An unusual persepctive on God- or not?

[Theoryofrelativity]

while i agree that one thing cannot exist by itself, it seems completely obvious that as far as mentality is concerned, everything exists only for its own sake, although placed in a complex framework of interrelation with the rest of existence. the key to unity is not so much an environmental or ecosystematic balance, but a mindset manifest in living things of intelligence that values compassion and respect for all life while still recognizing the necessary environmental factors that cause us to exhibit hostility towards and kill one another in the name of survival. that is not a god concept, merely a change in perspective. the problem with it is that, as much as natural systems may appear to desire balance and harmony, the proliferation of organisms, especially those with freedom of choice and action ensures that there can never be such a thing as 100% balance or harmony as long as one thinks or acts differently from the norm. the laws of probability alone can demonstrate why this would never happen.

I agree with all the above, the human race is doomed

Meanwhile, your description about life 'not being a God concept'.
I think you are all missing the point of what I am saying. You are still hung up on traditional roles of god and god being an entity. A divine creator.

I am saying that life and the successful continuance, is as it started out to be, about one ness, being one with your self and one with the universe. It's a spiritual concept I guess. God being the spiritual reward for being true to yourself and environment. The battle against nature and each other takes us further away from our sense of inner peace and well being. Thus when we move back to being at one with self, each other and the world (united) we will again find inner peace and world peace. This is the reward. This is what I am calling God.

 

[one_raven]

Yes.
It is an unusual perspective on God.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

i would have to agree with you. but i think our physiology as humans limits us from attaining complete unity. but we can always get closer. and all religions are based on reality, but through the passing down of these ideas--especially from the person who first thought them to the next--the intended message gets distorted. and also, it should be apparent that we all have some kind of bias based on the environment of our past. unity starts when we realize that all we say in language and all our religions and philosophies and science and math and even our senses are merely metaphors for what really exists around us. but through context and awareness of relation we are able to percieve that reality--not through any sense, but through a collective being.

Thank you for your post
I agree complete unity is impossible due to phisiology but as you say we should still aspire to be closer, and in the majority I hope that is true.

Although with the modern world gradually restricting real person contact and relying more and more upon a new virtual world for contact, will we evolve to understand less about true human nature as time goes on.

Will our innate abilities to 'read' people diminish through evoltution. Will we all become like Vulcans who are unable to show emotion and cannot understand (like autistics) emotional responses in others? Will this lack of emotional response to things enable us to establish a more harmonious life style, bearing in mind emotional respeonses are what causes a lot of problems or will this lack of emotion result in reduced empathy and compassion for others, taking us yet further away from unification and the rewards of inner/world peace and harmony.

 

[charles cure]

I agree with all the above, the human race is doomed

Meanwhile, your description about life 'not being a God concept'.
I think you are all missing the point of what I am saying. You are still hung up on traditional roles of god and god being an entity. A divine creator.

I am saying that life and the successful continuance, is as it started out to be, about one ness, being one with your self and one with the universe. It's a spiritual concept I guess. God being the spiritual reward for being true to yourself and environment. The battle against nature and each other takes us further away from our sense of inner peace and well being. Thus when we move back to being at one with self, each other and the world (united) we will again find inner peace and world peace. This is the reward. This is what I am calling God.

so basically you are redefining the word god with a completely different concept. words lose their meaning once you give them completely new and unwarranted connotations.

 

[superluminal]

Besides all this having an overwhelming "so what" factor, someone need's to explain to me why "one-ness" is such an overused spiritual feel-good phrase. What's so good about one-ness? What does it mean, exactly, to "be one with yourself"? I thought I was one with "myself" by definition. Schitzophrenics are, by definition, not one with themselves. Nor are conjoined twins. Why is "one-ness" always associated with harmony? I thought harmony required at least two distinct entities to define the concept of harmony - that being a pleasing relationship between entities.

I think all of this one-ness babble is just that. Babble. A black hole is the very definition of one-ness - a singularity no less. What's so good about black holes? They suck. Everything.

Dude, you know, the one-ness of the cosmos is, like, dude, it's all about harmony dude. One-ness is peace, you know? One-ness is, like, the holistic center of all being. It's the center, man, the center. All is one. You just don't get it dude.

No, I sure fucking don't.

 

[RoyLennigan]

Besides all this having an overwhelming "so what" factor, someone need's to explain to me why "one-ness" is such an overused spiritual feel-good phrase. What's so good about one-ness? What does it mean, exactly, to "be one with yourself"? I thought I was one with "myself" by definition. Schitzophrenics are, by definition, not one with themselves. Nor are conjoined twins. Why is "one-ness" always associated with harmony? I thought harmony required at least two distinct entities to define the concept of harmony - that being a pleasing relationship between entities.

I think all of this one-ness babble is just that. Babble. A black hole is the very definition of one-ness - a singularity no less. What's so good about black holes? They suck. Everything.

Dude, you know, the one-ness of the cosmos is, like, dude, it's all about harmony dude. One-ness is peace, you know? One-ness is, like, the holistic center of all being. It's the center, man, the center. All is one. You just don't get it dude.

No, I sure fucking don't.

its because you come to the realization that all things are relative to all other things--its like the butterfly effect, the smallest event takes part in causing the biggest event. even schizophrenics are part of the whole because they, like everything else, are simply an interaction of energy connected through different patterns. and they affect the world too, though a person's affect on the world is largely due to their unique physiology and position in the universe.

when people talk about being one with something its because they feel at that moment just how everything is connecting so fluidly and it hardly takes any motivation at all to keep with everything thats going on around you. its really easy to feel when playing music or sports with a talented, open-minded group of people. its an experience that can't be explained and if you don't know what it is, then you will never know by reading or listening to others talking about it. but like any word or phrase, its just a metaphor for that actual experience and so its open to your interpretation whether you've had that experience or not.

 

[BSFilter]

The only way the human race will ever become unified, is when we are presented with a single goal. This will most likely come in the form of worldwide endangerment, which would affect people globally.

Reading this concept of oneness, I could not help but to relate the concept of cycles into it also. Nothing is constant (except proposedly God). Everything which is around for a long period of time WILL undergo change, and many things under go specific cycles of change (ie Weather). Perhaps we have trouble realizing the cycles that take place in our universe simply because we have only been around for a cosmic eyeblink. Maybe galaxy creation in itself is a cycle, as well as the expansion of the universe and its ultimate end of its cycle(I do not believe it will expand forever).

 

[RoyLennigan]

The only way the human race will ever become unified, is when we are presented with a single goal. This will most likely come in the form of worldwide endangerment, which would affect people globally.

Reading this concept of oneness, I could not help but to relate the concept of cycles into it also. Nothing is constant (except proposedly God). Everything which is around for a long period of time WILL undergo change, and many things under go specific cycles of change (ie Weather). Perhaps we have trouble realizing the cycles that take place in our universe simply because we have only been around for a cosmic eyeblink. Maybe galaxy creation in itself is a cycle, as well as the expansion of the universe and its ultimate end (I do not believe it will expand forever).

i completely agree. all things are relative to each other and everything interacts with everything else. the only thing absolute is that there is something here, existing. but my idea of god is that web of interactions--its like an analog to our brain. so even god is not absolute.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

The only way the human race will ever become unified, is when we are presented with a single goal. This will most likely come in the form of worldwide endangerment, which would affect people globally.

Reading this concept of oneness, I could not help but to relate the concept of cycles into it also. Nothing is constant (except proposedly God). Everything which is around for a long period of time WILL undergo change, and many things under go specific cycles of change (ie Weather). Perhaps we have trouble realizing the cycles that take place in our universe simply because we have only been around for a cosmic eyeblink. Maybe galaxy creation in itself is a cycle, as well as the expansion of the universe and its ultimate end of its cycle(I do not believe it will expand forever).

agreed,
When you consider the life cycle of a fly and the extremely short time compared to ours that it takes to complete, we cannot comprehend the lifecycle of the universe. But what an amazing thing to ponder, I have never pondered about the actual potential life cycle of the universe before?
The birth, the infancy, the maturation, the reproduction cycle, the parenting, the death, what stage is our universe at. Would somebody care to elaborate on this theme and hazzard a guess at to what stage the universe could be in its life cyle and what each of those stages mentioned above could have represented in our history and where we fit into that life cycle?

 

[I-Am-Invisible]

<s>Isn't this concept like pantheism?</s>

Edit: will we achieve pantheism if we are unified?

and then again the arguments earlier mentioning that it is natural for animals to eat others, then isn't it natural for humans to want to be different etc. and that therefor konflikts, wars, and different groups (religous/political/etc) exist?

Wouldn't it require a ideal communistic society? (that is probably impossible to achieve)

 

[BSFilter]

Haha, at this point in our understanding, it is impossible to tell what stage of the universe we are in. One may assume its still relatively young because it is expanding, but who knows for sure? no one

 

[superluminal]

agreed,
When you consider the life cycle of a fly and the extremely short time compared to ours that it takes to complete, we cannot comprehend the lifecycle of the universe. But what an amazing thing to ponder, I have never pondered about the actual potential life cycle of the universe before?
The birth, the infancy, the maturation, the reproduction cycle, the parenting, the death, what stage is our universe at. Would somebody care to elaborate on this theme and hazzard a guess at to what stage the universe could be in its life cyle and what each of those stages mentioned above could have represented in our history and where we fit into that life cycle?

and

Haha, at this point in our understanding, it is impossible to tell what stage of the universe we are in. One may assume its still relatively young because it is expanding, but who knows for sure? no one

You would all hate my answer. Since none of you subscribe much to science, yep. You'd hate it.

Let the blathering continue.

 

[(Q)]

The birth, the infancy, the maturation, the reproduction cycle, the parenting, the death, what stage is our universe at. Would somebody care to elaborate on this theme and hazzard a guess at to what stage the universe could be in its life cyle and what each of those stages mentioned above could have represented in our history and where we fit into that life cycle?

Breast-feeding.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

and



You would all hate my answer. Since none of you subscribe much to science, yep. You'd hate it.

Let the blathering continue.

common blather on, tell us, we accept it's hypothetical as are all discussions regarding the origins of life. If the we imagine that the universe itself is a living thing, what stage might it be in its life cycle? Maturation of a life form certainly explains why the universe is expanding though ay? Wonder what the 'life from known as universe' eats?

 

[(Q)]

If the we imagine

Yes, superluminal, be like ToR and imagine.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

Yes, superluminal, be like ToR and imagine.

Yes superluminal be like Einstein and imagine

after all where would we be re the theory of relativity if he never had any imagination.

 

[Jenyar]

God is unity..not a thing, the result of unity is balance and harmony and peace.

I have a question about what you mean with "unity". The principle is easy enough to understand, but "connectedness" can be expressed in different ways. Is it the unity of an intradependent system (like different cells relying on each other to form an organ), of interdependent systems (different organs relying on each other to form a complex system), or of independent systems (different people relying on each other in a society).

I ask because the meaning will affect your argument. It's one thing to say that God is this unity, but that would mean God is (currently) divided, and therefore also not this unity (unless you don't mean "God" in any coherent sense at all). An alternative might be to say that God represents such unity, or "stands for" it - independent of the current situation. To put it simply, people living in harmony (presumably by actively managing their relationships with other people, but still uniquely contributing), would then be in accordance with God's will, which is/was His original design, and those who don't would be deviating from it. What do you think?

For the religions who worship and honour prophets. It is not the messenger that is important it is the message. The messages differ and are 'exclusive' meaning they are NOT messages from God. God is not about excluding anyone or anything. God is unification.

This message that you're bringing, is it exclusive, or can someone who prefers his own kind of unity (say, a single world government under his own rule) also claim it? Are facists and dictators, for example, included?

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

To put it simply, people living in harmony (presumably by actively managing their relationships with other people, but still uniquely contributing), would then be in accordance with God's will, which is/was His original design, and those who don't would be deviating from it. What do you think?

God is unity as in: inner peace, respect, harmony , love, unification on celluar level, unification on sociatal basis. All the above

Note this is my perspective NOT an argument.

Re dicatators and tyrants, dictating your will onto others is NOT unification, it is what it is, dictatorship.

I am saying God is all those good warm things that fill you up inside when you can relate to all the things that surround you. God is the feeling you exude unto others when you have these 'God' feelings inside you.

VERY simply, take the 'o' out of Good and you have 'God', good feelings, being good = god feelings, being god. Doing good to others, doing god to others.

Roy explains this better than I.

 

[Jenyar]

Re dicatators and tyrants, dictating your will onto others is NOT unification, it is what it is, dictatorship.

So your message doesn't exclude them - they exclude themselves?

 

[BSFilter]

I think the inital problem arises from using the concept of what humans consider to be unification. You cannot compare man-made governments in an attempt to define supreme unification.