Reply
Sun 12 Feb, 2006 09:41 pm
A friend of mine recently asked me this question: "Can you explain God without favoring a religion?" I've come up with a theory. I am a Christian myself, but I believe this theory really does give a new perspective on God, one that most religions would not get angry over. lol But anyway, on to my explanation...
Each aspect of myself that I can perceive, I know to be a product of the universe. I am simply a fragment of a greater whole. Every atom, the patterns that create my body are not unique, but may be found in greater quantities and myriads of examples in the universe. All the components exist outside and independently of the final product. This brings me to the question of my conscience. It seems that this too is simply a product of a greater whole. It seems unlikely that matter and energy alone can produce conscience. To me it seems more plausible that conscience is as fundamental to the universe as matter and energy.
If this fundamental conscience is God, then our limitations result when we begin to try to define God. Defining the Infinite can only make it less. God would be worthy of worship if God is something of such unfathomable wonder that we are left in awe of a mere glimpse.
Some of you may ask: "Why do you deem conscience merit for worship?" or you may ask how it can be deemed for worship. I'm only guessing. I use the example of conscience, because to me, that seems to be the only thing that would make sense if this being is intelligent enough to create all that we see and hear and are. I can't define exactly what God is because of course, I do not know, I can't know. You need a conscience in order to function intelligently, correct?
Now how do we explain God in relation to time?
Well, I believe God is beyond time. Judaism, Christianity, Islam, as well as many other religions suggest that God is here, has always been here, and will always be here. God doesn't live in the same time as we do. Or does he live in a time at all? Perhaps His life is a sort of "linear existence". He has an infintie amount of time for each and every one of us; He doesn't have to deal with us in the mass. With His life it is, so to speak, still 1920 and also 2006. For there is no before or after for God, He is always in the present (He sees all time as the present), and thus, has always been here. If there is no before or after as religion suggests, then what about energy?
Now, time is a factor in how energy is distributed and received, so if God is infinite, then what about energy up around Him? Is it just floating up there in eternity? That is a question I can't answer, but it explains afterlife. If our souls are made up of energy and conscience, then we're constant, we can't be destroyed, we live forever, our souls at least. I realize that some of you will say: "Energy cannot be created either, so you're saying we can't be made.", but if God can do anything, then who's to say that He can't create matter and energy and conscience?
Maybe you are not understanding this theory, or maybe you are, but I am going to clarify.
When I say that conscience is as fundamental to the universe as matter and energy, I mean that it could be on the same level as matter and energy. If this is so, then this conscience could be a God-like figure or God. This also goes into a sort of "Matrix" theory, if you will; about what is "real" and what is not "real". It suggests that conscience coule be as real as matter and energy, but of course, not tangible in the respect you may be thinking of, that is being able to see it, or touch it, or hear it, or even it being perceptible to the human mind. I did not mean that an individual's conscience is God either. I meant that God is a sort of...living conscience, if you will, that possibly lives outside of the body, outside of our known universe, outside of time. Of course, this fundamental conscience that may be God is much more powerful, and much higher than we could ever hope to be, for He created us. And of course, a conscience can create, in a sense. On God's level of mind however, His thinking is far superior to ours, to the point that He would be able to create matter and energy, and even souls or, consciences.
Many keep trying to bring science and logic into this, but science and logic can only go so far. It's harder to disprove the existence of God than it is to prove it. Think about this: If there were no God, then we should have never found out that there is not a God in the first place. To say that there isn't a God is just like saying it is dark, if light did not exist. If light did not exist, then you would not be able to perceive dark. Many also say that people created God; perhaps to gain power over other people, or because they were scared of what is beyond death and this world, so people created God and afterlife, and created our basic morals. Well, this simply does not make sense. How could we create something that we cannot fully comprehend or perceive? And we could never have created our basic morals. For one of us to create a moral, we must first have an understanding of previous morals. All laws and morals that humans have created are simply extensions or corrections of previous laws and morals. And to create something out of fear; yet again I ask: How could we create something that we cannot fully understand or perceive?
Your thoughts?
Does ontogeny recapitulate phylogeny?
Ontology is the study of existence in general. I'm not talking about species or populations here (the study of phylogeny: the study of evolutionary relatedness among various groups of organisms). I am talking about the existence of God.
I In The Beginning
i The concept of God
1) The concept of God is not as some father figure out beyond the stars or in a different plane of existence, but rather should be considered as originating in a different state of awareness, and should be likened to a sponge as exists in the Earth plane.
2) The sponge is a great mass of individual units which functions as a whole. But, force the sponge into separation and it still continues to function, though as individual units.
3) If you leave the individual units to their own devices in a common medium they, with the passage of time, will eventually gravitate back together into their original mass.
ii The continuance of God
1) In the beginning, which is in the continuance of God but into the Earth and other planes, there was a great void.
2) The absence in recollection of qualities of character such as selfish selfless love, which describes the various aspects of emotions in physical life, etc., was total.
3) That totality prevented the completion of experience of God.
iii The Law of God
1) In becoming separate Entities of God, the Units of God's Mass became subject to the Law of God:
2) The Entities were compelled to go forth from the Oneness of God and to experience;
3) The Entities are compelled to gravitate back to the Oneness of God as the fullness of their experience becomes complete.
iv The Laws for guidance
1) In order that the purpose of God's division could be accomplished and that the experience acquired would be positive, certain laws for the guidance and fulfillment of the Entities were established:
2) Each entity would choose its own path along which to experience;
3) Each entity would self-govern its own growth;
4) Each entity would self-discipline its own development;
5) No entity could gravitate further, back toward the Oneness of God, until resolving the negative aspects of its experience.
v The expansion of God
1) And so it came about that the Entities went out from the Oneness of God. The availability of experience to each entity was limited only by its own imagination.
2) But there was lacking the physical (earth) plane wherein imagination could be physically expressed and encountered.
3) So, many of the entities set about formulating the creation of the physical experience.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace