What is God Generically & Actually...

[Rob]

obyvatel

This preference is at variance with the general consensus understanding of this forum.

Not sure what you mean by 'this preference'??
I dont mind if my idea/s are at odds with this or any forum or person or business or scientist etc. I seek debate not consensus.
Being different can lead to breakthoughs where mainstream thinking (ie group consensus thinking) simply perpetuates the same beliefs ad infinitum which tends to encourage one dimensional (so to speak) advancement. ;)
Therefore, i seek open discussion with different ideas provided & then analysed. If you r saying i must adhere to this forum's beliefs without question then pls let me know & i will leave since i will believe only what i am convinced of. At 42 i have seen far too much B/S in life to simply accept without question what people throw my way .

This idea that we are God has been contradicted twice already - but you seem unable to consider this. Is your cup full?

So what if this idea has been contradicted? I am pleased that contractictory opinions have been made which i will consider with respect.
But that doesnt mean that i have to immediately accept the validity of the contradictions. I will analyse 1st & only then decide.
Why do u say i am "unable to consider this"? Where do i say that my opinion/s r not debateable?

No, my cup is not full, & never will have any more than <1% of the infinate knowledge & wisdom that exists.
The reason why i posted this topic was because i am not sure & wanted feedback, not to post my opinion as if it is 100% correct (in fact i presume i am never 100% correct or even close).
It is my opinion based on my broad knowledge & experience, no more & no less.

If you believe that there is nothing to learn then why are you here? The purpose of this forum is to network and learn.

My objective as i have said is the truth. I therefore seek all opinions, especially if they disagree with mine. That way i get to see other possibilities that i may not have considered.
The reason i posted the topic was to discuss possibilities & to find flaws in my logic, not to 'win' anything or get 'my way'.
But i dont want to be haranged into thinking there is only ONE way & that this forum has 100% definately solved this question & thus there is nothing to discuss. If you claim this then i suggest your cup is full, not mine. I am open to any & all opinions as long as they relate to the topic & not my personality traits, which may be well meaning but can be interpreted as subtle underhanded insults.

I never said there was nothing to learn; I said we still seem to exist in this reality where we have biological need to survive & prosper, etc.
Irrespective of our biological aspects & 3D universe I suspect nothing is as it seems. Of course i have considered that we may not be god. What makes you think i am unable to consider this? I am open to hear reasons for this prospect or any prospect.

What i meant was that ultimately, IMO everything IS GOD & therefore that ULTIMATELY implies that we r already perfect (whatever that means). That does not mean we should stop 'learning' or anything else humans normally do. I am talking about concepts of God & reality, not how to behave in this dimension. I will therefore keep going to work, make lots of $, try to find time to relax & see friends & family more often, collect stamps, coins, antiquities, learn about history & science, improve my vegi patch (organic only) , play Doom 3 (yes thats how far behind i am), etc etc. Yes all that, but i keep in mind that IF i am correct (to some degree at least) then in the end it doesnt matter what i do or achieve, we r still god even if we fail or are sinners or whatever.

For eg, in the end the universe will implode so no matter what all the beings in this universe achieve it will count for naught because it will be wiped away. Doesnt mean beings shouldnt live & do things because thats not my point. My point is that we can & should strive to be our best, just keep in mind that we have nothing in the end to truly achieve other than to exist...the universe will explode one day & wipe the slate clean...

Have you ever felt anything that could be classified as emotional pain?

Yes , i have experienced very traumatic events, life & death related, with amazing lessons learnt. The emotions, pain, joys, etc ... can you touch them? define them exactly? How can they exist is they are not physical? I suspect we feel because we r god. BTW, i have no grandeose dillusions attached to being a supreme being, .. i enjoy toying with all concepts... i am still a 42 yo with very real limitations.... my ego is not being stroked by my beliefs whatsoever.

 

[Rob]

This thread might be of interest regarding opinions

Yes it is interesting & a good read & the concerns raised something to be careful about to be sure.

However, saying 'IMO' though does not automatically consign the person to being close minded & all the other negative traits mentioned.
People can be stubborn or close minded irrespective of what words they exhibit, be it legaleze, geek speak, soialist. capitalist, esoteric, Wave, etc.

You cannot judge anyone based on a few text msg's or even many. Text is misinterpreted, emotion cannot be coveyed accurately, intent cannot be conveyed.

I have no problem with me or others saying 'IMO'. I do not judge people on that superficial level.
Opinions r not the problem, its what people do with opinions that is the problem.
Same with guns. Guns dont kill people, people kill people. Religion is considered tehcause of wars but it isnt. Religion is merely a concept. People r again the real cause of problems.
It is an opinion if there is no evidence present to back up what I say & unless i travel with evidence (eg books) it can only be an opinion.
Add to that is that i am trying to convey a non-threatening or non-arrogant personality, ie meekness & humility..
Also that because i am not 100% sure of what i say it is technically just an opinion. I am not arrogant enough to assume my theories r guaranteed to be correct.
Most chatting on any forum or any communcation between people is opinion based, not proven fact based, IMO.

:)

 

[obyvatel]

obyvatel

This preference is at variance with the general consensus understanding of this forum.

Not sure what you mean by 'this preference'??

I was responding to this statement of yours
[quote author=Rob]
Basically if its not physical it then its not real, just a personal preference.
[/quote]

[quote author=Rob]
I dont mind if my idea/s are at odds with this or any forum or person or business or scientist etc. I seek debate not consensus. [/quote]
I think at this forum, we seek to discuss and learn and approach at a consensus view of reality.
[quote author=Rob]
Being different can lead to breakthoughs where mainstream thinking (ie group consensus thinking) simply perpetuates the same beliefs ad infinitum which tends to encourage one dimensional (so to speak) advancement. ;)
Therefore, i seek open discussion with different ideas provided & then analysed. If you r saying i must adhere to this forum's beliefs without question then pls let me know & i will leave since i will believe only what i am convinced of. At 42 i have seen far too much B/S in life to simply accept without question what people throw my way .
[/quote]
Why did you have this idea that you are being asked to accept the forum's beliefs without question? Regarding this topic under discussion, some auxilliary material was suggested to you for reading. This material that I suggested to you to read is the culmination of years of research and analysis of data from various fields of study by Laura and other senior members of the forum. If you had taken the time to read it before continuing to expound on your opinions about God, then it would indicate that you are indeed interested to learn. If you had questions after reading the material, then the forum would help you with that. Without doing the work to read and learn and grow, it is not really possible to have a real discussion. As newbies, all forumites are asked to read certain material to get up to speed regarding many topics.

[quote author=Rob]

This idea that we are God has been contradicted twice already - but you seem unable to consider this. Is your cup full?

So what if this idea has been contradicted? I am pleased that contractictory opinions have been made which i will consider with respect.
[/quote]
As I wrote above, considering the contradictory views with respect would mean getting up to speed on what the contradictory view is by reading and understanding it instead of continuing with posting the same personal opinions.
[quote author=Rob]
But that doesnt mean that i have to immediately accept the validity of the contradictions. I will analyse 1st & only then decide.
[/quote]
Where is your analysis? After saying the same thing twice and suggesting material to read, what happened was that you continued to post your personal opinions.
[quote author=Rob]
Why do u say i am "unable to consider this"? Where do i say that my opinion/s r not debateable?
[/quote]
See above. You did not say anything to that effect but your actions indicated otherwise - at least to me.

[quote author=Rob]
No, my cup is not full, & never will have any more than <1% of the infinate knowledge & wisdom that exists.
The reason why i posted this topic was because i am not sure & wanted feedback, not to post my opinion as if it is 100% correct (in fact i presume i am never 100% correct or even close).
[/quote]
That is a great attitude to have. We can have meaningful discussions as long as you are willing to do the hard work of reading, learning and growing.
[quote author=Rob]
It is my opinion based on my broad knowledge & experience, no more & no less.
[/quote]
In this particular case and topic under discussion, some of the opinions that you have expressed have been analysed and disproved in this forum quite a few times. Once something has been discussed, analysed and a consensus conclusion is reached, further discussions on the same topic without any new data is a waste of time - so the persons concerned are asked to read material which would help them get up to speed.

[quote author=Rob]

If you believe that there is nothing to learn then why are you here? The purpose of this forum is to network and learn.

My objective as i have said is the truth. I therefore seek all opinions, especially if they disagree with mine. That way i get to see other possibilities that i may not have considered.
[/quote]
This was in reference to your statement
[quote author=Rob]
I dont think there r any 'lessons' to be learnt if we r indeed god.
[/quote]
Your objective is admirable. The above statement that I quoted seemed to be contradictory to your objective of finding truth - osit (or so I think).

[quote author=Rob]
The reason i posted the topic was to discuss possibilities & to find flaws in my logic, not to 'win' anything or get 'my way'.
But i dont want to be haranged into thinking there is only ONE way & that this forum has 100% definately solved this question & thus there is nothing to discuss. If you claim this then i suggest your cup is full, not mine. I am open to any & all opinions as long as they relate to the topic & not my personality traits, which may be well meaning but can be interpreted as subtle underhanded insults.
[/quote]
There was no haranguing, no subtle underhanded insults. This forum does not work that way. In this case no personality traits were discussed as well but in general, that is something that may be done in this forum. This forum exists to help people wake up - that necessarily involves seeing ourselves as we are and that picture mostly is not pretty. This forum does not exist to solely debate intellectual ideas but to help in personal transformation through the application of knowledge. Are you familiar with the concept of false personality ?
In this particular case and topic under discussion, some of the opinions that you have expressed have been analysed and disproved in this forum quite a few times. Once something has been discussed, analysed and a consensus conclusion is reached, further discussions on the same topic without any new data is a waste of time - so the persons concerned are asked to read material which would help them get up to speed.

[quote author=Rob]
I never said there was nothing to learn;
[/quote]
You wrote this
[quote author=Rob]
I dont think there r any 'lessons' to be learnt if we r indeed god.
[/quote]
This statement along with your current thinking that we are God would logically imply that there is nothing to learn - osit.

[quote author=Rob]
The emotions, pain, joys, etc ... can you touch them? define them exactly? How can they exist is they are not physical? I suspect we feel because we r god.
[/quote]
Can you say how the feedback that you have received so far in this thread has affected your original ideas about God?

 

[Rob]

Hi Ana,

Morality and conscience are not the same, in fact they are rather opposites.

I never said they were the same, but that they r both mere concepts. Not physical & therefore not real or proveable.

cheers
rob

 

[ana]

Well Rob,

First you came with your current "knowledge" of what God is or may be, and now, you say that something wich is not physical is not real or probable.

Following your thinking patterns, or God is physical, or God is not real or probable.

Seems to me you are having a hard time grasping abstract concepts.

 

[Mountain Crown]

Hi Ana,

Morality and conscience are not the same, in fact they are rather opposites.

I never said they were the same, but that they r both mere concepts. Not physical & therefore not real or proveable.

Paralogism

 

[Rob]

Assuming we have infinite ''power'' & knowledge ''unconsciously'' might also be delusional.

hehe, maybe, but that doesnt mean that we dont have "infinite ''power'' & knowledge ''unconsciously'' ".

ANy refernce i make toward all beings & everything in the universe being god is not an ego booster on my part.
It has had no affect on me from that perspoective for many reasons. Who would i show off to? to another person who is also god?
In fact i feel neutral were it true that we r god or that we r not god.

By

''strictly accurate''

i meant 'to be "more precise" ' in what i was saying... :)

The question is; who/what is ''me''?

I agree entirely, hence why i raised the topic in the 1st place.
As for the finger i was trying to be technical in saying that a 'finger' is only a concept because it doesnt exist while it is still attached.
If attached where does the finger finish & the body continue? At what is the EXACT point. That was my point as to why fingers dont exist & why nothing exists other than a blob called the universe. A blob that coalesces into various shapes but r nevertheless still made out of the same blob.
People talk about generalities as if they r fact, when they arent facts at all.

So you are trying to view the world by trying to use the eyes of God, but you are not God. You can try, but what results has it given you so far? Headaches? or Success in life? Health? Discipline? Self-respect? Awareness? Or are these of no importance?

Its your opinion that i/we r not god, but its not however a proven fact either way. wouldnt u agree? no one has said why we r not god yet...
everything is important, nothing is important. That is the paradox.
Much of what i theorise comes from a deep feeling that is hard to nail down. Then i try to conceptualise & express it by using logic & knowledge of physics etc.

Applogioes, but what does "STO " mean?

If you think you are ''unconsciously'' God, then... what now? What is your goal in life? Why do you think you are here?

The best that i can possibly do my friend, taht is all anyoine can do , 'their best', to strive to excel in everything, to question everything, & to reach for the sky.

People seem to think i suggest everyone give up on life or some such. Far from it. Give up stress maybe. Give up thinking that we r mere mortals maybe, more than insignificant creatures maybe.
For we r insignificant & infinte. That is the paradox IMO. I realise i cannot possibly conceptualise what reality truly is beyond our typical 3D world. But that doesnt mean i shoulnt try, as if i am too insignificant to dare question the subject. I make fluke it, or i just may get some it correct.

I agree that class 3 people have less chance of knowing what class 7 people know. But that is not guaranteed. Having age or education does not guarantee wisdom or truth.
Some of the greatest advancements came from uneducated people. Einstein was poor at maths, yet he must have been far superior to most so called educted experts of the day.
Few tyhings can ever be taken as a given or at face value, there r almost always exceptions.

People have mentioned several things for me to read so i'll review those.

BTW, thankyou all for for opinions. PLs keep them coming. :)

However, pls provide actual arguments against my theories not just "u r wrong". That is not a valid rebuttle. Its meaningless other than as a statistical survey of who agrees & disagrees. Id appreciate actual debate. thx :)

 

[Oxajil]

Dear Rob,

I think your spirit to learn and to search for truth is a very great one.

I think it would be best for you to first read the whole Wave series written by Laura Knight-Jadczyk and then come back so we can discuss this further.
I'm not saying that you have to agree with everything that is written in those series, but I simply ask you to read them so you can have some idea of this forum and of Laura's work.
Reading these will also enable you to have a better understanding of terms, such as ''STO''.

 

[Rob]

HI oxajil & obyvatel & all,

unfortunately looks like a discussion wont occur.

I'll read the rest of the wave etc.

thx all

 

[mattnapa]

I'm not sure how to enter the conversation here, but I am interested in discussions on close to what has been talked about here. Morality is not a road I go down often, but John Stuart Mill would probably be at the forefront. I have to confess that I majored in Philosophy accidentally in school. I planned on chemistry, but philosophy just kind of snuck in there. Any way there were kind of two schools of thought among the students and to some degree the professors on what might be called the nature of god, or the nature of consciousness and existence. To me the question of the Nate of consciousness and the nature of god are of course irrevocably linked. anyway the two schools were roughly the mechanist/atheist vi em of existence as opposed to the Christian/idealist conception of existence. While I am far from a conventional christian I often found myself arguing against this random mechanist view of reality. Personally I find the argument of freewill to be the most compelling argument against a universe that can be "completely" understood from physical measurement and predictive laws. I have seen some here refer to something like the "real reality," and I would have questions on how that is arrived at If I wer e to sum up my philosophy, I would say this strange contradiction we perceive between the finite and the infinite is the defining element of our construction of existence. Closely related is my belief that the more we try to approach some of these most fundamental philosophical questions, the more we reach contradictions which make real answers impossible. This is of course kind of relativistic and wishy washy, but in my opinion there is little in the way to clear answers on these question. One thing I will argue is that science is bringing us any closer to answers on these things. Love science, and think it has a huge role in thought, but these things are beyond it in my opinion

 

[Eongar]

God would have to define "God" to believe or not believe. And that is a rather complicated. First, in my opinion, not a bad question these points, but it is essential first realize which we identify with a personality which does not are we in essence, that dominates our lives psychic. That is, we should realize that we own ourselves in order to start a Work and closer to that idea of God, Tao, Divine Cosmic Mind, Brhama, etc.. I do not know if you have large regarding the post itself, but I think it is necessary try to immerse themselves in the roots of a matter rather to ramble and digress.

Apologies for my English, possibly
there is something not well understood, therefore also I publish it in Spanish. Thank you for understanding.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dios; habría que definir "Dios" para creer o no creer. Y eso ya es un tanto complicado. Primeramente, en mi opinión, no es malo cuestionarse estos puntos, pero es esencial primero darse cuenta de que nos identificamos con una Personalidad la cual no somos nosotros en esencia, y que domina nuestra vida psíquica. Es decir, deberíamos darnos cuenta de que no
somos dueños de nosotros mismos para poder comenzar un Trabajo y acercarnos a esa idea de Dios, Tao,
Divina Mente Cósmica, Brhama, etc. No sé si tiene gran relación con el post en sí, pero creo que es necesario intentar sumergirse en las raíces de un asunto en lugar de divagar y divagar.

Perdonen mi inglés, posiblemente haya algo que no se entienda bien, por eso mismo también lo publico en español. Gracias por entenderlo.

 

[ana]

Apologies for my English, possibly there is something not well understood, therefore also I publish it in Spanish. Thank you for understanding.

God; we should define "God" in order to believe or not. And this is indeed enough complicated. First of all, in my opinion, it is not bad at all to question ourselves this points, but it is essential first, to realize that we get identified with a personality wich is not us in essence, and wich governs our psychic life. So to say, we should be aware, we are not masters of ourselves in order to start a work and get close to this idea of God, Tao, Divine Cosmic Mind, Brhama, etc. I'm not sure if this has directly relation with the post as it is, but I believe it is necessary to try to plunge into the roots of the matter instead of divagate and divagate.

Hi Eongar,

We tried to make more comprehensible for the English reader your post based on the Spanish version you posted.
We apreciate your efforts to comunicate in English with the rest of us, if you need help, please do so in the Spanish section on the forum

Maybe you can also try to read the Wave series in English so you can familiarize more with the English terms increasing your ability to communicate in English. :)

 

[Eongar]

Thanks, Ana.

 

[AdamantineLady]

[quote author=Rob]
I dont think there r any 'lessons' to be learnt if we r indeed god.
[/quote]
This idea that we are God has been contradicted twice already - but you seem unable to consider this. Is your cup full?
If you believe that there is nothing to learn then why are you here? The purpose of this forum is to network and learn.

There is a point where the learning gives way to the experience that learning points to...and it is this that can be neither qualified nor quantified...only known. An accumulation of neat facts and different rules holds no value apart from the experience that it leads you to. How one can comment on Heaven when one has not yet been there and experienced Heaven is erroneous at best. It is like when Spock said to Bones on the Star Trek that went back in time to find whales...telling Dr. McCoy that he could not converse about 'death' because they lacked a 'common frame of reference'. Like it or not, humans will have this limitation of perception until the learning takes him/her beyond the confines of the 'lessons'.

 

[anart]

[quote author=Rob]
I dont think there r any 'lessons' to be learnt if we r indeed god.

This idea that we are God has been contradicted twice already - but you seem unable to consider this. Is your cup full?
If you believe that there is nothing to learn then why are you here? The purpose of this forum is to network and learn.

There is a point where the learning gives way to the experience that learning points to...and it is this that can be neither qualified nor quantified...only known. An accumulation of neat facts and different rules holds no value apart from the experience that it leads you to. How one can comment on Heaven when one has not yet been there and experienced Heaven is erroneous at best. It is like when Spock said to Bones on the Star Trek that went back in time to find whales...telling Dr. McCoy that he could not converse about 'death' because they lacked a 'common frame of reference'. Like it or not, humans will have this limitation of perception until the learning takes him/her beyond the confines of the 'lessons'.
[/quote]

Apologies, AdamantineLady, but I'm not quite sure what your point is with the above? It sounds quite subjective. Could you please clarify.