Dense
Member Posts: 73 Registered: 5/6/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 03:48 AM |
The “Fires and Hell” discussion is starting to sound like a topic: “How do
you define God?” This is a topic that has taken up many drunken hours of my
friends. My definition is: It is it because it has no partner. The reason
is that there can be no other being from its race than it self. If there is
not a second one then it is impossible to compare sex in theory. It must be
the most powerful being this also includes that it cannot create a being of
equal or potentially greater power. If this happens than it is only an
“alpha”. It has created all domains and the first of all living things. As
far as domains it has created heaven, earth, hell and every thing in
between. Upon creation all things had their own power (place & living).
But none even close to a tenth of it’s power. It knows that it will end
every thing and what will cause this but not when. The reason is human’s
free will. It must like reality TV. ::shudders:: This being is also omni
present. It knows every thing about the past and present with an outlook at
all of the infinite paths of the future. It knows every being before the
being is aware of it self. It desires us to do something no matter how many
lives or how short or long they are before the end of it all. Did you ask
“why?” Well I have no idea. I must not tolerate the lost of a soul well.
That is why there are so many religions trying to get us in heaven. Each of
these hold the basic path to heaven with some bull shit, some wallet
opening tricks, extra rules… due to the fact humans screw up. Maybe I am a
screw up for trying to define god. I want any one to tell me their
definitions, challenges/modifications, or things that need elaboration.
There are a lot of things I left out but every time it comes up we find new
things to define better. Every one of my friend’s has their own view some
are parallel to mine others say multiple gods, no gods but energy in every
thing, while one friend believes we are on our own and as it stands we are
fucked. We have started to finding our views are starting to blend
together. ____________________ i am a misunderstood genius... Nobody understands that i am a genius! |
|
|
callei
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 759 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 04:23 AM |
An anthrapomophism of physics and biology? that would be my answer. But
then my 'world view' doesnt need a heaven or a hell to make it complete or
understandable, nor does it need a rationalization for ignorance and
suffering.
But then i also dont believe that space/time is finite or that genetics are
a fluke.
And some night out drinking with your friends maybe try asking "why define
God" and see where that one ends up. Its bound to get strange ____________________ Real goths wear silver and crosses to keep the werewolves and vampires
away. |
|
Nicholas
Member Posts: 74 Registered: 17/3/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 12:48 PM |
Personally I believe in the supernatural, but in my opinion if there is a
god, it isn't showing itself and doesn't care what's going on down here...
why should it? My favourite interpretation of god was in an Anne Rice book,
where this god didn't know why he was here, and had created matter and such
in an attempt to see if a god could eventually come out of it so he'd
understand how he'd come to be.
As far as I see it what happens happens and the only things to blame or
credit is coicidense (i'm pretty sure i spelt that wrong) and ourselves...
purple monkey dishwasher ____________________ "Be neither a master nor a slave to pudding, for there is a time to gather,
and a time to cast pudding away" |
|
AloneSoul
Fanatic Posts: 522 Registered: 6/7/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 01:37 PM |
Damn it, I need to get online more. I'll reply to this thread soon. ____________________ but at least you know, just how much pain there is in living |
|
Monolycus
Fanatic Posts: 580 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 01:39 PM |
According to Emil Durkheim, gods are the apotheosis of the culture that
produces them (viz. self worship on a cultural scale). That definition
works fairly well within the context of the societies that he was
describing (Australian aboriginal peoples at that time) and would work
equally well for a few others, provided there is a homogeniety of belief
(such as North American cultures like the Kwakiutl circa 1800). In a
culture in which individual beliefs are fairly diverse, it could be argued
that gods represent an apotheosis of the individual (viz. self worship on a
smaller scale).
I think a better question than "Who is God?" (sorry, the question itself
implies monotheism and already ascribes attributes such as identity to that
godhead which may or may not be warranted) would be "What are gods?" There
is ample evidence that a "race" or even different "races" of gods (call
them Elohim, Æsir, the fill-in-the-blank pantheon, gods, or what have you)
have appeared on the scene from time to time in a very literal, albeit it
pandimensional fashion. The jury is still out about whether they have the
best interests of humans at heart (the jury is also still out about whether
humans have human's best interests at heart). According to the "myth" of
Prometheus (who gave humans "fire"), the myth of Lucifer (the "Light
Bringer"), and other local "myths", the gods have been none too pleased
about anyone advancing the cause of humans... and humans have subsequently
vilified those that have tried to bring them illumination as well. So from
one perspective, gods run the plantation and humans are the happy
illiterates that work for them. Just one thought.
The aim of mysticism is to experience G/god, so you could say that having
simply asked your question in the first place puts you on the path towards
becoming a mystic (I approve). The aim of most occultism, conversely, is to
become "more than human" (Shouldn't be a difficult feat; I've seen human
and it ain't all that), so if you had phrased your question differently, it
would have pointed you on the path towards occultism, in which case the
answer to your question (viz. "Who is God?") would have been "Me! Right
here!". It just so happens that we have a diety here who runs this site,
so it might be worth your time to just ask him who he is directly.
~M. |
|
Schizo
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 897 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 05:47 PM |
I was recently talking with a friend and we got off on this weird "theory
of existance" type conversation. We came to the conclusion that all of
existance was made up of three elements - matter/energy (which I really
think we will eventually find are one and the same), time, and spirit.
Each of these elements has 3 dimensions. The 3 dimensions of matter/energy
are obvious - line, plane and cube, to give examples. The 1st dimension of
time is a time-line, the thing we travel along. The 3rd is eternity. I
don't have a word to describe 2 dimensional time, but it would be to
time-line and eternity what a square is to a line and a cube.
Now, as for the subject of Who (or what) is god, I feel that concept fits
into the element of the spirit. The 1st dimension would be the individual.
Again, I'm not sure how to describe the 2nd dimension spirit, but I think
the 3rd dimension spirit could be described as god.
The theme of the 3rd dimension of all 3 elements is infinity - infinite
space, infinite time, and infinite spirit.
Then again, now that I think about it, if you think of god as the supreme
entity, maybe it would be the combination of all 3 dimensions and elements
- the culmination so to speak.
I don't know, I'm getting over my own head now, and I really don't know how
to fit in this high-faluting theory with my own personal experience. I
guess you'd have to go to one of the other religion threads to find my more
personal, rather than intellectual, theory of god. ____________________ "You can tell by the scars on my arms and the cracks in my hips and the
dents in my car and the blisters on my lips that I'm not the carefullest of
girls." - Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism" |
|
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 06:06 PM |
The only way I could define him in a more realistic sense is the harmony
within, the peace within. Anyone ever had that place inside them that they
find peace in? That's how I define "God/gods" in a more realist sense. As
far as theories go, I take the universal approach that he/she/it is
everywhere...around you, inside you, and beyond. Spiritually, well,
everyone has their own way. *shrug*
|
|
Dense
Member Posts: 73 Registered: 5/6/2003 Status: Offline
|
posted on 1/7/2003 at 07:42 PM |
Mono. very informative. It is very rarely we use scientific studies in our
dubates. Just personal expearances and obivations.
Nicholas your view is one that is parallel to a friends. His is that god
created man and man will become a god. In doing so he will create the next
god. This view has been paraphased but you get the idrea.
Schizo your view is what we call "the 3". It is based on things are three
parts "energy" to make one being. ie: mind, soul, & body= man and in
christanity the father, son, & holy sprit=god
Anya yours seem to be a form of mine. the major defance is that in mine you
know you have acomplised every thing for this life time when you reach a
zen state. there apears that we may change else where too but more
explaining is required from both of us. ____________________ i am a misunderstood genius... Nobody understands that i am a genius! |
|
Anya
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 656 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 2/7/2003 at 02:53 AM |
A religious way can be a way to connect to God(higher being, greater
force(s), etc), but I do not believe it is the only way for the Absolute
transcends all that is of religion, politics, "right" and "wrong", "good"
and "evil, the Heavens and Hells, etc. The closest to it, however, are
those who have mastered themselves and found harmony within and thus,
likely harmony without. To me that is the path, but the path will be
different for everyone for everyone has different experiences,
personalities, merits, flaws, etc. Someone once said that knowing the
world without is wise, but knowing the world within is enlightenment *I
think it came from the movie Bulletproof Monk*. So I guess another part
would be enlightenment...but eh.
The Absolute is everywhere...it's the universal essence, the cycle of life
and death, and most of all, the Absolute within is the harmony within. Eh.
I'll stop there for a bit. These are my beliefs utterly condensed. |
|
pale-face
Fanatic Posts: 478 Registered: 22/9/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 22/9/2004 at 02:42 PM |
having many heated conversations about this topic with a wide variety of
people, from peers to priests) i have come to the common consensus that god
is who you make him to be. ____________________ fucking classy. |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 11:30 AM |
no offense... but if god exists... then god si who god is, not who we make
him/her/// that would be like saying... you are who I make you... as an
individual, god may very well have personality flaws or mental problems... ____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|
Merry_Widow
Fanatic Posts: 598 Registered: 24/8/2002 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 12:36 PM |
By combining much thinking with much drinking, I thought the easier
question to ask would be who isn't god? By thinking about everyone I know,
and applying a simple process of elimination, I came to the conclusion that
I am, in fact, god. Problem solved.
The nice thing about alcoholic thinking is that fallacious reasoning has no
power over it. ____________________ Okay, dazzle me. |
|
Andree
Member Posts: 112 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 01:28 PM |
Pale-face, you say God is who you make Him to be. I disagree. People
think they can change who God is, and they often try. As a
believer of absolute truth (as opposed to strict relativism) I cannot
accept a religion that allows its followers to mold God into who and what
they want Him to be. I believe God is who He is, regardless of how people
distort and misinterpret His will to match theirs. Rationalization is an
easily-abused art.
What we perceive to be culteral discrepancies are actually practices
founded on similar principles. James Rachels (thank you, philosophy class)
uses the example of the Eskimos, who practice infantacide. We could look
at their practice and say, They're wrong; killing babies is unacceptable
and the Eskimos have no regard for human life.
In reality, the Eskimos value human life as much other cultures--but
killing babies (especially girls) is how they protect their population.
For one, Eskimo mothers, who nurse their children until four years or
later, can only provide nourishment for so many children. She can also
carry one infant in her parka as she travels. The Eskimos also kill
female babies because the males are hunters, and hunters have a high
casualty rate. If baby girls weren't killed off, females would soon
outnumber the food-producing males.
So, what appears to be heartless murder is actually a display of regard for
human life.
This example is simply to say that believing in strict relativism, while
teaching us to be open-minded, would allow us to base our moral codes, as
well as our idea of God, on our respective societies, which may be as
corrupt as we'd like them to be.
The problem, of course, comes in knowing what the absolute truth is. ____________________ < / hate > |
|
Schizo
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 897 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 05:13 PM |
I would say that truth is absolute, but there is no way to be absolutely
sure of absolutely all of it. In other words, some things are definitely
true, and other things are definitely false, but I definitely don't know
entirely which is which, and some things I think I know I'm probably
mistaken about. Which is why the concept of absolute truth can be scarey -
not because I'm scared of absolute truth, but because I'm scared of people
who think they know what absolute truth is.
And yes, if there is a god/God/goddess, etc., he/she/it is what it is, not
what we want it to be. Unless it is a figment of our imaginations, in
which case, we aren't really worshipping a god, but rather a part of
ourselves. And that part of ourselves is what it is, also, and not just
what we want it to be. ____________________ "You can tell by the scars on my arms and the cracks in my hips and the
dents in my car and the blisters on my lips that I'm not the carefullest
of
girls." - Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism" |
|
Andree
Member Posts: 112 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 05:43 PM |
I agree, but we do have both the power and authority to change what
lies within ourselves, to an extent of course.
And we can't forget religions whose entire premise is just that: to
worship a part of oneself. Many new-age sects fall under this category. ____________________ < / hate > |
|
Schizo
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 897 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 05:51 PM |
Yes, who we are is constantly in a state of metamorphosis, and a deity
based on a part of ourselves would also experience that change and
development. But at any given moment, we are what we are in that moment,
and along with us, our self-based deity as well. If it were possible to
freeze-frame a life like that. ____________________ "You can tell by the scars on my arms and the cracks in my hips and
the
/>
dents in my car and the blisters on my lips that I'm not the carefullest
of
girls." - Dresden Dolls, "Girl Anachronism" |
|
Andree
Member Posts: 112 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 05:59 PM |
That's the problem I have with worshipping self-will instead of a separate
deity; it a)allows us to pursue selfish goals, and b)puts a mutable being,
the self, in power instead of an all-powerful protector. ____________________ < / hate > |
|
pale-face
Fanatic Posts: 478 Registered: 22/9/2004 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 07:52 PM |
Andree, i appreciate your response (you to ferral). But in my own respect
for god (if there is one) he or she is different from person to person.
hence the makings for so many different religions. Buddha, god, the list
continues endlessly. hence why i say god is different from person to person
and you can make him be who you want, because until we meet him, we are
never going to know otherwise. assuming there was a god. i don’t think he
would have any problem with that. i don’t think he would have a problem
with people who don’t even believe in him. because if that were the case,
it would make his work ever more mysterious. ____________________ fucking classy. |
|
Andree
Member Posts: 112 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 09:15 PM |
But there are two ways to go about "making God different from person to
person." One way is to make an honest, objective assesment of who we think
God is. This would include reading texts, gaining perspective to the best
of our abilities, developing an earnest yearning for truth, and possibly
even forming a relationship with God.
The other way is to say, "I want X to be morally justifiable, so I'm going
to create and subsequently believe in a God who will allow me to do that." ____________________ < / hate > |
|
feralucce
Extreme Fanatic Posts: 1810 Registered: 31/12/1969 Status: Offline
|
posted on 23/9/2004 at 09:37 PM |
Pale-face...
I have anecdotal evidence... I am me... There is only one me... BUT... many
people have different opinions of me... more than one person here feel that
I am just a blustering idiot... some people think that I "love tearing into
people"... still others have other perceptions of who and what I am...
Just because you percieve something in a particular way, does not
necessarily make it so. many people percieve god to be a particular way,
but that is because they have a certain filter, called personal experience
over their vision... Just because the have views of the divine, does not
mean the divine is constrained by those views... Just as I am not what
people view me to be... ____________________ The earth turns on a tilted axis - just doing the best it can.
Hohenheim of Light~Full Metal Alchemist |
|