This is really an impossible question, but i wondered if any of the brilliant minds in here would take a shot at it.. ?

Maybe if we tried to speculate on this, we might understand what, or whom God is...

It really doesn't matter if God is omnipotent or not, something, or someone must have created him as well...

Anyone?

If anyone can answer that question, it will be a first. Bible doesn't say that God was created.

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

This is a dangerous question to ask because it could lead to an infinite chain of creators who keep on creating one another : a super god creates god while this super god is created by a super super god and so on...

In the christian tradition God is not created but is simply there all along, being infinite in time and space,and any other diminsion you can think of. You know what lets just give him the Hilbertspace with its infinite amount of dimensions, that 'll keep him busy for a while. ;)
In the words of Aristotle (who was Thomas of Aquino's most favorite philosopher even though he was a heathen): God is the Immovable Mover, the first instigator without being instigated himself. But as I have shown in an other thread I don't think this image of god is feasable so the question who created god also becomes obsolete.

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton

[This message has been edited by Plato (edited September 28, 1999).]

Another possibility for this is that man created God for purposes we do not know. In many traditions, including Christian, unknown occurances are attributed to God. He could be a means only to explain the unknown and satisfy the human want to not be the highest being. For, if we were, we would have to hold ourselves accountable for our actions. It's just a thought.

------------------
Peace and Long Life; Live Long and Prosper.
--Spock

How about this...time is a dimension which God transcends? We just can't understand that because we don't...as of yet anyway. So, God was not created. Not to say that jives in my head, cause it doesn't, it never did, and probably never will until I'm dead (first death). Later.

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

That is very good Lori,
that means :
1) that you know what time really is
2) that you know the nature of god

Could you elaborate a little more on these things ?

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton

I think that *God* in whatever form you make of it, is symbiotic with the universe. What else is there besides no God...

OH, so it' a separate but infinite God, that controls the physical realm as it sees fit? Ok, so God has it's own rules I see.

The only logical answer is that God is a function of the universe, as the universe is a function of God. There's no separating the two no matter what religion you adhere to. Who created God IMHO is not a valid question.

Ps-- It's just a thought, feel free to let me have it if this sounds totally whacked. ;)

Yes, I can elaborate...The time I'm referring to would be the dimension of time, or the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues; the nonspatial continuum that is measured in terms of events which suceed one another from past through present to future.

God is a spiritual being who is omnipotent and omnipresent, which basically means that He is our creator and He transcends time as we know it. I say as we know it because I'm unsure if our concept of time is nonexistent or different in the spiritual realm, or if it is the same progression there, and God just has a way of trandscending it. Sometimes people do that too you know? Have visions of the future...that's how the prophecy in the Bible was written. It was actually shown to the prophets; they actually witnessed it.

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

GammaEridon has it right, and history will be his pillar of support. It is the only God-theory that is testable through physical evidence (artifacts and anscient rites demonstrating progression of faith) -- and so far it seems to come out in flying colors. Plato and Tiassa have already discussed the anthropological picture of the origins of faith pretty extensively in other threads.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

Gods as a whole were created by our ancestors to explain what they could not explain for themselves. I try to imagine what the first of our kind to ponder a geyser or a volcano must have thought, assuming that it didn't kill the grinning idiot in the process. It would be very easy to imagine a great beast beneath the surface, where no man had gone before. I believe that the fiery terror of a lava flow must have started the image of Hell and the underworld, while the soothing rains that made things grow gave rise to a Heaven in the skies. Gods were created to dispel the shadowy world of "I don't know", and thusly to give us comfort in the face of the unknown and the terrifying.

That is a whole lot, Lori ! Let's go over them one at the time shall we ?

the dimension of time, or the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues

Here you fall in a loophole, you try to explain time by way of a period which is a slice of time so this doesn't teach us a lot about the nature of time.

the nonspatial continuum that is measured in terms of events which suceed one another from past through present to future.

Ok, so time is non spatial and it is a contiuum. I would agree certainly on the first part but raise doubts about the second. The truth is we don't know if it is a continuum, time could very well be discrete with such small intervals that we just can't measure them up untill now. What would the implications be for the transcendence of discreate time ? I don't know but we must bear in mind that time might hold some surpises for us.

God is a spiritual being who is omnipotent and omnipresent, which basically means that He is our creator ...

What ever you are doing here it is certainly not a valid conclusion from your premisses. Creator does not follow from omnipotence, omnipresence and being spiritual. As Boris has previously said the universe or multiverse if you prefer could have been there all along next to an omnipotent, omnipresent, spiritual being.

...He transcends time as we know it. I say as we know it because I'm unsure if our concept of time is nonexistent or different in the spiritual realm, or if it is the same progression there, and God just has a way of trandscending it.

suppose time is the same in the spiritual realm then god certainly won't live there because he transcendents time as we know it. So if there is something like a god who transcendents time there must be something like a spiritual realm that doesn't has the concept of time as we know it, in the very least god is the spiritual realm.

. Sometimes people do that too you know? Have visions of the future...that's how the prophecy in the Bible was written. It was actually shown to the prophets; they actually witnessed it.

That won't do for evidence I'm afraid. It takes an act of faith in the first place to accept the accounts of the prophets. Once you do that you don't have that much difficulties any more with accepting other peoples visions of the future. It is the first step that I don't follow, that I'm incapable of following since I believe there is an unsurmountable gap between the world of every day and the so called spiritual world. This urges me to refer the tails about the spiritual to the realm of fantasy !

However, what I can accept is that we are very much intertwained by the rest of the universe. Look at our planet for a start, all living creatures share the same heritage in the codes locked in their celluar nucleii. If we broaden the scope to the very elements that we are composed of then we can feel one with the intire universe since every where we look, we find the same chemical fingerprints in the spectra that we take from objects as far away as quasars. This means that we are not just foreign objects placed here by an even more foreign intelligence but we are the products of the forces and energies of the universe that surrounds us. Who needs a god with such a fantastical universe that surrounds us ?

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton

Oxygen,

Prove your assumptions. Oh, that's right, you can't.

Plato,

If you have any problems with the definition of time that I gave you, then take it up with Webster's. That is the exact definition of time. Period.

From omnipotence to creator is a valid conclusion. To be all knowing, and to be the only all knowing being, you have to be the creator.

Why can't God be a spiritual being in the spiritual realm, where time exists, but he can trandscend it? Explain that to me. Also, it doesn't take faith to believe someone had a vision or prophecy, it takes common sense. It does not make common sense to assume that everyone on the planet throughout history who has had a spiritual encounter or experience is lying. It just doesn't, and I'm sorry to say that is the assumption that you and Boris make all the time. Both of your arrogance is borderline sickening. To think that you both are soooo much smarter than every person on the entire face of the earth throughout the history of man is a pipe dream at best. Listen you guys, if you want to continue to ignore the overwhelmingly huge amount of testimony regarding spirituality since the dawn of man, then go right ahead, but you are not doing yourselves any favors. It's impossible to debate this topic with you guys because your arguements make no sense. It is apparent that neither of you have any clue about what I'm talking about, and you're too vain and egofied to check it out for yourselves. Boris' statement regarding the fact that he thinks man is somewhere near the completion of knowing everything there is to know about the universe is hilarious. Makes me laugh. Also doesn't make any sense. Just take a look at the rate of increase in scientific advancement. It has INCREASED AT AN INCREASING RATE since I've been alive at least. So Boris, you're wrong, and mathematically at that. You pulled that statement right out of your ass and you know it. You guys are missing the most important thing in life. The meaning of life. You're missing it. You'll lose it. How in the world can you possible think that it is rational and logical to assume that most of the people on the face of the earth are liars or misunderstood? That's insane. I hate to break it to you guys, but you're not any smarter than the rest of us. Yea sure you can regurgitate a bunch of scientific mumbo-jumbo you learned out of a book, but anyone can do that. Your true level of intelligence is shown by the fact that you assume that you're smarter than any other religious person, alien abductee, or anyone else who's had a spiritual encounter on the face of the earth and throughout the history of man. I mean listen to that assumption!!!! That's insane!!!!!!

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

Lori,

First I must apologise about my question for the nature of time, it was pure wickedness of my part bacause I know damn well that this is one of the most debated subjects in the past centuries where we will be going on with for quite a while...
Then a question : why is it that you always think that people who don't see the world your way, they are egoïstic with an arrogance that is borderline sickening ?
If I say that people are lying about having spoken to god then I don't mean this as a negative thing. Most of these people aren't doing this out of malevolence, they genuenly believe that they had an encounter, an enlightenment or some kind of contact with a spiritual being or divine presence. These people are not crazy but there are several other factors that need to be kept in mind.
First of all, their environment. The profets of ancient times live in a society thorougly embedded with a concept of god. Atheïsm is a very recent development, a product of the 18th century so if these people had some kind of experience this was reïnforced by their surroundings and culture as truly being touched by god.
Second the mind is a very strange thing ! We must be very careful to take everything that it tries to make us believe to hold for the truth !
Third the power of tradition and authority of certain people or sources. Once a whole bunch of people begin to agree that a certain book speaks the words of god himself, it gets very hard to make them think otherwise. For example, all through the middle ages scholars tried to reconsile the kosmologie of the ancients like Aristotle and Ptolemaus with the Holy Scripture. In the thirteenth century they succeded in the works of the scholastici like Bonaventura and Thomas of Aquino. Once this perfect harmony between the kosmos, god and man was established it stood there as an insurmountable mountain. It took several centuries before theologists realised that they could no longer hold on to it, the universe of the ancients simply was not right.
Were these people morons ? Were they crazy ? Was it arrogance of Newton to dismiss the teachings of Ptolemaus or Thomas of Aquino ? It certainly took a great deal of courage to shatter this magnificent construct of the middelages but it had to be done.

------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton

hi
god should be plural.gods. thats what people thought they were,but they were the Nefilim (which means "those who came down") from the planet Nibiru,the 12th planet.when its close enough to earth,every 3600 years,they can travel here.when they came here they made us, genetically mixing their dna and certain monkeys dna. thats why theres a missing link-them. these "gods" are are big,12 feet tall.monkeys are short.we are in between.we were enslaved by the"gods" to do work,mining gold,building pyramids etc. Zecharia Sitchin explains it all in his books but hes also on the net...........check it out.........nik

JMitch: You wrote "I think that God . . . is symbiotic with the universe. What else is there besides no God ...." I would like to throw in the notion that the universe IS God, thus leading to the question "What else is there besides God?" It leaves the question just as open, and prevents people of any specific faith from restricting God to a single image. If we look, say, at Greek myth, the gods have much to say about the nature of human conduct. This does not seem odd to me, since civilization was still a novel concept on such a scale, and the rules of human conduct were still quite random. Hebrew Qabalism, for the paltry study I've given it, appears to me to be a large, representative philosophy inextricably linked with Hebrew language and alphabet; I have an affinity for the various theories that search ancient written Hebrew for mathematical advisements. What do the Ten Commandments tell us about human conduct? And is it fair to expect a church-as-political-entity to stick in a couple of arrogances? ("No gods before me" and "That's my name, don't wear it out.")

Likewise, I'm fascinated by various Druidic ideas. For example, Dr. Barry Fell's "America BC" discusses the presence of Phonecian, Nubian, Tartessian, and Irish expeditions on the North American continent millennia before the arrival of the murderer Columbus. There are various temples scattered throughout the eastern United States which very strongly resemble temples in Ireland and Britain; there are alphabetic, linguistic, and stylistic correllations leaping from the data. What is important is to my point is that each of the temples is properly aligned with the sun, the moon, and the stars, accounting for ideas like precession, and the metonic cycle. Precession takes about 400 years to mark, but is constant worldwide. The metonic cycle takes 19 years to mark, and varies according to geography. Which meant that, after arriving on the continent, the priests had to spend 19 years figuring the temple alignment. Is there an iota of science here? Probably. But, in general, we write off some things because they are religion. I can't recall if any recent American or European has been credited with documenting the metonic cycle for the first time, but this religious idea's value to science has paid off greatly.

I didn't mean to draw that out, so ... I'm unwilling to speak ill of the core religion itself, as there might be an inherent value I haven't yet figured. But I'm also unwilling to let other people dictate the terms in which I consider God. And in the modern day, religious zealots seem to care more about faith and dominion than the inherent value of their philosophy. So if we dismiss these people from consideration for a moment, and attempt to make "God", as an idea, synonymous with "universe", then we can say that learning about God involves learning about the universe, not going out and gathering petition signatures to ban books, movies, sex, drugs, or anything like that.

thx,
Tiassa

------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)

[This message has been edited by tiassa (edited October 01, 1999).]

Tiassa,
I would like to
throw in the notion that the universe IS God

Thank you for adding that. I've had the same notion myself.

So if we dismiss
these people from consideration for a moment, and attempt to
make "God", as an idea, synonymous with "universe", then we
can say that learning about God involves learning about the
universe, not going out and gathering petition signatures to ban
books, movies, sex, drugs, or anything like that.

It's not about dismissing anyone, or putting those of faith down. It's all about unity, my friend. On the premise of God=Life we should act accordingly. It's an everyday test. (philosopher mode: off)

Lori,

You are putting words into my mouth again.

Quote one place where I presumed that all spiritual "evidence" consists of pure lies. I do not exclude outright fabrications , street hoaxes, and "me too, me too" wishful tales -- however I never claimed that all "evidence" was of such a dismal origin. I do admit (and indeed am quite interested in) the possibility that a certain portion of "paranormal" experiences were artifacts of human brain function. I also believe quite a few "spiritual" phenomena reside in sensory illusion or misinterpretation of physical phenomena. I am even willing to admit, just for laughs, the remote possibility of certain unearthly visitations. What I do not accept as an explanation is the totally impossible and elaborate concoction of the "spiritual world".

Likewise, I never said that scientific knowledge is nearing completion. What I did say is that knowledge of <u>fundamental phenomena</u> is nearing completion (even if only assymptotically.) Just because you know the laws of quantum electrodynamics that drive a computer, doesn't mean you have knowledge of all possible programs that this computer can execute. The same with physics: we are approaching a complete enumeration of all the basic building blocks (as in the Grand Unified Theory) -- but this does not mean we will soon perfectly understand the dynamics of every physical process in existence. Knowledge of the written world begins with the alphabet. We are only just about mastering the alphabet; the book of Reality remains largely unread. What I am saying is that you are confusing basic science with applied science. The technological and "scientific" explosion of the last decades has largely been in the applied fields.

This is not to say that the observable universe constitues an ultimate expression of existence; there may be higher realities, even giving rise to our own like a ripple on the surface of a deep ocean. However, what this means is that we are heading for the point of collecting all the building blocks necessary to explain absolutely every single phenomenon we observe in terms of deterministic physical processes (thereby excluding anything "paranormal", and guaranteeing "mundane" explanation to everything that used to go unexplained in the past.)

<hr>

Once again, in attacking my and Plato's collective "arrogance", you juxtapose the modern perspective with that of the anscients. This is not a fair comparison because the anscients did not have the knowledge we do. If they did, I bet the majority of them would also have become atheists, or at least agnostics.

Both you and I draw our knowledge from books of one kind or another. Though, my books are far better grounded in reality -- you <u>must</u> concede at least that.

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

Lori,

what I would like to add. Your biggest argument for paranormal phenomena, talking to god and UFO's seem to be because there are so many testimonies. This is not really that good because each testimony doesn't stand on its own, there is correlation between them.
If you want to see how easy it is to throw balls through a hole then you can take 100000 balls and throw them in the hole, count how many there are inside and divide that number by 100000. How ever suppose each time you get a ball inside the hole devellops a bit more of attractive force so that the next balls fall in more easily. At the end you will count a huge amount of balls inside but this number gives us not the same information as the previous one.
People talk to one another, they like to exagurate their stories and thus other people compare their experiences with that of their peers and add something to the stories. This is not out of nastiness of with the evil intend to decive, it is simple distortion of information because of unreliable means of transferring it.
I am quite confident that you are reading the exact letters that I typed here but I am less confident that their meaning is transferred as I intended. I'm not even sure if what I write is really what I want to say so if there is so much distortion, how can you be absolutely certain of anything ?

tiassa,

about presession : if you mean the time it takes for the earth axis to make one tour that takes about 25000 years, not 400 unless I don't know what you are talking about ofcourse which is very possible given the above mentioned distortions... ;)
------------------
"If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood on the shoulders of giants."
Isaac Newton

[This message has been edited by Plato (edited September 30, 1999).]

JMitch--

I owe you a clarification. When I said "dismiss people", I merely meant that we cannot let others' ideas of God (whether "right" or "wrong") set the path we choose to follow. If I might:

When I finally chose to not participate in the Christian process, I found that my ideas about the mysteries of the universe were still confined to the ridiculous dualism of Christ and Satan. When I dismiss those notions, choose not to argue "against" them directly, I'm allowing myself another path, rather than simply plunging down the trail into the dark mire of one church's political and philosophical shortcomings. Only when I chose to not call myself Christian or Satanist could I begin to see deeper questions, including the anthropological and historical aspects I explore in this forum. I agree that we cannot dismiss the people themselves, but there's no need to argue with a faith that cannot, by its nature, be given up.

***

Plato--

Precession refers to inaccuracies in our measurements of orbital speed. Actually, it's much like a Leap Year. If we set the calendar we have, and follow it for four-hundred years or so, the equinoxes and solstices will, at the end of that period, occur a day earlier in the calendar.

thx,
Tiassa

------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)

Lori- Can you prove yours?

Aztec religion says that their God came to Earth in a flaming chariot, etc. Quetzalcoatl (their god) was white and had a beard (a similar description to the steriotypical image of Jesus Christ). If we take this view further, could it mean that our God (whatever religion) is an extra-terrestrial and he/she/it was created through evolution just like ourselves? This removes the question who created god, and alien technology could easily have created the miracles described in the bible etc.

Andy.R

Ahhhhhhh!!!!!!!!! Just stop it, ok???? Andy, Jesus wasn't white, and God is not an alien!!!!!!!!!!! See????? What have I been telling you people????? This is the deception!!!!!!!!!

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

Lori:

You are correct that Jesus wasn't white. However, I believe your faith is obscuring an aspect of this. Okay, Jesus wasn't white and God is not an alien. What have these two things to do with one another? Nothing, unless a person subscribes to a faith similar to the one you espouse.

I understand that in a Christian universe, the Father-Son-Holy Spirit thing is supposed to be fact. But there is no deception until its established within the context of the discussion that the only "god" we are debating is the one who has presided so sporadically over the Judeo-Christian empires.

As to the great white god Quetzalcoatl:

Andyr:

Let me say up front I have no data at present to give you the specific example of this society interacting with the Aztecs. I'm working on it, among other things because it's a cool part of history that doesn't get told.

At any rate: Between 2500 y.a. and 1492 c.e., a number of groups beat Columbus to the American continent. Evidence suggests that the Celts, Phonecians, Tartessians, and Nubians all hit the American continent starting around 700-600 b.c.e.

Like I said, I can't connect the Aztecs themselves to this process because I can't find the information in the following sense: "During ____ [year/period], the ____ [nation/people] encountered the Aztecs at ____ [place]." I wish I could, to make this even more relevant. The theory itself is only about 20-30 years old, but the idea is so new to the culture that OMNI's website includes a small piece about a Phonecian coin found on the American continent, and asks if it's even possible for those people to have even made it here. So it's not a well-known theory yet, but it's there and it's not nearly as whacked as I expected it to be.

But all that just to put my two cents in on the precolumbian American empires and their gods.

thx,
Tiassa

------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)

Ok Tiassa,

If everything that is written in revelations comes true, THEN would you believe that Jesus is Christ, or would you still be blinded to the truth? What if I told you that one of these days here real soon, that I was going to disappear along with many other Bible-believing Christians, and the aliens are going to take credit for it by saying that they took us away to another planet to finish our development, because we were too close-minded to evolve with the rest of the planet during this "dimensional shift" of sorts? Would you say I'm full of shit? OK then, just watch. And when it happens, just remember that I knew it was going to happen, and then ask yourself how did she know that? AND know that I am not on some other planet living the rest of my 3rd dimension evolution out as some flippin' octopus, but am with Jesus, and awaiting the martyrs, which I sincerely hope that you will be one.

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

God wasnt created, he is outside time, which means he never had a start and will never have an end

He is not only omnipotent, but he is also in every single second of 'our' time at once.

I hope that clears the start of this topic up monkees :)

shambles :)

------------------

Thank you PercyPea, that does a very nice job of clearing things up.

------------------
God loves you and so do I!

Im glad i can help monkee :)

------------------
Im a shambles, but Im Gods shambles!!

Lori--

The dangerous thing about whether or not the Revelations come true is that their realization is subjective; serveral doomsday cults have predicted the end of the world based on interpretations of the Revelations. Whether Branch Davidian, Millerite, or that Korean cult that saw October, 1993 as the end of the world, each of these groups truly believed the Signs were upon them. In each case, well, we know the rest.

So, while I would not actually put the words into your mouth for you, there is the risk of the following:

"Yes, if the Revelations came true, I would believe."
"But," said the Christian. "Look, the signs are upon us ... why do you not believe?"

In the long run, a coincidence of circumstances is not enough to convince me that a vague prophecy has come true. War? Famine? Pestilence? Puh-leeze. Oh, and that fourth horseman: Death. "What killed him?" Well, Death killed him.

So, specifically, no, the coming of the Revelations won't convince that Jesus is Christ.

I always had a joke that I would believe in Jesus as Christ when he popped up on the streetcorner and we drank a few beers together while hammering out the finer points which generations of misdirection have dulled. This theory falls through, as well, though, because even if Jesus did appear for a night on the town, he still, by principle, cannot proclaim himself Christ.

And then there's your own words: "Would you say I'm full of shit? OK then, just watch. And when it happens, just remember that I knew it was going to happen, and then ask yourself how did she know that?"

OK. First, I like to be cautious when I say you're full of anything. Secondly, I love that "Just watch ... I knew it was going to happen" bit. So is it about God or about you being right?

And this is where I have an unfair argumentative advantage. I have no God restricting me from hypocrisy, arrogance, or other mistakes of presentation. You, on the other hand, do.

Oh, wait. It's okay. I forgot ... you're forgiven.

Tiassa

------------------
"Let us not launch the boat until the ground is wet." (Khaavren of Castlerock)

There we go again with the time issue. Why is it so hard to understand that if God exists outside of time, then he/she/it could never actually <u>do</u> anything? Because "doing" something, like creating the universe for example, implies a sequence of events <u>in time</u>. For example, intent <u>followed by</u> action. You can't have that outside time!!!

Though, of course, God does work in mysterious ways. It doesn't matter how nonsensical God is; it must exist because the Bible said so. D'ohhhhh......

------------------
I am; therefore I think.

Why is it so hard to understand that if God is super powerful then he can do whatever he wants, inside or out side of time.

He just does things outside of human comprehension boris monkee, its as simple as that

------------------
Im a shambles, but Im Gods shambles!!

I have to say I find myself agreeing with Boris more and more on this board. The most simple explanation of "Who created God?" is that man did. If you happen to be one of the adherents of Occam's Razor, that alone should be a simple enough explanation. Since, for most people, it is not (including myself), lets delve a little deeper.

To analyze and thereby criticize Christianity on this board is a hanging offense, so lets take for our example Greek/Roman mythologies. We call them mythologies because we, from our "enlightened" viewpoints, "know" they aren't true. What's to say that some greater society in another 500 years, after the decline of Christianity, won't look back and say the same things about ABOUT christianity? What we know now about Greek/Roman mythologies is that they were convient ways for those civilizations to explain events in the world around them that they couldn't explain by themselves. Being that I don't subscribe to any particular religion, I believe I can objectively say that ALL religions serve exactly the same purpose as the mythologies of old: To explain the unexplainable by creating something even MORE unexplainable, and to provide Man with security by entrusting the well-being of the world to a higher power.

-Mierdaan

------------------
"Not all who wander are lost..."
-J.R.R. Tolkien

Boris,

There we go again with the time issue. Why is it so hard to understand that if God exists outside of time, then he/she/it could never actually do anything? Because "doing" something, like creating the universe for example, implies a sequence of events in time. For example, intent followed by action. You can't have that outside time!!!

I have a computer game called Civilization, that I have wasted many countless hours playing. I save the game at certain strategic times, so that if I don't like the turn a particular game takes, I can quit and open the file at some earlier time and make different decisions based on the advantage of knowing what happened when I made the wrong choice. I can also choose a previous game and watch it unfold as if for the first time. However, having played that particular game before, I already know the outcome of the game. Do you see any parallels here?

Searcher-I understand that which you're trying to convey, but we aren't a big game to God.

While we're arguing about who(what) created God, or if he/she/whatever already existed eternally and forever...

Can anyone prove to me that I'm not eternal? As far as I can tell I've existed as long as time itself has. I have no memories of what came before me, therefore there was nothing before me. I have no concept of what will come after me, therefore nothing will come after me. Could it be that God is under this same misaprehension? In other words - maybe God just thinks he has existed eternally, and misinformed Peter and all the other bible-writers... Would God remember his own birth? Does anyone reading this remember their own birth? Just curious.

Hello SkyeBlue,

I don't remember my birth but I believe that I do remember the first time I came to the realization that I was alive. I was a toddler and my grandfather was playing too roughly with me. He was sitting on a couch cushion with my head under it, teasing me. I felt like I was being suffocated. When he finally let up, I came out from under the cushion, took a big gulp of air and I remember being happy that I was "alive". Anyone else?


[This message has been edited by truestory (edited October 26, 1999).]

Vanja,

Although I can appreciate your point of view, I do not necessarily agree (and I don't necessarily disagree, either - I simply don't know). The way I see it, there are 3 possible reasons for our existence:

1) We are all part of some cosmic game.

2) We are required to eventually serve some useful purpose, presently unknown to us.

3) We simply exist.

Choice number one implies multiple players. In that case, I would tend to believe it is a game between aliens as I would have a difficult time believing that God would have either a need for such pastimes, or an opponent with whom to compete. It also implies that our usefulness expires when we do.

Choice number two implies that some of us who prove ourselves to be unquestioningly obedient, hard workers and blindly loyal to the first being who comes along and claims to be God, will be chosen to do some future task. The rest of us would no doubt be discarded. Again, this to me suggests an alien hand working behind the scenes, as I can't imagine God having a need for cheap slave labor.

Choice number three implies that there is no great purpose for our existence other than to just enjoy the experience of life to the fullest extent possible. Do what you love and love what you do; live and let live; discover the paradise within. This seems to me to be the choice most consistent with what I believe God to be. His energy permeates all things, and through us and all things in the universe, he can experience and be a part of all that is, was or will be.

Pepole tend externalize the parts of themselve's that they have a hard time accepting. From this basic thought I belive that the God and Satan duality comes from inside each of them. God being the part that they feel is good and all loving, and Satan being the part they have been taught and instinctively feel is wrong but none the less is part of who they are.

------------------
The Belief that there is only one truth and that oneself is in possession of it
seems to me the depest root of all evil that is in the world
-Max Born