God

[Guille]

First, I Must Say That Its Not Fear That I Always Have To Defend Myself With No Help,
Now I Must Say That The Universe Was Created In Opossites, We All Know That, So If We Are Not Perfect And We Think We Are The Most Intelegent Thing That Its In The Universe, There Is Perfect, There Is God

"god And Science Are Two Loners, If We All Get Them To Help Each Other They Will Get To The Path To Toe Stronger Than Ever"

Alex

What Dou You Think About My Cool Quote From.... Well Myself

MAN! Don't live in another world! This is life. As hard as ever. In this world you have to defend yourself, and if you don't manage supporters, be strong, and do it alone. Do you tihnk I have supporters? Me? Probably the person most hated between religious people of the web! Me, who have done a several pages god thread giving demostrations that what, for some people is most important, doens't exist. I have no supporters. LOOK, even in my own thread, there arer more votes for theism than atheism! Look back at the pages, do you see anybody defending me? They all discussed. I go on very well with many of the forum, this is why many didn't just start attaking me insulting me, but they don't support me. And if you say it's not fear, well go an ask help for god, if he really exists accroding to you...I wonder how come in every single thing that has happend, miracles, etz, that are supposed to demostrate god, aren't clear, and always have possibilties of other things doing it.

NOW, not ALL the universe was created by opposites. Is there an opposite for, thread? for forum? for stone? I can give as much as you want, but I find it quite useless. The only thing that you can do to demostrate that perfect exist (in which case, if you trully demostrate perfection, I will start believing in god (I promise)) is: no way. Let me tell you some thoughts I had at Oxford this July:

The totallity of our existance is both ourselfs and our world. "I" is divided in mind and body; thought and perception. Then only way that our world exists, is by thought and perception. We can say that they are co-working, for each leads to the other (like cause-effect-cause). We our selves, are part of our world. We percieve and think about ourseves. Now, all of what exists to you is your world, and your world is either percieved, thought, or both (ussually both). Have you percieved "god"? The answer, the real answer, you can only give, because it's your world, but, I can tell that NO is the answer because a big part of you is in my world, I know you a lot. Perception, just to remember you, si done by our senses. I'mnot talking about thinking yet. Just to comment, this explenation only workls for those who believe god to be a "creature" (I didn't find a good word, sorry if it is insultive), not for those who believe god to be nature, i.e. everything. Now, can we think about god? Well, If I have written it, I must have think about him! And if we are discusing him , we must have think about him! and anything related to him must have been thought about him! This is the normal rationalization. But it is COMPLETELLY AND ABSOLUTELLY WRONG. Let me justify myself before you start trying to destroy youir computer screeen by reading this. When we think, we think in images, this is in every single part of our brain. We don't think in words. It is true that we have the words in our brain, in our memory, but we use them only when we are going to talk, write, or read (for indentification). Now, to think in god, we must have an image of him. We may have never really think in deciding that image consciouslly, but we have done it. Now, this image must represent exactly what god, the word, and the concept, represents (and this is not refutable, for it is thoughts of one of the greatests philosophers of 20th century, Ludwig Witgenstein). Now, to represent something, we need a perception of this representation, of the meaning pf the concept of this representation, but as there is no representation of god in our perception, it must be produced by our mind also. The meaning of the concept of god was thus created in our mind because there is not perception of it, of the meaning. The meaning of the concept of god is divided in several properties or characteristcs, which aren't agreed beteween religions, point which makes me capable of saying to be god myself, and nobody can fight it, for, in my world, I decide what is what and who is who. But this is not my important point. We haven't percieved any of the characteristics of god in reality: perfection, absolute goodnes, absolute loveness, absolute truth, absoluteness, completeness, eternity, infinity...etz. Now, the thinking process, ability, is the constitution of our mind, thus, of ourselves. So, acconrding to this god is proved to be not part of our world but of ourselves, existence in use is proof, non-existence in world is proved. 1 to 1, now. But god, the meaning, image, word, concept and characteristcs, are thoughts, not the thinking process or the ability to think. The thoughts is not part of ourselves, it is the analization that we do of thing sin our world. There is a tunel in our mind, which let's things from the world in, one way, and then process it whiles it's in the tunel, and then it goes out again, to the world, through the other side of the tunel. But our ion our mind, apart from this tunel, we have litttle sperical holes. These holes, contain the thoughts of our mind about things which aren't percieved from the oru world, for example god. Thus, god thoughts are in a hole in our mind, and this is how we can think about god, but we don't think about god, as a thing, as something, as from the our world, we think about we our god is. Thus, what we did, is create our selves the god hole in our mind, we digged and digged and think abd think. We gave him shape and form. But not existence. He isn't part of the world, doesn't exist there. He isn't part of our mind, doesn't exist there. He is a fully surrounded by a wall, in all directions, so it can't go to form part of our mind, the abilty to think, ro go to the world, the ability to percieve. But we said that everything that exists, at least for us, is either percieved our thought, do we think about god? no, I said, we think about something that according to other thoughts, and with no perception basis, has the characteristics and form that we gave it, but, thus, we don't think about "god". SO he is not part of our mind or neither of our world, not part form perception, not part from the thought, not part from the tunel, not part from the ends of the tunel, not part of anything, not part of itself.

I know this paragraph is long, but I must say that it is extremelly valuable to read, for it gives a whole new conception about what and how, we think, percieve, exist, and other things exist. I will talk about the why, whcih is much more important, in future posts. Finally, I hope that these thoughts that I made and gave so much attention in Oxford, help others in there way.

[Guille]

Nichole,

I don't think you are an alien at all, ypou have the kind of position which an atheist like me loves to discuss about.

Do you agree with the statement: god=nature=everything?
Now, I've developed a lot my thoughts from the first page to now. When we die we stop living. We do not stop existing, true. But before discussing this, we must agree that we are: our mind and our body; our thoght and our perception. Now, when we die, we stop thinking, our mind doesn't work exist any more because our brain, the basis of thought and mind, has died. Now, the conclusion, is that we stop existing partly, by our mind, but our body still exists. After several thousand years our body doesn't exist anymore, but, the atoms we are made of will exist always, so we will never stop existing in that sense.

[gs_cmans]

God isn't proven and isn't disproven thus I can't say if God exists or doesn't. I think you can never disprove God. I also think you can never prove God so in a way it's a non-discussion. Even if God came out and said here I am and this is how I did it you can't be sure. It's an infinite question as is all.

Yes we cant disprove because there has no one defined the clear structure of GOD to disprove it. I think it is not required to disprove it, because GOD is just living in the beleifs and no physical phenomenon to authorize its existance.
Even if GOD exists and have created the universe all just for creating humans, he must hav been CRAZY about it just creating an so large universe and with a small part cal earth in a small sub-urbs of a small solar system.(I think this clues for non-existence).

[Scoopcone]

Your whole contemplation of GOD is answered towards the end of "Simply, Everything". That (simply) is what GOD is. A phenomenon due to the physiology of the brain and the physics of the mind. We humans can generate (the most) intellectual-gravity, thus what we call "faith" is stronger than a lower-life-form's.

Different Religions? "Anything describable can be described in an infinite amount of ways".

"That which observes cannot see itself". (Steven Cohen)

Never forget that.

[gs_cmans]

Really to say i wonder whether that infinite questions or any other infinite means explanation in not really convincing. So i can never accept that (than simply never to forget that).

[Guille]

hola guille: why do you think humans don't think in words???

i personally would say humans (at least if i go and kind of analyze myself) are capable to think in words - and that's one main reason why human race kind of surpasses everything else on earth especially because human language has a great number of words and interconnections within language and even lots of interconnections between different languages .... birds do also have lots of different "languages" - true? false?

i personally also suppose that human brain doesn't have memory - it has interconnections to the environment and gets the information needed as required - sure that is also kind of memory - but memory outsourced - sure that might sound dumb!!! for me it doesn't make sense if the brain of itself has memory because: it doesn't make sense that it furthermore can happen that sometimes a word/picture escapes some mind and suddenly reoccurs ....

one question: i do know some spanish - and while i learned it i "found" the word:

hinterland (adapted from german)

and for the english speaking:

what about "kindergarten"? (also adapted from german)

both words i can suppose would be better expressed by using its own language ... because it lacks interconnections within its own language ...

can you explain without backchecking how that can happen from your point of view?

I think I should have explained it better. Humans do think in words, in the sense that we must think in words in order to express them. But when we think about "Apple" we think, in a our brain, about a red/green/yellow circular, fruit, etz....we think about it's taste, texture, smell, size....everything we have percieved of it. Then we go to the neurons that have directly connected information of facts to the picture that reprresents the concept-percept of apple: the word apple, the tree of apples, the market place to buy apples... I'm not sayingf that we choose to see the apple pciture ofver the others, I 'm saying that when we think of things in our head, we things of the concept that those things represent for us as percepts (objects of perception), and that is how they look as concepts (objects of conception (thought)).

When we learn a language when we are very very small, we have words directly connected to concepts, but when we learn it from my age, onwards, we have learn the words of that language, connect them to their equivalent in our mother language, and then indirectly, it is cionnected to the concept.

I am learning french, but when I think in the word POMME I don't have a direct connection POMME<------>CONCEPT OF APPLE. I have POMMES<------>MANZANA/APPLE<------>CONCEPT OF APPLE

In my case, I learned english and spanish as mother languages, so I connect the french to both th spanish and enlgish words of apple, because I have a direct connection from the spanish word to the concept, and another one from the enlgish word to the concept.

By the way, I'm preparing a long, long post (maybe I divide it in several) more about defining god. I will explain why there are bad and good things, and many other things, including the sense of life.

[mkirkpatrick]

If you find yourself then you will find God,it is really that simple,dont take anyones word for it,Try it yourself and see,It is really that simple.The power
behind this reality is that you do The Work,You find out Yourself!you donthave to listen to any lectures,attend any religeous building,take someones word for it.
You find it within yourself,Man Know Thyself,and when Man knows Himself he also Knows God.Dont take my word for it,try it today,and See?

I once asked a monk a while ago,How will you get into heaven,he said by
backing out of Hell!


kind regards,michael.

[Guille]

How can god be related to non.human natural phenomena if god himself was invented by humans?

Now, a theist may say then that relgious are fine for morality and ethics, because these are human things, and thus they work. But no, they don't, for they themselves are against the very principles of ethics.

ABout going to heaven by backing out of hell, for my mind it means: Going from nowhere to nothingness.

[enton]

This post I'm going to do about perfection.

God is perfect. If god is perfect, and god is unique, then god is the only perfect thing in the universe. So then everything but god, is imperfect. Perfect and imperfect are opposites. Let's consider a universe were there is no perfect thing: no god, would b obligatory. In this universe, everything is imperfect. There is no perfect thing. If everything is imperfect, and perfect is the opposite of imperfect, then because there is no perfect thing that makes everything imperfect, they stop being imperfect, and as all are the same, and they are not imperfect, and the opposite of imperfect is perfect, then everything is perfect. So everything is perfect because everything is imperfect. This fact is worthwhile if and only if there is no god. If we introduce god, or the perfect, in this universe, then everything isn't imperfect. As everything isn't imperfect, then everything isn't perfect. We have the both opposites. So now they are opposites. So now everythng is not equal so the universe would "explode" or wouldn't work, so there could be no universe.

As I noticed, you don't refer to Bible in my thread, Guille. The Bible is a book comprised of 66 books. In these little books are found words of men of God like prophets, apostles, christians etc. You can also read words of anti-God, anti-Christ. You can also read words of angels of God. You can also read words of satan and his cohorts.

What is my main target here? I am talking about God basically biblically. The believers and most especially the christian faithful know that God is faithful. God swears onto himself, even unto his holiness and his wrath. Now if this thread is just a matter of explaining what and who God is, I had already given a thread here about the existence of God biblically speaking. Besides you cannot fathom the Father of Jesus Christ if He is whom you are talking about.

[mkirkpatrick]

All our beliefs our personal to us, and that being said we need to take care in
sometimes sharing them, for there are many who will not accept what you say,
and this can be hurtful to all involved, many years ago I made the mistake of sharing some very personal stuff with strangers, only to be ridiculed and laughed at, I will not make the same mistake again. When it comes to God and religion it
can invoke many passions and inflame the mind, I try to respect all men and also
try and find a modicum of humility each day. Very difficult when the ego tries to
rule!
kind regards michael.