This is just me being crazy and trying to find a way to give the people who need a god one that won't hurt anybody

Allex Spires
Allex Spires's picture
Posts: 9
Joined: 2006-10-01
User is offlineOffline
This is just me being crazy and trying to find a way to give the people who need a god one that won't hurt anybody

My original attempt to present this idea backfired. Here's Sapient making fun - I went with the burden of proof upon my shoulders and decided it weighed too much, maybe I should try to prove it.

I agree wholeheartedly that athiesm is the way to go. But I have reasons beyond nobody's been able to prove that God exists. My reason is that I believe that God exists and humankind and the universe are that God. I believe (no gurantee, if I'm wrong, oh well) that as a finger can't move without a brain, the universe can't be alive either. It would need a brain inside it to perceive it as existing, as your brain being inside you, perceiving you to be existing makes you sentient. I have located a higher functioning and amazing brain that exists inside the universe, it is the human brain. I have concluded that the universe and everything in it is God.(I could be wrong) I don't think that it does anything in particular or performs miracles or whatever,(all miracles, though, I suppose must have been poerformed by it, but are scientifically explainable and if they aren't now, they will be one day) I came up with this theory not to prove you wrong, but to prove to the world that the only way to reach our evolutionary potential, as a species, is to make peace with everyone in the world. Because a brain against itself makes for a madman. And if the human brain is the brain of the universe, then each individual brain is a brain cell.

Religious people believe that they have to kill and overpower to make their God happy. But if all humans are God, then killing and overpowering other parts of God's brain makes God very unhappy, and crazy. Religious people feel that they need a God, so I give them one. The universe itself.

I don't stop there, either, I illustrate.

Speculations about Religion and Reality, Dedicated to Dr. Carl Sagan

God is a being that is everywhere. God is a being of pure creative force. God is truth and proof of designation of our own existence, as well as our own mortality...

It begins with a black background. It always does. And then a pinhole of light penetrates the unprobable depths of pure, unshadowed, omniversal darkness...

13.7 billion of years ago, there was a ball of absolute. This ball was made of everything and we often refer to it as God. All of the energies that make up the chemical reactions that caused all the stars, planets, random celestial bodies and any other things in the universe were contained within God. Then, genesis, it blew up. Big bang and creation. But the whole of it remained as God. It remains, still, as everything. Regardless of how incalculable it's size may be.

Regardless of the size of the whole it hasn't grown at all because it is still everything. It is as big as everything can be yet if it is everything it's size cannot be measured, giving it similar properties to nothing. The universe is always everything so it's size does not have any real significance whatsoever.

The explosion's force caused expansion of 'everything'. New 'things' were created. Star systems pock marked with planet systems and asteroids and comets filled the no longer void. More destruction chaoting to more creation. Over millennia and aeon.

Some long time after the initial discharge, aftershocks of disorder organized themselves to produce the Milky Way Galaxy. Still longer after this, the Solar System was formed and finally, the most popular planet on all of Earth: Earth.

God is still there. Everything is God. Material energy can never be created, nor can it's existence be extinguished. It can only change itself in form. All of the material energy that made up the everything at the 'dawn' of all, is the same material energy we still have now. God is matter/energy, pure and true... but, so are we. Stars are all made of us-stuff, and vice-versa.

The universe and everything in it is God. We are all linked through the material energies that make us up. As we are all part of the universe, we are also a part of God. God did create us and so in essence, we also created ourselves.

Heaven is a place without a body, without a mind. All of the information you have with you is contained inside of your brain. Your brain is just as fragile as the rest of you. When you die, you cannot take it with you. Death is existence invisible. You cannot think, and you cannot stay together. Gliding smoothly through strands of silken sweetness, you expand and become a trillion new parts of the universe overall, though you already were.

Most humans not only cannot accept this, they can't even comprehend it. This is why we have heaven. It's nice to think that your mentality, your sole, your you, goes with you and you get to go on perceiving. You and it do not.

When you die, you do get a place in the kingdom of God. You just won't enjoy it. . . .you won't hate it either. You won't be aware of it but you will experience it.

If people could take perception with them, past death, God but that would be pure beautiful... but they can't.

We are here to be here and exist so that we can be here and exist. If you want joy you can try to experience everything. Look to the stars, everything is an awful lot.


This is a simple yes/no questionaire for you to determine, based on your own evidence, whether or not the universe is a sentient organism and considerably, based on your evidence, God. This coincides with my essay, Speculations about Religion and Reality.

- sentient [sen-shuhnt]
adjective
1. having the power of perception by the senses; conscious.
2. characterized by sensation and consciousness.noun
3. a person or thing that is sentient.
4. Archaic. the conscious mind.


Is the Universe a sentient being?
YES/NO

Everything in the universe considerably comes from the same place and is made from the same substances, I.E., Carl Sagan said: "We are all made out of starstuff." Do you agree with that?
YES/NO

Is everything in the universe a part of the Universe as a whole?
YES/NO

Is your index finger a part of you?
YES/NO

Is your index finger sentient?
YES/NO

Is your brain a part of you?
YES/NO

Is your brain sentient?
YES/NO

Regardless of whether or not your finger is sentient, are you sentient?
YES/NO

Is a star sentient?
YES/NO

Are you sentient?
YES/NO

Are both you and a star part of the same universe?
YES/NO

Regardless of whether a star is sentient, does the fact that your brain is sentient, and part of the universe as a whole, make the universe sentient in the way that your brain being a sentient part of you makes you sentient?
YES/NO

Does a human brain have the power to manipulate its environment as it manipulates its body, having no control over its overall lifespan but some over its "health", shape, and movement?
YES/NO

Does a human brain have the power manipulate the Earth as it manipulates a body, having no control over its overall lifespan but some over its "health", shape, and movement?
YES/NO

Does a human brain have the power to conceive a way to manipulate the universe as it manipulates a body, having no control over its overall lifespan but some over its "health", shape, and movement?
YES/NO

Is the universe a sentient being?
YES/NO

Is the universe God?
YES/NO

Is Humanity, the only higher functioning brain known to exist in the universe, the brain of God?

YES/NO


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
I'm with you, dude. It is

I'm with you, dude. It is not so much a question of whether God actually exists, though. It's a question of how people who believe God exists perceive reality. If you have the kind of God that you describe, then you've basically just turned science on its head and given it a mythology. In other words, whether or not God exists is irrelevant, and you can choose to perceive the world through a mythological lens or not. If you choose mythology, then base your mythology on scientific facts.

Mythology is just an interrelated set of symbols presented in an intuitive way so that people can learn about the universe intuitively rather than rationally. But then again, you can have your mythology teach the benefits of rationality. Combine mythology and rationality, and I think we can give people the God they need without giving them a God that will cause harm. That's where I'm going with it. 

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


mouse
Posts: 129
Joined: 2007-02-21
User is offlineOffline
yeah i like the way you

yeah i like the way you have articulated what god would mean.

thanks for sharing.


Named
Named's picture
Posts: 18
Joined: 2007-02-11
User is offlineOffline
So ultimately, the

So ultimately, the conclusion to be made from your proposition of God existing is that he/she/it is irrelevant? Leaving me to ponder what the hell the point of first conceiving and then arguing the idea.

 

I could argue any concept to exist in the shadow of another, but it would be equally pointless. 

Live 'til you die.


Plutodog
Plutodog's picture
Posts: 1
Joined: 2007-02-24
User is offlineOffline
Named wrote: So

Named wrote:

So ultimately, the conclusion to be made from your proposition of God existing is that he/she/it is irrelevant? Leaving me to ponder what the hell the point of first conceiving and then arguing the idea.

Exercising those brain cells, exploring the issues, any such proposition can be very good for that.  Not every excerise works for every body but a little widening of your perspective might bring in more data for you to play with!Wink

 Woof Woof


Allex Spires
Allex Spires's picture
Posts: 9
Joined: 2006-10-01
User is offlineOffline
Named wrote: So

Named wrote:

So ultimately, the conclusion to be made from your proposition of God existing is that he/she/it is irrelevant? Leaving me to ponder what the hell the point of first conceiving and then arguing the idea.

 

I could argue any concept to exist in the shadow of another, but it would be equally pointless.

Yes, God is Irrelevant.  But at least I seem to, seem to, have found him.  And it's not as though he's dead either, he's in the process of being born.  At some time in a very distant future, if we're careful, God will be relevant.  But right now God is just an idea that people murder other people over.

 

 The purpose of originally arguing God, as near asd I can tell, is control of people.  Rome fell.  If the Romans had believed more solidly in their gods, (or in one God) as Catholics do, their Empire would be more than just the Vatican today, though they do hav an unspoken worldwide army that scares the fuck out of me.

 

The point of God is to control people when people can't control them, basically an imagiunary Big Brother who will hopefully keep the masses in control if they decide to revolt.

 

The point of arguing my arguement at all is to demonstrate to people who are searching the world for meaning that they are that meaning and need look no futher than their own eyelids if they want to see into God.  Need look no further than their own sense of happiness if they want to visit heaven.

 

As to arguing any concept in the shadow of another, examine Walt Disney actually being, in every way, form, and idiosyncracy, Walt Whitman; or the idea that peanut oil is the sole cause of global warming. I think that it will fail, but you can search all you like.

All expires.


GreyhoundMama
GreyhoundMama's picture
Posts: 76
Joined: 2007-03-09
User is offlineOffline
"So ultimately, the

"So ultimately, the conclusion to be made from your proposition of God existing is that he/she/it is irrelevant?"

Exactly. In my opinion, none of us can prove, absolutely, that god exists or that god doesn't exist. I happen to BELIEVE that it doesn't exist, at least as described by any religion I've ever heard of. And if there is a "god" that isn't as described, or that's what you describe, using the word god wouldn't be my choice because it's such a loaded term that's fraught with prior assumptions. But whether I believe or not is irrelevant. Rationality, reason, science ... they are evolving as we make further discoveries. None of us can imagine what will be common knowledge 100 or 1000 years from now. So, I do the best I can, I try to be nice to people, and I try to survive the primative violence that threatens our very existance.

Good topic. Laughing

Karen and her hounds
creating art ~ creating a new life