What is God/ god?

[Unforgiven]

So, we made God did we?

Do we make Gods by prayer and servitude through worship? Then does that mean that we can perhaps make miracles because we find favour with these Gods and become blessed at some point in life when it makes the most sense?

 

[china]

How are you going to find out what God is . Are you going to accept somebody else's information? Or are you going to try to discover for yourself what God is? It is easy to ask questions, but to experience the truth requires a great deal of intelligence, a great deal of inquiry and search.So the first question is, are you going to accept what another says about God? It does not matter , Krishna, Buddha or Christ, because they may all be mistaken .Surely, to find out what is true your mind must be free to inquire, which means that it cannot merely accept or believe. I can give you a description of the truth, but it will not be the same thing as your experiencing the truth for yourself. All the sacred books describe what God is but that description is not God. The word 'God' is not God, is it?To find out what is true you must never accept, you must never be influenced by what the books, the teachers or anyone else may say. If you are influenced by them, you will find only what they want you to find. And you must know that your own mind can create the image of what it wants; it can imagine God with a beard, or with one eye; it can make him blue or purple. So you have to be aware of your own desires and not be deceived by the projections of your own wants and longings. If you long to see God in a certain form the image you see will be according to your wishes; and the image will not be God, will it? If you are in sorrow and want to be comforted, or if you feel sentimental and romantic in your religious aspirations, eventually you will create a God who will supply what you want; but it will still not be God.So, your mind must be completely free, and only then can you find out what is true - not by the acceptance of some superstition, nor by the reading of the so-called sacred books. Only when you have this freedom, this real freedom from external influences as well as from your own desires and longings so that your mind is very clear - perhaps only then is it possible to find out what God is.

 

[darkbeaver]

That's good stuff China. But every baby knows, God is a full breast.

 

[jimshort19]

God

I am all meaning.
I am all purpose.
I am all reason.
I am all cause.
I am all motive.
I am your God.
I am I am
I am.

And dat's de namo dat tune. Look at your motive. That is your God, but it may not be the same as mine. If your God is your stomach, it is not the saame as mine. The monotheist notion ties the hand of the imagination, so that it may not perceive the truth, that there are many Gods, as many Gods as motives, and they come and go as cheap as borsche, but is there one that stays?

 

[karrie]

So, your mind must be completely free, and only then can you find out what is true - not by the acceptance of some superstition, nor by the reading of the so-called sacred books. Only when you have this freedom, this real freedom from external influences as well as from your own desires and longings so that your mind is very clear - perhaps only then is it possible to find out what God is.

You know china, I would find your introspective posts much more profound if you didn't project an air in your replies of being 'right' when you pose a question such as this. How do you know that those who've answered you aren't the ones with the truly free, unswayed minds... those who know the complete truth? So many atheists, agnostics, and other varieties assume that anyone who still feels a presence just hasn't come to realize THEIR truth yet. They sit in judgement, quietly and sometimes not so quietly mocking faith.

And yet, they're doing nothing differently from any person of faith... they are forming their own impression and projecting that onto God... they are seeing God for what THEY want to see.

Even if one was to follow your advice... free your mind of any teachings and influence, the end result is still an impression. Perhaps an unconscious desire in what you want to see. Perhaps a desire to see something so random and unbelievable that you can't imagine having dreamt it yourself. Or perhaps it's that you want to find nothing at all. But it still speaks to the mind of the searcher. One can never be entirely free of their own consciousness. One can never sever it from their perception of the world around us.

 

[darkbeaver]

God the sun. oops i'm giving the movie away, solly ver mooch:lol:

 

[jimshort19]

God is Astrology

"So, your mind must be completely free, and only then can you find out what is true - not by the acceptance of some superstition, nor by the reading of the so-called sacred books. Only when you have this freedom, this real freedom from external influences as well as from your own desires and longings so that your mind is very clear - perhaps only then is it possible to find out what God is."

But... perhaps not. Oh well. Another day, another empty platitude.

 

[darkbeaver]

Jim what's a empty platapuss?

 

[jimshort19]

Platapuss empti

I knew you'd show up when the puss was pronounced. It seems to be your speciality Mr. Bond - Beaver Bond.

 

[darkbeaver]

I have a very sensitive olafactory gland, which affords me early whorning . :lol:

 

[jimmoyer]

Does the big bang, mean something came out of nothing ?

Was the horizon point so dense and mass so concentrated it took up volume less than a pinhead ?

And does there need be a God that activated the big bang ?

Is God just a synonym for infinity in time and an innumerable number of contractions and big bangs ?

Oh good...

The cleaners just called.

Santa outfit is cleaned and ready.

 

[jimshort19]

Big Bang

Jimmoy, you crafty American, I know your tricks by now. You know the answers before you ask the questions. Happy fishing, Santa Claws.

 

[darkbeaver]

Does the big bang, mean something came out of nothing ?

Was the horizon point so dense and mass so concentrated it took up volume less than a pinhead ?

And does there need be a God that activated the big bang ?

Is God just a synonym for infinity in time and an innumerable number of contractions and big bangs ?

Oh good...

The cleaners just called.

Santa outfit is cleaned and ready.

Morning unca Jim. God could have pushed the start button I guess, but I been reading a particle of fizziks (a very little bit) the author says there wasn't a beginning as we understand it, and I don't, hope you're doing fine. best regards the wet rodent:lol:

 

[Unforgiven]

Jim what's a empty platapuss?

Grouchy! ;-)

 

[Unforgiven]

I have a very sensitive olafactory gland, which affords me early whorning . :lol:

Land o Gocian!
What is the whorld gives you the cum-pun-tion?

 

[jimshort19]

Jimmoyer artistically posits that God is a Santa Claus symbol. That guy is way too deep.

DBVR, "... a particle of fizziks (a very little bit) the author says there wasn't a beginning as we understand it, and I don't..."

There is a physics problem. Last time I checked some physicysts held out that they had reverse engineered our universe to the first 14 one-hundredths (or was it one-thousandths?) of a second of the Big Bang. They hit a wall when the physics 'broke down'. The physics hit some kind of a temperature/density/time wall. Assuming that the physics are not defective but relativistic and have gone through some kind of change of phase, does this mean that we need new (more) physics to go back further, or does it mean that we can go no further with physics? I do not know.

We do not have any credible understanding of THE beginning, so we have no such "as we understand it" in respect to the universe. We have an understanding with respect to recombinant material reality, but have yet to make a pound of anything, not a cup, not a teaspoon, not a single particle, let alone a universe, so we're handicapped in this regard when it comes to comparative logic. We have oranges, but we didn't create them. We have rockets, but we didn't create them in an absolute sense.

To understand the beginning of the universe you may start by admitting that you know nothing about absolute beginnings, but this is where we hit the wall, because where to Hell are we now?

 

[darkbeaver]

Land o Gocian!
What is the whorld gives you the cum-pun-tion?

Stop, you're hurtin me man, I,m chokin on me Shreddies.:lol:

 

[darkbeaver]

Jimmoyer artistically posits that God is a Santa Claus symbol. That guy is way too deep.

DBVR, "... a particle of fizziks (a very little bit) the author says there wasn't a beginning as we understand it, and I don't..."

There is a physics problem. Last time I checked some physicysts held out that they had reverse engineered our universe to the first 14 one-hundredths (or was it one-thousandths?) of a second of the Big Bang. They hit a wall when the physics 'broke down'. The physics hit some kind of a temperature/density/time wall. Assuming that the physics are not defective but relativistic and have gone through some kind of change of phase, does this mean that we need new (more) physics to go back further, or does it mean that we can go no further with physics? I do not know.

We do not have any credible understanding of THE beginning, so we have no such "as we understand it" in respect to the universe. We have an understanding with respect to recombinant material reality, but have yet to make a pound of anything, not a cup, not a teaspoon, not a single particle, let alone a universe, so we're handicapped in this regard when it comes to comparative logic. We have oranges, but we didn't create them. We have rockets, but we didn't create them in an absolute sense.

To understand the beginning of the universe you may start by admitting that you know nothing about absolute beginnings, but this is where we hit the wall, because where to Hell are we now?

I think there's wisdom in what you say Master Jim, I have adapted to the axiom I think you're illuminating, I know absolutely nothing and therefore understand everything. Ya, where are we now, who cares as long as the beer machine dosn't fail and we can't think anymore, what,
perhaps, maybe, sorta, approximately, something like that, christ thinking is painfull.:lol:

 

[jimshort19]

I think that God is like a super farmer. He's looking for lovers, and he's growin' his own weed. Some to smoke, some to keep for lovin'. We are weed man! But I don't mean that in a gender specific way.

So he makes this big love generator, a universe, and we haven't met the neighbours cause our little plot is way too big for that.

 

[darkbeaver]

I think that God is like a super farmer. He's looking for lovers, and he's growin' his own weed. Some to smoke, some to keep for lovin'. We are weed man! But I don't mean that in a gender specific way.

So he makes this big love generator, a universe, and we haven't met the neighbours cause our little plot is way too big for that.

That makes a lot more sense than the orthodox explainations Jim, I think I'll crochet that and hang it on my wall.