It is currently Sat Jul 21, 2018 9:51 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: What is God?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2018 5:02 pm 
Holy Ghost

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 11:51 pm
Posts: 918
Anyone else heard of this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06WqN5gULqs


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2018 5:45 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am
Posts: 15539
Heard of what?

- Doc


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:36 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 7074
deacon blues wrote:


Interesting kid.

God is energy. I can go with that on a fundamental level.

Hey, he believes in God. That's cool. More than can be said for some folks here. :wink:

And he figured it out by age thirteen. Good for him. :smile:

Regards,
MG


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:04 am 
Holy Ghost

Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 11:51 pm
Posts: 918
Max Loughan does say he doesn't believe that God is a person or entity (2:20) He says that "God is energy himself, well not even himself, Itself" You seem to miss the point, MG. What's interesting to me is that the young men is using reason, where 13 year-olds in the LDS tradition are encouraged to rely more on authority and feelings in the search for Truth.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 11:08 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am
Posts: 15539
I believe God is the AI running our simulation.

- Doc


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:44 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 7074
deacon blues wrote:
Max Loughan does say he doesn't believe that God is a person or entity (2:20) He says that "God is energy himself, well not even himself, Itself" You seem to miss the point, MG.


Yes, I heard him say that. My thoughts simply went a different direction from his. God in our image, but a being of energy/light of some form or fashion.

deacon blues wrote:
What's interesting to me is that the young men is using reason, where 13 year-olds in the LDS tradition are encouraged to rely more on authority and feelings in the search for Truth.


This young man would be an interesting 'add on' to a deacon/teacher's quorum. :smile:

Regards,
MG


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:22 pm 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am
Posts: 811
Makes sense. God in essence is conscious energy, or energetic consciousness, I AM THAT I AM.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 8:29 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 4242
Location: Firmly on this earth
God is whatever mankind think it ought to be for them to be comfortable.

_________________
"Being and nonbeing arise mutually. Thus not to see the unity of self and other is the fear of life, and not to see the unity of being and nonbeing is the fear of death." Alan Watts

"The problem is most religions proceed to try and explain the truth and then insist that you agree with their explanation." Brad Warner


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 8:37 am 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am
Posts: 811
Philo Sofee wrote:
God is whatever mankind think it ought to be for them to be comfortable.

Well, if you look deep into the symbolism of Christ doing some major soul-searching shadow work - (and of course Christ is not Jesus’s last name but what he became & encouraged all to become,) the higher GOoD involves addressing the lowest, most uncomfortable bad.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:29 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 7791
Location: What does the fox say?
God is a three decker sauerkraut and toadstool sandwich with arsenic sauce!

_________________
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:51 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 4242
Location: Firmly on this earth
Amore wrote:
Philo Sofee wrote:
God is whatever mankind think it ought to be for them to be comfortable.

Well, if you look deep into the symbolism of Christ doing some major soul-searching shadow work - (and of course Christ is not Jesus’s last name but what he became & encouraged all to become,) the higher GOoD involves addressing the lowest, most uncomfortable bad.


Yep, made in our image and hopes for our comfort just like I said....

_________________
"Being and nonbeing arise mutually. Thus not to see the unity of self and other is the fear of life, and not to see the unity of being and nonbeing is the fear of death." Alan Watts

"The problem is most religions proceed to try and explain the truth and then insist that you agree with their explanation." Brad Warner


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Sat Jan 20, 2018 5:01 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 2:19 pm
Posts: 10470
Location: Multiverse
It's whatever this guy says it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgoB2JMEowc

_________________
You have made this ludicrous assertion about Israelite religion in the New World. Produce one shred of non-faith based evidence to prove it. --Philip Jenkins


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:17 pm 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am
Posts: 811
Philo Sofee wrote:
Amore wrote:
Well, if you look deep into the symbolism of Christ doing some major soul-searching shadow work - (and of course Christ is not Jesus’s last name but what he became & encouraged all to become,) the higher GOoD involves addressing the lowest, most uncomfortable bad.

Yep, made in our image and hopes for our comfort just like I said....

Not exactly. Jesus (and practically every other religious icon or symbol) can be interpreted different ways. Often, as you mentioned, they are projections of what one imagines and hopes, but there are deeper possible implications. Jesus being tempted by Satan (aka the evil aspects within him and all humanity) and Jesus suffering in Gethsemane (again for the evil within us all) - is not exactly comforting. Yet, it can be seen, if you look deeper, as a sort of spiritual map of what we need to do - explore our own shadow aspects so they don't mess with us and others without our awareness.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:23 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 8021
Location: Somewhere between bemused and curious.
Did Orson Pratt get reincarnated?

_________________
"The lives we lead now are not dress rehearsals, they are the only performance we have. Therefore what matters is what we have here, the people we know and and love and the good we can do for the world"
Sean Carroll


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 12:26 pm 
Holy Ghost

Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:00 pm
Posts: 888
God is the Other, capital O.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Wed Jan 31, 2018 11:34 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 4242
Location: Firmly on this earth
Meadowchik wrote:
God is the Other, capital O.


Or the Nuther, capital N. :wink:

_________________
"Being and nonbeing arise mutually. Thus not to see the unity of self and other is the fear of life, and not to see the unity of being and nonbeing is the fear of death." Alan Watts

"The problem is most religions proceed to try and explain the truth and then insist that you agree with their explanation." Brad Warner


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:07 am 
God

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:39 am
Posts: 13677
I don't want to crush anything going on here, but your skeptical alarm bells should be going off within seconds in. His invention claims are obviously not true and he strings together pseudoscientific, vaguely new agey comments after that. I feel bad for him, because there is someone exploiting him behind that.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:47 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 7:16 pm
Posts: 28305
Location: Off the Deep End
mentalgymnast wrote:
deacon blues wrote:


Interesting kid.

God is energy. I can go with that on a fundamental level.

Hey, he believes in God. That's cool. More than can be said for some folks here. :wink:

And he figured it out by age thirteen. Good for him. :smile:

Regards,
MG


1 Corinthians 13 King James Version (KJV)

1-4

Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,

_________________
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb


Stay close to the people who feel like sunlight ~ Arsu Shaikh


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:10 am 
Holy Ghost

Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 7:00 pm
Posts: 888
Philo Sofee wrote:
Meadowchik wrote:
God is the Other, capital O.


Or the Nuther, capital N. :wink:


Some post-theists call God us, as in oneself when one has learned love and acceptance for self.

I call God a placeholder for the unknown, except I don't need that anymore. I've spent enough of my life immersed in certainty, now I am much more comfortable with limited objectivity than I am with certainty.

What's "Nuther" to you, Philo?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:01 am 
Holy Ghost
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2015 10:49 pm
Posts: 914
Philo Sofee wrote:
Meadowchik wrote:
God is the Other, capital O.
Or the Nuther, capital N. :wink:


Quote:
How the World Was Saved
One day Trurl the constructor put together a machine that could create anything starting with n. When it was ready, he tried it out, ordering it to make needles, then nankeens and negligees, which it did, then nail the lot to narghiles filled with nepenthe and numerous other narcotics. The machine carried out his instructions to the letter. Still not completely sure of its ability, he had it produce, one after the other, nimbuses, noodles, nuclei, neutrons, naphtha, noses, nymphs, naiads, and natrium. This last it could not do, and Trurl, considerably irritated, demanded an explanation.
"Never heard of it," said the machine.
"What? But it's only sodium. You know, the metal, the element…"
"Sodium starts with an s, and I work only in n."
"But in Latin it's natrium."
"Look, old boy," said the machine, "if I could do everything starting with n in every possible language, I'd be a Machine That Could Do Everything in the Whole Alphabet, since any item you care to mention undoubtedly starts with n in one foreign language or another. It's not that easy. I can't go beyond what you programmed. So no sodium."
"Very well," said Trurl and ordered it to make Night, which it made at once—small perhaps, but perfectly nocturnal. Only then did Trurl invite over his friend Klapaucius the constructor, and introduced him to the machine, praising its extraordinary skill at such length, that Klapaucius grew annoyed and inquired whether he too might not test the machine.
"Be my guest," said Trurl. "But it has to start with n."
"N?" said Klapaucius. "All right, let it make Nature."
The machine whined, and in a trice Trurl's front yard was packed with naturalists. They argued, each publishing heavy volumes, which the others tore to pieces; in the distance one could see flaming pyres, on which martyrs to Nature were sizzling; there was thunder, and strange mushroom-shaped columns of smoke rose up; everyone talked at once, no one listened, and there were all sorts of memoranda, appeals, subpoenas and other documents, while off to the side sat a few old men, feverishly scribbling on scraps of paper.
"Not bad, eh?" said Trurl with pride. "Nature to a T, admit it!"
But Klapaucius wasn't satisfied.
"What, that mob? Surely you're not going to tell me that's Nature?"
"Then give the machine something else," snapped Trurl. "Whatever you like." For a moment Klapaucius was at a loss for what to ask. But after a little thought he declared that he would put two more tasks to the machine; if it could fulfill them, he would admit that it was all Trurl said it was. Trurl agreed to this, whereupon Klapaucius requested Negative.
"Negative?!" cried Trurl. "What on earth is Negative?"
"The opposite of positive, of course," Klapaucius coolly replied. "Negative attitudes, the negative of a picture, for example. Now don't try to pretend you never heard of Negative. All right, machine, get to work!"
The machine, however, had already begun. First it manufactured antiprotons, then antielectrons, antineutrons, antineutrinos, and labored on, until from out of all this antimatter an antiworld took shape, glowing like a ghostly cloud above their heads.
"H'm," muttered Klapaucius, displeased. "That's supposed to be Negative? Well… let's say it is, for the sake of peace. … But now here's the third command: Machine, do Nothing!"
The machine sat still. Klapaucius rubbed his hands in triumph, but Trurl said:
"Well, what did you expect? You asked it to do nothing, and it's doing nothing."
"Correction: I asked it to do Nothing, but it's doing nothing."
"Nothing is nothing!"
"Come, come. It was supposed to do Nothing, but it hasn't done anything, and therefore I've won. For Nothing, my dear and clever colleague, is not your run-of-the-mill nothing, the result of idleness and inactivity, but dynamic, aggressive Nothingness, that is to say, perfect, unique, ubiquitous, in other words Nonexistence, ultimate and supreme, in its very own nonperson!"
"You're confusing the machine!" cried Trurl. But suddenly its metallic voice rang out:
"Really, how can you two bicker at a time like this? Oh yes, I know what Nothing is, and Nothingness, Nonexistence, Nonentity, Negation, Nullity and Nihility, since all these come under the heading of n, n as in Nil. Look then upon your world for the last time, gentlemen! Soon it shall no longer be…"
The constructors froze, forgetting their quarrel, for the machine was in actual fact doing Nothing, and it did it in this fashion: one by one, various things were removed from the world, and the things, thus removed, ceased to exist, as if they had never been. The machine had already disposed of nolars, nightzebs, nocs, necs, nallyrakers, neotremes and nonmalrigers. At moments, though, it seemed that instead of reducing, diminishing and subtracting, the machine was increasing, enhancing and adding, since it liquidated, in turn: nonconformists, nonentities, nonsense, nonsupport, nearsightedness, narrowmindedness, naughtiness, neglect, nausea, necrophilia and nepotism. But after a while the world very definitely began to thin out around Trurl and Klapaucius.
"Omigosh!" said Trurl. "If only nothing bad comes out of all this…"
"Don't worry," said Klapaucius. "You can see it's not producing Universal Nothingness, but only causing the absence of whatever starts with n. Which is really nothing in the way of nothing, and nothing is what your machine, dear Trurl, is worth!"
"Do not be deceived," replied the machine. "I've begun, it's true, with everything in n, but only out of familiarity. To create however is one thing, to destroy, another thing entirely. I can blot out the world for the simple reason that I'm able to do anything and everything—and everything means everything—in n, and consequently Nothingness is child's play for me. In less than a minute now you will cease to have existence, along with everything else, so tell me now, Klapaucius, and quickly, that I am really and truly everything I was programmed to be, before it is too late."
"But—" Klapaucius was about to protest, but noticed, just then, that a number of things were indeed disappearing, and not merely those that started with n. The constructors were no longer surrounded by the gruncheons, the targalisks, the shupops, the calinatifacts, the thists, worches and pritons.
"Stop! I take it all back! Desist! Whoa! Don't do Nothing!!" screamed Klapaucius. But before the machine could come to a full stop, all the brashations, plusters, laries and zits had vanished away. Now the machine stood motionless. The world was a dreadful sight. The sky had particularly suffered: there were only a few, isolated points of light in the heavens—no trace of the glorious worches and zits that had, till now, graced the horizon!
"Great Gauss!" cried Klapaucius. "And where are the gruncheons? Where my dear, favorite pritons? Where now the gentle zits?!"
"They no longer are, nor ever will exist again," the machine said calmly. "I executed, or rather only began to execute, your order…"
"I tell you to do Nothing, and you… you…"
"Klapaucius, don't pretend to be a greater idiot than you are," said the machine. "Had I made Nothing outright, in one fell swoop, everything would have ceased to exist, and that includes Trurl, the sky, the Universe, and you—and even myself. In which case who could say and to whom could it be said that the order was carried out and I am an efficient and capable machine? And if no one could say it to no one, in what way then could I, who also would not be, be vindicated?"
"Yes, fine, let's drop the subject," said Klapaucius. "I have nothing more to ask of you, only please, dear machine, please return the zits, for without them life loses all its charm …"
"But I can't, they're in z," said the machine. "Of course, I can restore nonsense, narrowmindedness, nausea, necrophilia, neuralgia, nefariousness and noxiousness. As for the other letters, however, I can't help you."
"I want my zits!" bellowed Klapaucius.
"Sorry, no zits," said the machine. "Take a good look at this world, how riddled it is with huge, gaping holes, how full of Nothingness, the Nothingness that fills the bottomless void between the stars, how everything about us has become lined with it, how it darkly lurks behind each shred of matter. This is your work, envious one! And I hardly think the future generations will bless you for it…"
"Perhaps… they won't find out, perhaps they won't notice," groaned the pale Klapaucius, gazing up incredulously at the black emptiness of space and not daring to look his colleague, Trurl, in the eye. Leaving him beside the machine that could do everything in n, Klapaucius skulked home—and to this day the world has remained honeycombed with nothingness, exactly as it was when halted in the course of its liquidation. And as all subsequent attempts to build a machine on any other letter met with failure, it is to be feared that never again will we have such marvelous phenomena as the worches and the zits—no, never again.

_________________
Choyo Chagas is Chairman of the Big Four, the ruler of the planet from "The Bull's Hour" ( Russian: Час Быка), a social science fiction novel written by Soviet author and paleontologist Ivan Yefremov in 1968.
Six months after its publication Soviet authorities banned the book and attempted to remove it from libraries and bookshops.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: What is God?
PostPosted: Thu Mar 01, 2018 3:54 pm 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:27 am
Posts: 811
EAllusion wrote:
I don't want to crush anything going on here, but your skeptical alarm bells should be going off within seconds in. His invention claims are obviously not true and he strings together pseudoscientific, vaguely new agey comments after that. I feel bad for him, because there is someone exploiting him behind that.

Please give specific examples (proof) of your claims. Otherwise it’s just your blind faith being pushed on us, assuming we’ll just take your distorted claims without any factual evidence.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 26 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bret Ripley, Google [Bot], huckelberry, Mittens and 35 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group