What is God?

@no1author,

God is both infinite and inscrutable, but on occasions makes some of his his hidden attributes understandable to man

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall;124847 wrote:

God is both infinite and inscrutable, but on occasions makes some of his his hidden attributes understandable to man

Alan you are becoming rhetoric, engage in conversation please. Why is he infinite, when infinite is just a human concept.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris, I think it is possible for one to identify that existence outside of space & time as God, if one chooses. It is also possible, if one does not believe in God, to identify that existence simply as "the ground-state of being," an impersonal, uncaused cause that explains the origin of the universe without reference to religious mumbo jumbo. I myself call it SPIRIT, simply because it is an existence outside of space & time, a rather ghostly concept that. :-) I do note that the description of existence outside of space & time necessarily takes on the mystical character the Hindus have long ascribed to their Highest form of Godhood, the transcendent Brahman.

I take it as a boon however that the ground state of being (spirit) can be identified as a deity or not as one chooses, because it means that many theists and atheists will hate the concept for what it permits others to do, while some few at least will see it for the reality of things whether they like it or not. Seeing that we cannot know (yet?) what preceded the birth of the universe, I think this concept is based upon our most obvious deductive information. Something must have existed because something cannot come from true nothingness, and that something (or those somethings) must be defined by an absence of space-time properties. Those two assumptions are fair enough and lead to what I call spirit.

Is it God? Perhaps. But it is the fountain of creation from which all the universes of the multiverse arise.

Samm

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;124856 wrote:

Alan you are becoming rhetoric, engage in conversation please. Why is he infinite, when infinite is just a human concept.

Infinite is not a concept, but is a way of saying a thing cannot be conceived of because humans can only conceive of finite reality...But; we deal with infinites all the time...All our moral realities, like virtue, freedom, justice, or equality are infinites; which makes the situation impossible, and lest you give up hope, impossible is only a degree of difficulty..

0 Replies

@SammDickens,

Samm;124877 wrote:

xris, I think it is possible for one to identify that existence outside of space & time as God, if one chooses. It is also possible, if one does not believe in God, to identify that existence simply as "the ground-state of being," an impersonal, uncaused cause that explains the origin of the universe without reference to religious mumbo jumbo. I myself call it SPIRIT, simply because it is an existence outside of space & time, a rather ghostly concept that. :-) I do note that the description of existence outside of space & time necessarily takes on the mystical character the Hindus have long ascribed to their Highest form of Godhood, the transcendent Brahman.

I take it as a boon however that the ground state of being (spirit) can be identified as a deity or not as one chooses, because it means that many theists and atheists will hate the concept for what it permits others to do, while some few at least will see it for the reality of things whether they like it or not. Seeing that we cannot know (yet?) what preceded the birth of the universe, I think this concept is based upon our most obvious deductive information. Something must have existed because something cannot come from true nothingness, and that something (or those somethings) must be defined by an absence of space-time properties. Those two assumptions are fair enough and lead to what I call spirit.

Is it God? Perhaps. But it is the fountain of creation from which all the universes of the multiverse arise.

Samm

The problem as I see it Samm is there is no such thing as nothing BUT we can see the beginning of this universe. So if I say it came from nothing, its statement of contradiction. Can it appear to come from nothing? only if you imagine an existence where nothing is possible. If you have an ethereal existence where there is no time or space, as we know it, then everything can appear from nothing. Alternatively, if you invent another universe that could create this one then you invent the problem of originality, an even bigger problem.

---------- Post added 02-04-2010 at 10:13 AM ----------

Fido;124878 wrote:

Infinite is not a concept, but is a way of saying a thing cannot be conceived of because humans can only conceive of finite reality...But; we deal with infinites all the time...All our moral realities, like virtue, freedom, justice, or equality are infinites; which makes the situation impossible, and lest you give up hope, impossible is only a degree of difficulty..

So give me an example that defines a infinite ? How can freedom be infinite, it has natural boundaries that confine it by morals, morals are bounded by reason, equality contains itself , it cant be boundless.

My infinite is incomprehensible and can never be achieved. You may try to imagine it but the reality is not possible.

2 Replies

@xris,

xris;124880 wrote:

---------- Post added 02-04-2010 at 10:13 AM ----------

So give me an example that defines a infinite ? How can freedom be infinite, it has natural boundaries that confine it by morals, morals are bounded by reason, equality contains itself , it cant be boundless.

My infinite is incomprehensible and can never be achieved. You may try to imagine it but the reality is not possible.

There is no defining infinites...To define freedom is a life time's labor, and how can that be freedom after all??? The name: freedom, like the name: God is the beginning of a process that can never properly end, because there is no natural end, no finitude to the subjects we consider...

1 Reply

@Fido,

Fido;124886 wrote:

There is no defining infinites...To define freedom is a life time's labor, and how can that be freedom after all??? The name: freedom, like the name: God is the beginning of a process that can never properly end, because there is no natural end, no finitude to the subjects we consider...

Is that the best you can do?the truth is the end and that must be finite.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;124922 wrote:

Is that the best you can do?the truth is the end and that must be finite.

Think twice...The truth is just a moral form, in other words, an infinite...You cannot demonstrate a single truth that stays the truth...Perhaps life??? Life is truth, is it not, but nothing is more infinite, more subject to change, and never permanent... Try again...

1 Reply

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;112999 wrote:

Finnegans Wake, a crazy book written in dream language. Do you know of it?

There's an excellent dissertation by Terrence McKenna on Finnegans Wake. It's about a four hour podcast on the Psychedelic Salon. Look for "Surfing Finnegans Wake".

Takes a Bard to know a Bard.

_________________________________

As to the OP...

God = Truth = Information

Satan = Deception = Entropy

__________________________________

One more thing. God is an Atheist.

---------- Post added 02-04-2010 at 06:05 PM ----------

Samm;124533 wrote:

The mind of the universe; cosmic DNA.

Cosmic DNA... Hmmmm. Well on one hand, we know that DNA is a code, and thus far we have found nothing in the Cosmos that remotely resembles a code. On the other hand, all codes have authors, thus DNA must have been authored. Seems to fit nicely with the Hebrew "And God Said, let there be..." And the Christian, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God and the Word was with God, and the Word became Flesh"... yep, sounds like biological DNA to me. But what about this mysterious Cosmic DNA? No sign of a code anywhere, otherwise SETI would be out of business in short order. Their business is to search for a code amidst the white noise of the Cosmos... right? They are well to note that where there be code, there must also be author.

Perhaps Bhartrihari Bhartrihari[The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy] presents a few clues to support the Hebrew and Christian perspectives. Bhartrihari's Sphota Theory of Language is part of the Shabdadvaita proclaiming Brahman as the ultimate essence underlying every physical manifestation.

Word!:whistling:

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;124880 wrote:

The problem as I see it Samm is there is no such thing as nothing BUT we can see the beginning of this universe. So if I say it came from nothing, its statement of contradiction. Can it appear to come from nothing? only if you imagine an existence where nothing is possible. If you have an ethereal existence where there is no time or space, as we know it, then everything can appear from nothing.

I agree with you, xris, that there can be no such thing as nothing. What we call nothing always turns out to be something upon close examination. It is obvious that the universe came from something, and it came from something that held all the potentials realized in this universe.

I strongly disagree with your statement that "If you have an ethereal existence where there is no time or space, as we know it, then everything can appear from nothing." :nonooo: How does this conclusion derive from the premise? There is no nothing here. Existence outside of space and time is existence. There can be no nothing where there is existence. Existence is not possible where there is nothing, and nothing is not possible where there is existence. The mind exists outside of space as does the observer inside the mind, the consciousness. You can't see or hear or smell them. Yet they exist. Our actions which derive from choices we make within our minds are not something from nothing. Your conception here is all askew, contradictory, and paradoxical. Ouch! My head! :perplexed:

xris; 124880 wrote:

Alternatively, if you invent another universe that could create this one then you invent the problem of originality, an even bigger problem.

I agree with you here and see no advantage to postulating a previous universe as the source of this one. That would only be begging the question.

Samm

0 Replies

@no1author,

Nothing... It's what rocks dream about.

Plato?

_______________________

But break it down... "no" + "thing"

"Things" are typically considered to be constructed of energy and matter. They are "material" things.

But there wasn't any energy and matter before the Big Bang. Thus, "no thing" existed before the Big Bang. Therefore, "nothing" existed before the material realm came into existence.

Enter Norbert Weiner...

"Information is information. Not energy and not matter. Any materialism that does not allow for this cannot survive in the present".
Cybernetics, p147

So... Information is non-physical, immaterial. It is not dependent upon energy and matter to exist. Thus, Information could have existed before the Big Bang. Information is always a product from a sentient mind.

That's why I say,

God = Truth = Information

Satan = Deception = Entropy

All energy and matter is Entropy... noise on the line with its only purpose being to degrade the signal. Entropy tries to keep the Truth away from us. Funny how Satan is reported to do the same.

1 Reply

@no1author,

I dunno, QuinticNon. I think the only code in DNA is something we imagine, otherwise just a bunch of organic molecules doing there thing; if there is an author to the code we find, it's us. When you think about intelligence, there are two primary types to consider.

The sort of intelligence we credit ourselves with and imagine our gods to have in much greater supply begins its existence as stupid as a rock (and I'm insulting the rock). We gradually accumulate knowledge throughout our lives and, by the time we die, may pride ourselves in having acquired some body of knowledge. If God's intelligence is of the human sort, then he must begin stupid and become wise over time from his experiences; that being the nature of human intelligence.

The other sort of intelligence is seed intelligence, or DNA intelligence. The seed, from the very beginning of its existence, has all the intelligence it needs to create a tree. The tree is fully potential within the seed from the moment it becomes a seed. The seed does not have to learn anything; its wisdom is innate to its being.

Therefore, you see, when I describe God as cosmic DNA, I am not denigrating the idea of God but am instead upholding the idea of God as an intelligence beyond all semblance of our human intelligence, an intelligence we cannot comprehend whose wisdom is innate and absolute and unchanging. If I am denigrating anything, it is human intelligence and its overblown propensity to describe everything in terms of its own understanding, like the idea that creation is "authored." We are all so clueless, are we not?

Samm

2 Replies

@no1author,

God is the rational, ordering and creative principle of the world.

1 Reply

@SammDickens,

Samm;125004 wrote:

I dunno, QuinticNon. I think the only code in DNA is something we imagine, otherwise just a bunch of organic molecules doing there thing...

There are extremely precise reasons that the ATCG of DNA is classified as a code. Those reasons are why we call DNA the "Genetic Code". Nothing from the cosmos produces code. That's why we don't classify solar flares, pulsars, nebula, or even things like tornadoes as code. DNA fits every classification for being a code as binary, English, or even smoke signals. Science doesn't just tag the word "code" onto anything they feel like.

DNA was discovered by Watson and Crick. Hubert Yockey discovered it as genuine code from the research of Gamow and mapped the DNA communication protocols directly from Claude Shannon's "Mathematical Theory of Communication" based upon the principles of Information Theory. If it runs through the protocols, it's a code. If it doesn't, then it's not a code. Nothing from the natural world of Chaos runs through the protocols. DNA wasn't assigned as being a code just for fun. It was discovered to be a code. Not a template. Not a blueprint. DNA is a genuine code as much so as any other code on the planet. It successfully maps probability space A to probability space B. This is old news.

Samm;125004 wrote:

...if there is an author to the code we find, it's us.

There is no possibility whatsoever that Humans wrote the Genetic Code within the molecule of DNA. There is no possibility that nature just accidentally wrote it either. There is no mechanism in chaos to achieve such a thing. Codes always come from sentient authors.

Samm;125004 wrote:

two primary types (of intelligence)to consider.

OK, I'm listening.

Samm;125004 wrote:

The sort of intelligence we credit ourselves with and imagine our gods to have in much greater supply begins its existence as stupid as a rock...

Can you provide an example where intelligence has been demonstrated to spring forth from a stupid rock?

Samm;125004 wrote:

The other sort of intelligence is seed intelligence, or DNA intelligence... fully potential within the seed from the moment it becomes a seed.

I can only assume that you mean "Genetic Code" when you say "seed intelligence". For without the instructions within DNA there would be no seed, no tree, no potential, and definitely no life.

The only thing separating Life from non-life is a Genetic Code. Code is what makes the Tree a Tree and not a Rock. No code = no Life.

Samm;125004 wrote:

The seed does not have to learn anything; its wisdom is innate to its being.

The seed must be programmed with the proper Information, otherwise there is nothing to instruct it to become a Tree. Information is the only reason a Tree does not become a Bull Frog. Each and every life form has its own unique programming to become what it will become. Codified Information is the mechanism that allows this to happen.

Samm;125004 wrote:

Therefore, you see, when I describe God as cosmic DNA, I am not denigrating the idea of God but am instead upholding the idea of God as an intelligence beyond all semblance of our human intelligence, an intelligence we cannot comprehend whose wisdom is innate and absolute and unchanging.

I don't disagree. But that's a matter of speculation or faith. As much as I may agree with you, there is no empirical evidence that God is cosmic DNA. But I've already said that God = Information... so we're not so far away in our thoughts. I've provided scriptural references that point to God being Word based. Word is Code. It's actually much deeper than I'm explaining here. It's actually much more understandable than you give it credit for. It's just science friend. And this science is actually starting to prove the existence of a master sentient author. A being that consists of Pure Immaterial Information. A being that does not require the material realm of energy and matter to exist.

Samm;125004 wrote:

If I am denigrating anything, it is human intelligence and its overblown propensity to describe everything in terms of its own understanding, like the idea that creation is "authored." We are all so clueless, are we not?

Just because we are clueless doesn't mean we cannot find clues, weigh them against science and logic, and take another step closer to the truth.

0 Replies

@QuinticNon,

QuinticNon;125001 wrote:

God = Truth = Information

To me, this is one more exciting possible use of the word God. It's a metaphor that amuses me. I like it. I think "God is love" is also good. Inquiry as recontextualization. We juxtapose words. Then we juxtapose other words.
If is God is Information than Google can play Christ.

I enjoyed your post, all my rambles aside.

1 Reply

@QuinticNon,

QuinticNon;124964 wrote:

God = Truth = Information

Satan = Deception = Entropy

I think the connection between Entropy and Information is overstated. Some facets of entropy and information can be represented by similar mathematical equations but the connection doesn't god much further than that. I just started a thread in Philosophy of Science about the Information and Entropy connection. It's not at all theological but interested parties may want to check it out.

http://www.philosophyforum.com/philosophy-forums/secondary-branches-philosophy/philosophy-science/7512-thermodynamic-entropy-information-entropy.html

(I guess I'm advertising my own thread here. It's delicious, studies show it fights some forms of cancer, it is good for the environment, and it makes you more attractive to the opposite sex. Buy my product!)

0 Replies

@Fido,

Fido;124963 wrote:

Think twice...The truth is just a moral form, in other words, an infinite...You cannot demonstrate a single truth that stays the truth...Perhaps life??? Life is truth, is it not, but nothing is more infinite, more subject to change, and never permanent... Try again...

No you try again, the truth is not the truth if it can change.

---------- Post added 02-05-2010 at 06:07 AM ----------

Samm;125000 wrote:

I agree with you, xris, that there can be no such thing as nothing. What we call nothing always turns out to be something upon close examination. It is obvious that the universe came from something, and it came from something that held all the potentials realized in this universe.

I strongly disagree with your statement that "If you have an ethereal existence where there is no time or space, as we know it, then everything can appear from nothing." :nonooo: How does this conclusion derive from the premise? There is no nothing here. Existence outside of space and time is existence. There can be no nothing where there is existence. Existence is not possible where there is nothing, and nothing is not possible where there is existence. The mind exists outside of space as does the observer inside the mind, the consciousness. You can't see or hear or smell them. Yet they exist. Our actions which derive from choices we make within our minds are not something from nothing. Your conception here is all askew, contradictory, and paradoxical. Ouch! My head! :perplexed:

I agree with you here and see no advantage to postulating a previous universe as the source of this one. That would only be begging the question.

Samm

samm I think your missing my point. If we cant have nothing but we can see a beginning, what are we to presume?

1 Reply

@SammDickens,

Samm;125004 wrote:

I dunno, QuinticNon. I think the only code in DNA is something we imagine, otherwise just a bunch of organic molecules doing there thing; if there is an author to the code we find, it's us. When you think about intelligence, there are two primary types to consider.

Great response. I move this to include the entire workings of the universe. Where people want to and wish for patterns, I really don't see any pattern to the universe. There is no code by which things happen, just like watching water moving down stream. It's not utilizing information to act, instead it is only being effected by bent space.

Samm;125004 wrote:

The sort of intelligence we credit ourselves with and imagine our gods to have in much greater supply begins its existence as stupid as a rock (and I'm insulting the rock). We gradually accumulate knowledge throughout our lives and, by the time we die, may pride ourselves in having acquired some body of knowledge. If God's intelligence is of the human sort, then he must begin stupid and become wise over time from his experiences; that being the nature of human intelligence.

Well him learning seems to be reflected in the bible. To me the bible gives me the impression that god is a five year old kid with a typical cranky five year old attitude. He wants his ants to play how he wants his ants to play or else pain and suffering be theirs. I do of course realize that god is just the imaginations of adults who refuse to accept their invisible friend isn't real.

0 Replies

@prothero,

prothero;125014 wrote:

God is the rational, ordering and creative principle of the world.

As if...............

0 Replies

@Reconstructo,

Reconstructo;125041 wrote:

To me, this is one more exciting possible use of the word God. It's a metaphor that amuses me. I like it.

I'm not kidding. I'm not putting forth the notion that God = Truth = Information as a metaphor. I'm very serious Reconstructo and have spent the past decade coming to this discovery. I'm glad you're amused. It amuses me too and I thank you for the kind attention to my comments. Usually I'm brushed aside as just another opinion.

I am not a religious man. But I, (and many others) have discovered an unbelievable interdisciplinary relationship between Information Theory, Communication Theory, Genetics, and any world religion that bases its foundations upon principles of the Word.

My views are not a passing opinion to make pleasant conversation. My views are the carefully considered results of nearly a decade of discovery. I have very good reason to make the statements that I do.

Yet, I cannot expect a single internet thread to automatically convince others of what I have been made aware of slowly over time, skeptically at first, but now, more than convinced of.

Reconstructo;125041 wrote:

I think "God is love" is also good.

If you define Love as "the giving of oneself", then you and I both are in complete agreement. Because that's what Information does... it gives itself to people, and unconditionally so.

Reconstructo;125041 wrote:

Inquiry as recontextualization. We juxtapose words. Then we juxtapose other words.

Yes we do. But in this case, I do not. I'm serious as a heart attack and extremely precise in the definition of words that I use. In fact, most of the confusion of this theory comes from not adhering to specific definition of terms. This theory demands that we do not allow slang or metaphor in any way.

Reconstructo;125041 wrote:

If is God is Information than Google can play Christ.

You have no idea how close you are to the truth with that statement. If you studied what a "Jesus Christ" is as much as I have, you may be surprised at what you find.

The Bible clearly states that Jesus return will manifest upon the clouds of heaven. Not just in one verse but in many verses.

Google is part of the Information Cloud. Cloud computing is bringing us into a new age of the Petabyte, where Information must be looked at in a completely different manner. It destroys the traditional scientific method and brings an end to the classic processes of developing a Theory.

This Wired Magazine article explains the implications. We are actually learning to image Absolute Truth. And what we are finding is that Truth is speaking for itself, without the need for Humans to taint it with opinion.

Welcome to the Age of the Petabyte... The End of Theory. The Petabyte Age: Because More Isn't Just More

Click all the links. The article has many fascinating claims.

This topic is much deeper than my comments here are capable of expressing.

2 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know