If God is the First and the Last then everything in between is God to. I'm God you are God, Everything is God expressing Itself in many different forms. The beauty of it all it that everything is connected in some way. We try to define God and it's so hard for many because we look right pass Her when we look at the fine young lady sitting at the bar. We look right past Him when a man is begging for money on the street corner. We look right past it when a beautiful flower pops out of the ground. God is ever present in the World and Earth. Let me hear your thoughts on this. THANKS and PEACE!!!!
God IS Everything
- Thread starter dadubose
- Start date
Ever read "Stranger in a Strange Land" by Heinlein. It deals with the idea that "Thou art god."
Certainly seems reasonable to me. If God is infinite and all-encompassing, then we are all a part of god. A part of infinity. Of course, this leads you to the question, "Can you split infinity?" If you take something that is infinite and cut it into two equal parts, wouldn't you end up with 2 infinite parts? Infinity X 2?
Certainly seems reasonable to me. If God is infinite and all-encompassing, then we are all a part of god. A part of infinity. Of course, this leads you to the question, "Can you split infinity?" If you take something that is infinite and cut it into two equal parts, wouldn't you end up with 2 infinite parts? Infinity X 2?
Another way to look at this is through the equation -
God = Everything
By maintaining a balanced equation and simplifying we can replace either side with the other and achieve -
Everything = Everything
The result is of course that God is a redundant clause and makes no difference to the final result whether he exists or not.
Taking the philosophy that simplicity is the ultimate in elegance we should simply delete the God component and suffer no loss.
Kat
God = Everything
By maintaining a balanced equation and simplifying we can replace either side with the other and achieve -
Everything = Everything
The result is of course that God is a redundant clause and makes no difference to the final result whether he exists or not.
Taking the philosophy that simplicity is the ultimate in elegance we should simply delete the God component and suffer no loss.
Kat
Of course God would be in hell if he/it/she were omnipresent. At least part of him/it/she would be (you know, that part called satan). But that part is different than the part that would be you. That's like saying if my foot were in my shoe, then I am in my shoe. My hand, being part of my whole, must then also be in my shoe. This is obviously not the case, so therefore I am not in my shoe, so my foot is not in my shoe.
Last edited:
You know, if God was omniwhatever and could do whatever he/she/it wanted, instead of destroying Satan (which he cant really do) why doesnt he just lock the doors to Hell or something or get Raphael and Gabriel to put Satan under house arrest so he cant cause any more trouble. Just a thought (a feeble one at that)
I think the whole thing is Logically Unsound, by that I mean the premise that God is beginning, end, so therefore must be all inbetween (i dont have a problem with God at beginning and end, just the other bit (well actually i do but thats not for here))
Taking a metaphor for the possible representation of the required answer, how about this....
Imagine a TV programme (if you have a limited imagination please turn your TV on now). The beginning may have an opening song, and the show also ends with the same song, but surely the fact that it began with the same song and ended with the same song does not mean that everything in between was the song, does it?
There is of course an inconsistency in this metaphor, which is that the song does not create the programme nor is it omnipresent etc.
I'll work on it, but you get the picture.
Everneo, good one, its shorter and more concise and much better than mine.. Bya
I think the whole thing is Logically Unsound, by that I mean the premise that God is beginning, end, so therefore must be all inbetween (i dont have a problem with God at beginning and end, just the other bit (well actually i do but thats not for here))
Taking a metaphor for the possible representation of the required answer, how about this....
Imagine a TV programme (if you have a limited imagination please turn your TV on now). The beginning may have an opening song, and the show also ends with the same song, but surely the fact that it began with the same song and ended with the same song does not mean that everything in between was the song, does it?
There is of course an inconsistency in this metaphor, which is that the song does not create the programme nor is it omnipresent etc.
I'll work on it, but you get the picture.
Everneo, good one, its shorter and more concise and much better than mine.. Bya
Last edited:
dadubose said:
I'm glad that you found your "God" but now try to show those who don't believe in it what it is.
I think a crucial part of this type of philosophy is to bear in mind that although we may be part of god (or whatever), don't take any pride in that notion. Does your foot have pride in being a foot? Does your eye have pride in being an eye? Beware lest you fall to megalomania and truly believe that you are god.
edit: actually, what I mean to say is "Does your foot claim to be you? Does your eye claim to be you? You may be a part of god, but are not god. The computer you are using right now is as much a part of god as you are. Is it god?"
edit: actually, what I mean to say is "Does your foot claim to be you? Does your eye claim to be you? You may be a part of god, but are not god. The computer you are using right now is as much a part of god as you are. Is it god?"
Last edited:
so the dog shit on the ground is also God?dadubose said:
and you never can b/c it doesnt exist!
universe just exists,we have no need for gods
www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Essays/Occam.html
www.transtopia.org/occam.html
Last edited:
§outh§tar said:
Were you expecting a 'yes' or 'no' answer?
This is good stuff everyone! Can I add that we are all one made up into many parts. The body is a perfect example. Though the body has many parts and functions, all the parts and functions must operate in "UNITY" in order for it to FULFILL it's purpose. We are a walking masterpiece, each and everyone of us. WOW!!! We forget consciously that we have a backbone but yet without it we probably wouldn't be able to walk. If we consciously re-member (Re = "again") (Member = "be apart of") a lot of things that God IS we just might solve a lot of what appears to be problems today in our world. I hope somebody feel me!!
PEACE & SOUL
dadubose
PEACE & SOUL
dadubose
I agree, everything is a part of God. Just as everything is part of the universe. The 'good' and the 'bad' are all parts of God. Perfection is subjective, I cannot really argue anything to be objectively perfect or imperfect. All the atoms in the universe came from one source, and that source is what everything is a part of. Nothing can be created or destroyed, only change form...
*************dadubose said:
M*W: dadubose, I like your thinking! I believe we were "created in God's image; therefore, humanity IS God. To answer someone's earlier post regarding that if we WERE God, then we would be too prideful, etc. I don't think this is so, although some individuals (Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Milosevic, etc.) had personal motivations that made them the exception to the rule. In a way, humanity as God is a trial and tribulation of its own. It's lonely at the top as they say.
yes. Worship the holy poo!!
Actually, it shouldn't be that strange an idea. That piece of shit was once part of a dog. It's not nice to denigrate feces (or any other ill-looked-upon substance), everything keeps exchanging particles. Some of that piece of crap may one day make up part of your child, or your grandchild. Or may be integrated into you. (How hygienic are you?)
It's not so much pride that's the problem as just having to face facts. Maybe we humans make up some type of bacteria in god's colon. Your view is rather humanocentric. Humans aren't that special. We couldn't exist without everything else. Parts of a whole.