip mall?

in short:

yes I am.

because.. uhhh.. He's God right..? I think the only true boundary for God would be illustrated by asking "Can God think of anything that he can't think about?" and the answer would be..

No.

cuz if he did.. he would have thought it.

i'm not sure about you, but I feel like this is conversation is the one in this thread the stands out as the closest to "Philosophy 101"..

notice how others took time to think about my points, instead of reactively (and emotionally) responding..

your reactions mirror your true feelings, and very appropriately resist even considering what i'm pointing out.. it's simply the role you've chosen to play

reply to post by muzzleflash

God = All

Therefore
All = Sum of Parts of God

So this indicates:
You = Part of God

Expressed Mathematically:

1 / ∞

for me to either agree or disagree with what you are saying, I would need to know how you are defining "You"..

if you mean my body, organs, personality, and memories.. I would agree with you. those are just a part of the equation when isolated and compartmentalized..

if you mean my body, sensory memories, imagination, and the context that they exist within.. then I would have to disagree, because that is ALL..

So some might then ask: "if you've never been to Egypt, does it still exist?" and I would say "of course it does. it is just a place in movies, books, and referenced in other countless ways.. what else could it be?" and you say "well I HAVE been to Egypt, and it was a solid place" and I could only reply "You indeed explore a solid place, but it was not the Egypt that we read about, or see on a map.. it was an entirely NEW and individual place to that moment, and ultimately is just ONE aspect of the Earth as a whole.."

lemme know if that makes sense.. a bit jumbled haha.

TheWrightWing
I have just attempted to create an entire universe, complete with a custom set of physical laws.

I failed.

I am not God.

I just tried and I did create a universe, I made men like beings and ruled them with a rod of iron, I gave one dude called Mosey a load of rules and when people broke them I smited the heck outa them...many years past (milliseconds in our universe) and the people got more intelligent and started question ME?!!?? so I made the people who still believed in me destroy the whole lot of them..including my faithful ones just to prove I was the best.
I got bored after they all died so I sold it on God-bay.

AfterInfinity
What gives? At least question it, if nothing else.

It had nothing to do with the conversation posed by the OP.

The OP didn't say anything about the validity of old external Gods.

By which I mean, there is none. "God" has no clear cut definition, only a perspective.

Yes, and the OP gave you the definition to work within to explore the discussion the OP has opened. The OP asked you take these propositions... sit and think on it and see if you can come up with a proof that this is not true of you.

The OP specifically said you have the reference to all previous concepts proposed on the nature of existence/God for comparison and proceeded to provide this version from which the thread was asked to operate with.

1.) The conscious awareness behind your eyes, behind your brain, is the mind of God..

2.) Your body is the oldest, most advanced biological technology available, designed exactly for your purposes and modified to fit your needs as life progresses.

3.) the entire Universe is simply God (You), turned inside-out..

4.) The only reason that your are not omniscient and all-powerful is because You have decided not to.. or at least until you DO, in which case we have these supposed "holy men" and shamans who learn to tap into their true potential and perform amazing feats.. but also notice that many people who do reach this level hardly dabble with these abilities, because to do so is to attempt to "rise above" their fellow incarnations of God, and impede upon Your Will (upsetting the balance.. which is ultimately impossible to do)

5.) You are not invincible because, again, you don't have Faith that you are.. or until you do..

You decided to ignore all that and spend time telling everyone how great you are at pattern matching.

AfterInfinity
When the term "god" first came about in its original incarnation, it meant nothing like what it means today. Gods of cultures long dead and mostly forgotten were relatively feeble and finite in comparison to gods of today.

All of them still had a "source" "god" which was the fundamental nature of all existence. AKA "The Universe" if you wish. The "sub-gods" are "sub-natures" of existence, including natures of humanity that are larger than a single person yet still exert influence on them. No different than a white source being passed through a prism and splitting into "7" colors... yet still being the same Single Light.

They were not feeble. The feebleness is your understanding of those people's dramatic intelligence and capacity for deep multi-layered symbolism/metaphor to communicate truths about existence at a time where the capacity for expression was much more limited.

"Turtles all the way down" is genius for describing the fractal nature of reality before anyone had access to the Mandlebrot Set. The repeating nature of reality on all scales was already being communicated before we started to feel clever for coming up with again.

AfterInfinity
I have a natural affinity for spotting patterns, so once I have observed a pattern, you can't hide it from me, no matter how much BS you slather on top of it.

Yes, it's been very fun watching you explore your patterns.

I especially love that pattern you have where you go on about people taking their inner desires and projecting them outward and seeing what they want to see.

That's the best pattern.

Here's another pattern.
The universe created you. You are conscious. You are not separate from the universe. You *are* the universe, seeing from where you are, creating yourself. You *ARE* the Universe... you just aren't the only point of *awareness* in the universe.

You *are* the Universe and the Universe is actively creating you. You do not contain anything which is not already inherent in the universe.

The feebleness is in ascribing only one "point of view" to whatever label we want to use... God/Tao/Universe, etc... that's what prevents people from fully grasping that they really truly are The Universe... aka The Creator... currently creating themselves.

The other feeble part some have in "seeing clearly" is assuming that "God" would never choose to experience being anything but THE ALL ENCOMPASSING SELF.

AfterInfinity
That strikes me as a curious observation, given that gods aren't supposed to change.

Think of it another way. It isn't "them" changing... it's the different faces that man is increasingly prepared to come face to face with. As men grow, new aspects are prepared to be explored and understood.

The Agnostic/Atheist face is the current face being given a good long look by many people... because many are finally ready for it. I remember my time as an atheist fondly. It was a critical building block from which I was able to continue to grow, but without the atheist experience the understanding my continued learning explored wouldn't have been as firm.

Calculus doesn't change when you start with intro to Calculus... and then move on to advanced subjects and eventually move on to applying it in real world projects. It was the student that changed.

The fundamental nature of existence doesn't change, the different points of view do.

No one point of view is "God" itself... just as no one finger is "me" by itself.

I and my Finger are One.

reply to post by BlackArrow


The seperation of 1 god into multi-gods allowed more people to relate to certain deities, instead of sitting there offering a prayer to diana/zues/thor/ and every other god in the world for a better harvest, they were given traits.

I will use the Archangel Michael of the Christian religion. Origonally he was not assigned to sit there and find that which is lost, but he was used as a protector, it wasn't until recently they altered Michael's posistion and made him an 'angel'(god if you will) of lost and found. But today that is what he is used for, 30years ago, he'd be petitioned to drive evil doer's away, as an very aggressive guardian powerful enough to do this, he was a defender of humanity.

Just a few months ago at a nursing home, I watched a sweet little old lady call to michael to help her find her keys. (yeah simple as that)


Michael is no longer the defender of humanity in christianity, he is now the spiritual-founder of lost and found.

The bible names only 2 angels, Gabriel and Michael. But over the times more have been added including Raphael etc, which in recent years took Michael's place as the protector of humanity. Gabriel was the provider, When Adam and Even were first cast out of the paradise, he gave adam and eve a cow and taught them how to plow. (Thus may he be compared to the *god* of harvest?) if you know him as anything else that is due to change in the religion by the people.

Religions have to adapt and change with the times of the general public or they lose favor. One of the biggest pointers that I am going to point out is a little family dispute between Greek Gods Ares and Aphrodite, we all know those two didn't get along. But the reason why is simple, one day ares decided to well do his little war thing. One of his warriors vandalized Aphrodite's temple, now to get back at him she went to the head of the gods and told him that ares was planning to start a war within themselves, thus he was banished and became mortal for several years until he was finally able to redeem himself. (He was forbidden by the people to be worshipped in hopes to bring peace among them)

The reasons why they were so protective of their temples, is place of worship provides power to these 'spirits' or gods in which reside in them.

Japan, China, and several other eastern cultures still build little houses for spirits(gods of the past) to reside in. Mainly for the forgotten ones throughout ages.




I know its about 'witches' but I wish to share a link that might be insightful to some about religions in general.
www.witchway.net...

The idea and story has its own spiritual meaning no matter what religion you choose, just be open minded as you read it, and remove the word 'witch' if you must.

(and no i'm not a witch - but i do appreciate all that can share knowledge and insight)


Sorry to drift, but I will state this as my proof that my past posts prove we are 'gods'. Those we choose to follow, become gods weither mass religion or as an individual, but they are in power because we 'give' them that power as an individual or as a group for them to be where they are in our history. We give power, and we take it, we build, as we destroy.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

p.s I agree that there is no 'true' definition of god because it is on an individual basis that makes god a god. Couldn't fit that in when i was going down your list, but if they defined 'god' today as anything other then a divine being/creator or say attached a name, or further attributes. Then there would be an uproar, so its up to individual interpretations of that nature.

Think about how many holy wars have occured in the name of 'God'. There has been more deaths in the just the name of GOD alone without adding anything to identify it.

I think the world would be foolish to put anything other then a divine power/being/conciousness/energy/etc (a list that could take me the next 40-50years to write), that an individual believes in as the definition. Which the only thing every person agree's to that god stands for something(including but not limited to Bullcrap, sacred crap, etc sorry had to hit both sides of the coins thinking of atheist too). Granted you spell it backwords.. (yeah, yeah bad joke.)



My last post got a little bit more into how gods became what they are, but there's only 1 thing in common with any/all gods/powers/divine/creators/etc. Is that our belief is what makes them a god.

reply to post by BlackArrow


I don't have enough time to respond in the way i'd like (taking all of your points into consideration) but I feel like i'd probably be "preaching to the choir anyhow" haha.

this is what comes to mind though:

The basic circle of life insist on a never ending cycle of energy, you die worms eat you birds eat the worms cats& birds eat the birds.. etc.. etc.

exactly. this is why our bodies are essentially the most advanced technology seemingly available (except i'm sure a dolphin or a raven would be a great "ride" as well ) because our entire being is simply what we has been assimilated during years upon years of consuming organic matter. it doesn't matter if you are a vegetarian or carnivore, we thrive by consuming life and this is the oldest game there is. Notice how animals don't take life and death as "seriously" as we do.. or perhaps I could say they take it MUCH more seriously, but see it for what it is, and hence do not spend time worrying about Death because they know that has nothing to do with Living anyhow..

The person who can revert a human back to 'cave man' style behavior would be the most wealthiest person in the world scientifically speaking. DeEvolving - the most dangerous force mankind meddles in like searching through a pin-yata for that snickers candy bar.

I very much agree, though i don't see "reverting" or Devolving as a necessarily "regressive" process, but rather the acquiring of a new ability to explore a dynamic of life which is VERY useful for certain circumstances, and also so we remember to not take the HIGHER realms of thought and signal-processing, for granted.. The problem is not how "highly" or "lowly" evolved we are, but how stagnated we are in our ability to oscillate between states of consciousness that are most useful at any given time. I think it was already said, but the old poly-theistic gods were usually presented as being offspring, or an avatar for the ULTIMATE deity, which played all parts of the drama through each god. One can use any of these gods as archetypes to meditate on aspects of themselves but until one can see the connection between all things (and all consciousness as RAW UNFILTERED Grade-A God), these archetypes and mythologies will be endlessly misleading and usually results in one chasing his own tail.

DEVO is one of my favorite bands for the reason that their entire body of work is devoted to bringing people aware of this message haha.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

That's not limited to just humans either, "we" includes all of life throughout the entire universe. If there is no consciousness to see the universe then the universe ceases to exist in any meaningful way because there is nothing to observe it.

thanks for your thoughts. this is also what I have observed. Just like Wrightwing's example of God and his heavy rock.. This seemingly profound question CAN be answered..

"when a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?"

of course it does IF there is anyone to hear it.. BUT, even in the case where this tree is the LAST tree in existence, and it falls.. the dirt still hears it. the water hears it.. EVERYTHING, from dirt to human, is its own way of expressing the fractalic, and hence PURE nature of the universe: elaborate, finite probabilities - expressing themselves in "an infinite" span of time (time is cyclic.. history literally repeats itself.. but since this is always true.. the present is always changing the past...)

reply to post by BlackArrow

That is what sony said when they got hacked F So in theory you just don't have the know how to do it, just because you don't know the steps that you must take in order to do that doesn't prove that you can not. Imagioning is the first step, acting is the 2nd.

you really blew me away with that one!

great analogy.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Eh...define "planning". My idea is of a fractal machine that feeds into itself over and over and over again. It's not something that consciously happens, but rather like a river flowing along a crack in the earth. It doesn't choose, it simply acts according to its nature and responds to circumstances in that mode of behavior.

I very much agree with the idea of a "fractal generator" but I purposefully stay away from the word "machine" for the reason that most people immediately imagine a computer or car or equally mechanical, metal, unintelligent, primitive machine made by humans..

while this might sound strange, I think that most people understand the mechanism of the universe MUCH better than they know how their computer works, and it is this natural-mechanism which I want to focus on.
indeed there are certain aspects of it that seem very law-bound (gravity for example) like the momentum of the "river of life" in your example..

but i'm also suggesting that We are like people canoeing in this river and, while most people choose to try rowing up-stream (as with people who get overly nostalgic for the past..), I am suggesting that if we were to just accept that the river is going in the direction it is going, we can USE the momentum of the river to navigate where we would like to go rather than always settling for just "going with the flow"..

I DO say "just go with the flow" but.. with Intent

reply to post by the2ofusr1

I had thought that time can only be divided to the -33 power or something like that and that matter loses locality when you hit to the -44 power ...peace

this does indeed outline the spectrum in which we exist, but it is just a matter of scale and "framerate" like in film.. just as we can only see within a VERY small area of the electromagnetic spectrum, we can still access and utilize other parts of the spectrum down to radiowaves, and up thru gammarays..

the ability to navigate perspective (or lack thereof) is what provides the true limitation.