Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 04:05 am
We have a good deal of atheists, a lesser amount of theists, some agnostics( read:weak theists) and a smattering of other external deity religious folks here.
As far as I can see, I am the only autotheist.

Bob the skeptic says:
"Autotheist?? So you think YOU are GOD??"

Yes, I sure do. But this hinges on the definition of 'god'. The word is pretty flexible in meaning but I define it differently than most, in regards to myself.

God to me is that which drives your life, shapes your destiny. God is omnipresent, god makes the final decision about what his world will compose of.

I am of the opinion only the self meets these criteria.

I drive my life, and although many factors play into my destiny, I am the most influential one. I am omnipresent, I will be the only one present from the beginning to the end of my life, through every moment. I decide what to include in my world.

Bob the skeptic might say:
"Ok then. Why even bother..you sound like an atheist to me"

But I'm not. Although I don't think there are any external deities, I think the idea of deity has been with us so long it has ingrained itself anthropologically and psychologically into our programming. Every culture on earth creates religion, the worship, dogma, and ritual vary in form but are always present. This is not indicitive to me in any way that spiritual entities or deities actually exist, but rather an example of an evolutionary mechanism at play.

Regardless, I have come to conclude this is part of who we are, an indulgence, a need to be sated.

Why throw the baby out with the bathwater? the ideas of spiritual boogymen, and indeed 'spirituality' (whatever that is even suppose to be...) are outdated, sure, but maybe there's more to it.

Make yourself a God, instead of worshipping by proxy the man that created whichever one you worship now. It's very psychologically empowering.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 9,901 • Replies: 197
No top replies

 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 06:21 am
I recommend that you read Rene Dubos" A God Within. Not too far from your philosophical stand.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 08:57 pm
Re: Autotheism.
Doktor S wrote:
We have a good deal of atheists, a lesser amount of theists, some agnostics( read:weak theists) and a smattering of other external deity religious folks here.
As far as I can see, I am the only autotheist.

Bob the skeptic says:
"Autotheist?? So you think YOU are GOD??"

Yes, I sure do. But this hinges on the definition of 'god'. The word is pretty flexible in meaning but I define it differently than most, in regards to myself.

God to me is that which drives your life, shapes your destiny. God is omnipresent, god makes the final decision about what his world will compose of.

I am of the opinion only the self meets these criteria.

I drive my life, and although many factors play into my destiny, I am the most influential one. I am omnipresent, I will be the only one present from the beginning to the end of my life, through every moment. I decide what to include in my world.

Bob the skeptic might say:
"Ok then. Why even bother..you sound like an atheist to me"

But I'm not. Although I don't think there are any external deities, I think the idea of deity has been with us so long it has ingrained itself anthropologically and psychologically into our programming. Every culture on earth creates religion, the worship, dogma, and ritual vary in form but are always present. This is not indicitive to me in any way that spiritual entities or deities actually exist, but rather an example of an evolutionary mechanism at play.

Regardless, I have come to conclude this is part of who we are, an indulgence, a need to be sated.

Why throw the baby out with the bathwater? the ideas of spiritual boogymen, and indeed 'spirituality' (whatever that is even suppose to be...) are outdated, sure, but maybe there's more to it.

Make yourself a God, instead of worshipping by proxy the man that created whichever one you worship now. It's very psychologically empowering.


You are not omniscient.

If you think you are omniscient (even as it relates only to yourself) , tell me how many hairs on your head? What occurred last night in your bedroom as your slept (what time did the furnace kick on and off to keep you warm)? What is your blood pressure and heart rate now (without checking)? Draw out on a piece of paper the pattern of one of your fingerprints, or the creases in your palm (no peeking). How long in mm is your right index finger?

Do we even need to discuss omnipotence? Give it up.
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Sat 17 Dec, 2005 09:02 pm
Quote:

You are not omniscient.

If you think you are omniscient (even as it relates only to yourself) , tell me how many hairs on your head? What occurred last night in your bedroom as your slept (what time did the furnace kick on and off to keep you warm)? What is your blood pressure and heart rate now (without checking)? Draw out on a piece of paper the pattern of one of your fingerprints, or the creases in your palm (no peeking). How long in mm is your right index finger?

Do we even need to discuss omnipotence? Give it up.


Way to argue against stuff I didn't say.
I didn't use the words 'omniscient' or 'omnipotent' once..your preconceived christianized notion of what 'god' must mean seems to have inserted itself in there for you to argue against. So, that was basically you vs you.

Why not actually read what I wrote and try again?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 12:52 am
So you have free will, then?
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 12:56 am
Doktor S wrote:
Quote:

You are not omniscient.

If you think you are omniscient (even as it relates only to yourself) , tell me how many hairs on your head? What occurred last night in your bedroom as your slept (what time did the furnace kick on and off to keep you warm)? What is your blood pressure and heart rate now (without checking)? Draw out on a piece of paper the pattern of one of your fingerprints, or the creases in your palm (no peeking). How long in mm is your right index finger?

Do we even need to discuss omnipotence? Give it up.


Way to argue against stuff I didn't say.
I didn't use the words 'omniscient' or 'omnipotent' once..your preconceived christianized notion of what 'god' must mean seems to have inserted itself in there for you to argue against. So, that was basically you vs you.

Why not actually read what I wrote and try again?


Yeah I read what you said. You are always present with yourself (omnipresence but with limited real estate), therefore you are God. What a joke.

MerriamWebster.com wrote:
omnipresent
One entry found for omnipresent.
Main Entry: om·ni·pres·ent
Pronunciation: -z&nt
Function: adjective
: present in all places at all times


But I guess as long as we can all make up our own definitions for words, instead of using them as they are normally defined, then you can call yourself a millionaire when you're broke, and a king when you're a janitor, and a Don Juan when you can't get a date.

Let's just all make up our own words, shall we?

I simply pointed out that several classic attributes of God do not include you among those who qualify.

But you simply make up a new definition for omnipresence and presto you qualify! Go ahead, make it up as you go along. That's the ticket.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 12:57 am
Okay, you really ARE Charles Manson! Hey, when did you get paroled? Laughing

Sorry Doktor S, I couldn't help myself.

You think you are A God or THE God? I need clarification before I go any further.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:00 am
real life wrote:
MerriamWebster.com wrote:
omnipresent
One entry found for omnipresent.
Main Entry: om·ni·pres·ent
Pronunciation: -z&nt
Function: adjective
: present in all places at all times


He never said he was present in all places at all times. Just pointing it out.

Carry on...
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:04 am
kickycan wrote:
real life wrote:
MerriamWebster.com wrote:
omnipresent
One entry found for omnipresent.
Main Entry: om·ni·pres·ent
Pronunciation: -z&nt
Function: adjective
: present in all places at all times


He never said he was present in all places at all times. Just pointing it out.

Carry on...


He said
Quote:
I am omnipresent


However he doesn't fit the definition.
0 Replies
 
kickycan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:05 am
You're right. I stand corrected.
0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:05 am
I think kickycan was kind of helping out. Right, kickycan?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:17 am
Omnipresent, eh?

My friend Waldo Whalen is realy really fat. He's goldurn pretnear everywhere. Laughing

Cain't get around him nohow.

Takes up a whole city block almost.

'Zat big enough?
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:24 am
He could be omnipresent if his entire world consisted only of wherever he is at any moment. (Right?)
Or, he could be omnipresent if he considered himself to be part of everything that exists.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:31 am
echi wrote:
He could be omnipresent if his entire world consisted only of wherever he is at any moment. (Right?)
Or, he could be omnipresent if he considered himself to be part of everything that exists.


He could consider himself such. But if we want to talk to anyone other than ourselves and be understood, it is usually best to use a commonly understood definition.

If you wanna make it up as you go along, my toddler does the same. Perhaps we can arrange a play day. Um, no never mind.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:41 am
Sounds like he's taking responsibility for what he is, and what he does. So do I.
0 Replies
 
echi
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 01:46 am
real life wrote:
echi wrote:
He could be omnipresent if his entire world consisted only of wherever he is at any moment. (Right?)
Or, he could be omnipresent if he considered himself to be part of everything that exists.


He could consider himself such. But if we want to talk to anyone other than ourselves and be understood, it is usually best to use a commonly understood definition.

If you wanna make it up as you go along, my toddler does the same. Perhaps we can arrange a play day. Um, no never mind.
Laughing

He wouldn't be making up his own definition. The word "omnipresent" would just apply differently to him if he really had such a world view.But the proper definition of the word, I think, would still hold.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 06:25 am
Nice going, guys. Discussing definitions definitely deflects from any need to discuss the original post. Now let's discuss the definition of 'distraction,' shall we?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 07:10 am
He misused a word. A very important word he uses to explain the philosophy that he is his own god. That reflects on the soundness of his religious philosophy. A revealing mistake.

I think the truth is, or I should say the fact is, nobody can prove who or what god is or isn't. Saying you are your own god is egocentric, alienating.
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 09:56 am
I dunno. Maybe we should ask: What's up, Dok?
0 Replies
 
Doktor S
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Dec, 2005 10:32 am
LoL
I love it when theists get all offended that someone could use the word 'god' out of their silly abrahamic context. What's wrong real life?
If you read what I said initially, why was your first response replying to things I didn't say? Don't try to backtrack, it was pure reactionary, you didn't even read it.
But to carry on...the only thing that has been commented on was my use of the word 'omnipresent'. (which was perfectly justified, as I will show)
So then, everyone agrees with 'the rest'? Why do I have my doubts about that .
I am a subjectivist, by nature. Each of us packs a 'perceptual universe' around with us, that we may neither exit nor invite another into. It is ours and ours alone. At the center of each 'perceptual universe' is..us. Without the perceiver, the 'I' , it ceases to exist. The I is omnipresent in this universe.
One more thing...
Quote:

Saying you are your own god is egocentric, alienating.

So what? What is so wrong about being egocentric..we ARE our egos after all.
What is so wrong with elitism? I'll take it over mediocrity and egalitarianism any day of the week.
Where you find these things to be negatives, I find subjugating your will to some outside invisible force to be downright degrading.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Autotheism.
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 12/24/2024 at 08:13:43