Reality as God

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Spellbound, Jun 27, 2014.

  1. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Love God, peace angel, hope angel. They are all good and faithful.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,600
    Kiss'n cousin..lol!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    I agree with you on that. But God being the supreme authority, must have total free will. That means he could act evil. But if he were to do so, we'd be fucked beyond measure. So would the rest of reality. God has a moral obligation to be good at all times. On the other hand, if God is incapable of evil, then he would not be all powerful, or could the title "all powerful" mean something else?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Actually if god exercises his free will to do evil, which he can't because he's good, he would be the devil. Actually we have free will to be good with. When we are all good with our free will, because we want it, it will be a testement to us. Your natured so you will act a certain way good is to the core friendo.
     
  8. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    "What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason."
     
  9. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    I mean faithful as the sense of good things, and that its good.
     
  10. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    my above...was borrowed from, and had to do with voltaire and deism

    What if GOD doesn't care if you believe or don't believe, have faith or have none, recognize god or don't?
    What if, after creation we are indeed completely separate from "GOD"?
     
  11. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    I consider myself a deist in that I am aware that God is real but that we are totally cut-off from him in physical reality. For instance:

    I AM THAT
    Dialogues of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj


    That in whom reside all beings and who resides in all beings, who is the giver of grace to all, the Supreme Soul of the universe, the limitless being -- I am that.
    Amritbindu Upanishad

    That which permeates all, which nothing transcends and which, like the universal space around us, fills everything completely from within and without, that Supreme non-dual Brahman -- that thou art.
    Sankaracharya

    The seeker is he who is in search of himself.

    Give up all questions except one: ‘Who am I?’ After all, the only fact you are sure of is that you are. The ‘I am’ is certain. The ‘I am this’ is not. Struggle to find out what you are in reality.

    To know what you are, you must first investigate and know what you are not.

    Discover all that you are not -- body, feelings thoughts, time, space, this or that -- nothing, concrete or abstract, which you perceive can be you. The very act of perceiving shows that you are not what you perceive.

    The clearer you understand on the level of mind you can be described in negative terms only, the quicker will you come to the end of your search and realize that you are the limitless being.

    Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

    Reality is spirit. One.
     
  12. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,134
    Faith is God. My word comes alive as nature. God has to care or he isn't our all loving, all powerful father. We are loved, and that love will rule us.
     
  13. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    As has been argued already, equating God with reality offers no new explanation but merely satiates those who wish to believe in God while also appearing to remain scientific about the issue, but without actually providing any science or scientific notion. There is nothing falsifiable about the notion, nothing testable, nothing scientific. Yet it is dressed up in the clothing of science to lend it some sense of legitimacy and rationality.

    It may help, as others have argued, to anthropomorphise reality, to use He and His to describe it, but I find it a redundant and ultimately useless concept in trying to understand it. Although it may offer some insight into what and why people believe.
     
  14. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    Yes. I prefer to call reality Daffy Duck.
     
  15. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Daffy Duck's cool but he's only reality on a television set. That's as far as he goes.
     
  16. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    I consider myself a duckist in that I am aware that Daffy Duck is real but that we are totally cut-off from him in physical reality.
     
  17. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    I farted.
     
  18. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Reality is an information processing system i.e. a Self Configuring Self Processing Language.
     
  19. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,353
    So is a computer.
    But what information do you think reality is processing?
    And how do you consider it (reality) distinct from that information?
    If it is not distinct then to consider it merely an information processing system would be like describing you as a farting machine (given your previous post) - i.e. it may describe a function you perform but in no way describes you (or does it?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ).

    There again, one could be equally as vague and as meaningless and describe it as a "self-contained experiential system".
    Or a "duck-producing quackifictional quadrality of webbed superfluity".
     
  20. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    Have you confused "reify" with "deify" ?
     
  21. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    Did that create a new universe?
     
  22. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Reality. It is self-processing.

    I don't consider it distinct. I consider reality to not only be matter and energy, but information as well. Like the laws of Physics and the phenomenon that partake in those laws. As well as the information contained in a mind.
     
  23. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    No but it did devolve this one just a little bit.
     

Share This Page