Who is God?

[Thief]

So... if there is no difference between you and your Creator....think about it....
There are 6billion differences wandering about...evidence of differences.

 

[godnotgod]

So... if there is no difference between you and your Creator....think about it....
There are 6billion differences wandering about...evidence of differences.

Your analogy is completely faulty.

The concept of a creator-God which you are referring to as compared to his crea-tures is totally different in character and essence.

The differences amongst the species homosapiens are in superficial characteristics only: we are all universally human.

Your reference to the existence of a unique external creator-God has never been established as fact.

What we do know is that we are all here, now, and that we all have the same universal consciousness and essence as human beings and as potential higher beings. If we look at how we physically developed, we can see that we unfolded. The creative force responsible for our unfolding and development comes from within, in the same way that a flower unfolds. What is within is connected to some unknown and invisible source. Therefore, the creative force and our human-ness are in union, in the same manner that an orange is in union with the source that is the orange tree from which it emerges.

There is great variety to all life forms, but the source of all manifested forms is neither unique nor not-unique. It is tasteless, odorless, silent, and invisible. To be aware of its presence one must go beyond taste, smell, sound and sight. Some other form of consciousness must be turned on. Until we do, that source is as good as non-existent. Think about TV signals in a room. Without a TV set turned on to detect and translate those signals, they may as well not be there.

"One light, though the lamps be many"

Once again, if the creator-God you refer to is unique as you claim, then he must automatically must be compared to all that is not unique. Since the not-unique must be used as a comparative basis, it is evident that the unique entity you call God is dependent upon all that is not-unique for its existence. Essentially, the problem here is that you have created a duality which cannot be separated, the unique and the not-unique being completely relative and interdependent one upon the other.

The "God" you speak of has an alpha and an omega, a human face and form, and is subject to human emotions such as anger and murder. He walks; he talks; he crawls on his belly like a reptile. That God is none other than the human ego being projected onto some image created in the likeness of man. He, like the ego that produces him, does not exist. Both are complete fabrications.

 

[Thief]

Your analogy is completely faulty.

The concept of a creator-God which you are referring to as compared to his crea-tures is totally different in character and essence.

The differences amongst the species homosapiens are in superficial characteristics only: we are all universally human.

Your reference to the existence of a unique external creator-God has never been established as fact.

What we do know is that we are all here, now, and that we all have the same universal consciousness and essence as human beings and as potential higher beings. If we look at how we physically developed, we can see that we unfolded. The creative force responsible for our unfolding and development comes from within, in the same way that a flower unfolds. What is within is connected to some unknown and invisible source. Therefore, the creative force and our human-ness are in union, in the same manner that an orange is in union with the source that is the orange tree from which it emerges.

There is great variety to all life forms, but the source of all manifested forms is neither unique nor not-unique. It is tasteless, odorless, silent, and invisible. To be aware of its presence one must go beyond taste, smell, sound and sight. Some other form of consciousness must be turned on. Until we do, that source is as good as non-existent. Think about TV signals in a room. Without a TV set turned on to detect and translate those signals, they may as well not be there.

"One light, though the lamps be many"

Once again, if the creator-God you refer to is unique as you claim, then he must automatically must be compared to all that is not unique. Since the not-unique must be used as a comparative basis, it is evident that the unique entity you call God is dependent upon all that is not-unique for its existence. Essentially, the problem here is that you have created a duality which cannot be separated, the unique and the not-unique being completely relative and interdependent one upon the other.

The "God" you speak of has an alpha and an omega, a human face and form, and is subject to human emotions such as anger and murder. He walks; he talks; he crawls on his belly like a reptile. That God is none other than the human ego being projected onto some image created in the likeness of man. He, like the ego that produces him, does not exist. Both are complete fabrications.

I never said He was human.
Or anything less.
Your perspective speaks of you...not me.

And proving the existence of God is not required for a religious discussion.
It is an article of faith.

 

[godnotgod]

I never said He was human.
Or anything less.
Your perspective speaks of you...not me.

You refer to God as "He". That implies a face and a form. That face and form is male and human. I am not saying the God you refer to is human per se; I am saying He is made in the image and likeness of man via a projection of the ego.

And proving the existence of God is not required for a religious discussion.
It is an article of faith.

That may be so amongst believers, but we are having a religious discussion on a public forum comprised of many views. To talk about God as if he did exist is to foist your view upon the rest. That is what we commonly refer to as dogma. Essentially, you are treating your belief as if it were Absolute Truth. Belief is not reality; it is a model of what one supposes reality to be.

Rather than make dogmatic statements, can you tell us what the basis of your beliefs are? Then we can have a discussion.

 

[Thief]

It would be quicker for you to review my postings.
There's only a few more than a thousand.

Most of what you assume of me has already been answered.

And yes....faith is an item that need not be proven.
Still I don't rely on Scripture.
And if you were reading more carefully the things I post you would know that.

And yes we are having a discussion.

 

[godnotgod]

And yes....faith is an item that need not be proven.

In that case, don't make statements based upon faith as if they were already understood as being true.

You might say something such as:

"I believe that a creator-God is real for the following reasons:"

Instead of: "God is the alpha and omega, and blah blah blah, when you don't KNOW in reality if such a God actually does exist....you only BELIEVE that such a creature exists, based upon.......?????????? All of the faith in the world does not make something true. Even atheists have faith. It is belief that is the problem.

The title of this topic is "Who is God?"

If you can provide the basis of your belief as to who God is, we might be able to have a discussion about THAT, instead of about the dogma that is being presented.

 

[Vile Atheist]

Cathy Corbett

 

[Thief]

In that case, don't make statements based upon faith as if they were already understood as being true.

You might say something such as:

"I believe that a creator-God is real for the following reasons:"

Instead of: "God is the alpha and omega, and blah blah blah, when you don't KNOW in reality if such a God actually does exist....you only BELIEVE that such a creature exists, based upon.......?????????? All of the faith in the world does not make something true. Even atheists have faith. It is belief that is the problem.

The title of this topic is "Who is God?"

If you can provide the basis of your belief as to who God is, we might be able to have a discussion about THAT, instead of about the dogma that is being presented.

I don't think you're up for this.
Your objection to the description...alpha and omega....clearly indicates you have little or no consideration to such things.

You really should take the time....click my call name...go to statistics....and read some of my earlier postings.
You have assumed I cannot support my viewpoint.
I already have.

 

[godnotgod]

I don't think you're up for this.
Your objection to the description...alpha and omega....clearly indicates you have little or no consideration to such things.

You really should take the time....click my call name...go to statistics....and read some of my earlier postings.
You have assumed I cannot support my viewpoint.
I already have.

It is very simple. Alpha and Omega simply refer to having a beginning and an end. Where is the beginning to God? Where is the end?

I have not assumed anything. You made a statement:

"I [God] am the alpha and the omega"

I am simply challenging it's validity as it relates to the nature of what God is supposed to be. You can choose to defend your statement or not. That is up to you.

 

[Thief]

It is very simple. Alpha and Omega simply refer to having a beginning and an end. Where is the beginning to God? Where is the end?

I have not assumed anything. You made a statement:

"I [God] am the alpha and the omega"

I am simply challenging it's validity as it relates to the nature of what God is supposed to be. You can choose to defend your statement or not. That is up to you.

How about....
"I" (God) am the beginning and the end of all things.

If "I" choose to use a term as a proper noun...does it confuse you?

 

[Tiapan]

Gods other name is "excuse". It is the box in our mind we shove all things unknown. We ponder it and draw seemingly obvious patterns and delude our selves that zero must equal something. Then we group fantasize to reinforce it into a virtual reality we pretend to accept as real.

It was gods will
God made it
The way of God

All excuses because we are ignorant of the real reasons or dont want to accept them. Its a cop out.

Cheers

 

[Thief]

Gods other name is "excuse". It is the box in our mind we shove all things unknown. We ponder it and draw seemingly obvious patterns and delude our selves that zero must equal something. Then we group fantasize to reinforce it into a virtual reality we pretend to accept as real.

It was gods will
God made it
The way of God

All excuses because we are ignorant of the real reasons or dont want to accept them. Its a cop out.

Cheers

How about we give God some characteristics...anyway.
How about...bigger, faster, stronger, more intelligent, and greatly experienced?
Surely you know a few people who have some of these attributes.
What if there is someone with all of these, and has a spiritual life and living?
Then apply the term...Almighty... to that person.

All that is left is deciding if the Almighty is the cause for existence.

 

[godnotgod]

How about....
"I" (God) am the beginning and the end of all things.

If "I" choose to use a term as a proper noun...does it confuse you?

No. The problem is not that you used a proper noun, or that you refer to God as an anthropomorphic entity; it is that you made the claim that God is the alpha and omega. Because you made the claim, all I am asking is that you show me exactly where God's beginning and ending occur. In other words, what are you basing your statement upon? That's all.

Just answer the question: Where is the beginning and the ending of "God" who is an "I"?.

 

[godnotgod]

How about we give God some characteristics...anyway.
How about...bigger, faster, stronger, more intelligent, and greatly experienced?
Surely you know a few people who have some of these attributes.
What if there is someone with all of these, and has a spiritual life and living?
Then apply the term...Almighty... to that person.

All that is left is deciding if the Almighty is the cause for existence.

Congratulations! YOU have just created GOD in the image and likeness of MAN, all within the confines of your own mind.
*****

1st Japanese Soldier: "Wook! It's...Ziwwah!"
2nd Japanese Soldier: "Oh, My GOD!"
!st Soldier: "Dass right! He's....BIGGER!"
2nd Soldier: "Ya!
1st Soldier: "...and...FASTER!"
2nd Soldier: "Oh, Ya!"
1st Soldier: "a..a...a..an'.....STRONGER!"
2nd Soldier: "Uh, Huh!"
1st Soldier: "...a..a...a..an"...oh...so much...SMARTER!"
2nd Soldier: "Ay! Caramba!" But is he highly EXPERIENCED?"
1st Soldier: "You betcha!"
2nd Soldier: "Then that's no Ziwwah! It's none other than the fearsome...

GOD-ZIWWAH!, the cause of all existence and non-existence!.

1st Soldier: "God Almighty!"
2nd Soldier: "That's what I said!"
1st Soldier: "He will destroy us all"
2nd Soldier: "Fear not! Wook! Up in the sky! It's a plane! Supelliah Amellican Technorrogy will save us!
1st Soldier: "Oh, thank GOD!"
2nd Soldier: "Estupido! :slap: Everyone knows that there is no GOD without ZIWWAH!"
1st Soldier: "I knew THAT!":thud:

 

[godnotgod]

How about we give God some characteristics...

When it came to creating man, God pondered deeply which attributes to assign to him. Noticing God's concern, one of the angels shouted up to him:

"Why make a fuss? Just toss in a little modified chimp DNA!"

 

[godnotgod]

I don't think you're up for this.
Your objection to the description...alpha and omega....clearly indicates you have little or no consideration to such things.

I was not objecting to the description itself, but only to the fact that you stated the description as if it were Absolute Truth, without willing to demonstrate how this is true. In other words, you are just spouting dogma.

Can you show how God is the alpha and the omega, and exactly where/when/how the alpha and the omega first arise?

 

[Thief]

No. The problem is not that you used a proper noun, or that you refer to God as an anthropomorphic entity; it is that you made the claim that God is the alpha and omega. Because you made the claim, all I am asking is that you show me exactly where God's beginning and ending occur. In other words, what are you basing your statement upon? That's all.

Just answer the question: Where is the beginning and the ending of "God" who is an "I"?.

Read it again...It's God's claim....not mine.
And it's not a statement of His beginning or end.

 

[Thief]

Congratulations! YOU have just created GOD in the image and likeness of MAN, all within the confines of your own mind.
*****

1st Japanese Soldier: "Wook! It's...Ziwwah!"
2nd Japanese Soldier: "Oh, My GOD!"
!st Soldier: "Dass right! He's....BIGGER!"
2nd Soldier: "Ya!
1st Soldier: "...and...FASTER!"
2nd Soldier: "Oh, Ya!"
1st Soldier: "a..a...a..an'.....STRONGER!"
2nd Soldier: "Uh, Huh!"
1st Soldier: "...a..a...a..an"...oh...so much...SMARTER!"
2nd Soldier: "Ay! Caramba!" But is he highly EXPERIENCED?"
1st Soldier: "You betcha!"
2nd Soldier: "Then that's no Ziwwah! It's none other than the fearsome...

GOD-ZIWWAH!, the cause of all existence and non-existence!.

1st Soldier: "God Almighty!"
2nd Soldier: "That's what I said!"
1st Soldier: "He will destroy us all"
2nd Soldier: "Fear not! Wook! Up in the sky! It's a plane! Supelliah Amellican Technorrogy will save us!
1st Soldier: "Oh, thank GOD!"
2nd Soldier: "Estupido! :slap: Everyone knows that there is no GOD without ZIWWAH!"
1st Soldier: "I knew THAT!":thud:

Your age is showing.

 

[Thief]

When it came to creating man, God pondered deeply which attributes to assign to him. Noticing God's concern, one of the angels shouted up to him:

"Why make a fuss? Just toss in a little modified chimp DNA!"

You could research my postings and find an much better read on Genesis.

 

[godnotgod]

Read it again...It's God's claim....not mine.

No, YOU read it again! YOU clearly made the claim, and I quote you word for word, as follows:

"God is unique.
He is creator.
He is alpha and omega."

...and it is not God's claim, but the Bible's.

And it's not a statement of His beginning or end.

OK, let us take a look at what the Bible actually says:

Revelation 22:13

New International Version (©1984)
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

King James Bible
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

American Standard Version
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

Douay-Rheims Bible
I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

All other versions I have looked at say pretty much the same thing.

Wikipedia notes that:

Though many commentators and dictionaries apply this title both to God and to Christ, secular scholars note otherwise.Barnes’ Notes on the New Testament (1974) observes: "It cannot be absolutely certain that the writer meant to refer to the Lord Jesus specifically here... There is no real incongruity in supposing, also, that the writer here meant to refer to God as such."

This is what you originally said:

"God is unique.
He is creator.
He is alpha and omega."

Is your meaning different than that of the Bible? The Bible is clearly indicating a beginning and an end, contrary to your statement:

"And it's not a statement of His beginning or end".

The only conclusion I can reach, within the context of your statement, is that the Bible, in stating that God is the beginning and the end, does not mean what it says.

More religious mumbo jumbo, I suppose.

God is generally seen as possessing an infinite nature. The nature of the Infinite is such that it has no beginning and no end. It has no beginning and no end simply because it exists outside of time; of history. It exists purely in this eternal Present Moment, which has always existed, and which has never had a beginning nor an end.

God would have a beginning and an end only if he (it) were a finite being.

The writer of Revelations was wrong. He was making it up out of his rational understanding. If he truly had understood the true nature of spirituality, he never would have made such a statement.