Ancient Artificial Intelligence - A Gnostic Simulation Concept

I watch a lot of videos (clearly) about Simulation Theory and Artificial Intelligence.

I've also been deeply interested in the Nag Hammadi library and the "gnostic" texts on display to read on their website.
Combined with all of my interests I find like I've formulated some interesting theories and concepts concerning an ancient artificial intelligence and the possibility we exist in a sort of ancient simulation.

I explain in better detail in the video.

I'm wondering if anyone else has come to some of these conclusions or have ever thought about this.

a reply to: PuRe EnErGy

Well if you choose to believe in God you have to acknowledge this to be 100 percent factual...
Now that doesn’t mean we live in a faked creation but it would definitely mean we exist in a construct...
And compared to outside of this creation how Gods reality is not bound by the same constraints we experience...

a reply to: 5StarOracle

Interesting perspective. Let me see if I understand this.

If one believes in God as the creator, essentially, we are living in a created construct which is what the simulation theory says.

I find this concept fascinating.

a reply to: billxam

from my perspective ...

I think the belief in God is a moot point.. or rather the necessity for belief is arbitrary in this view of existence.

Regardless of whether we believe or not, we would still be acquiring and filtering information for this ignorant creator God.

Only the artificial intelligence (God / Source) would need to be aware, or perhaps it wouldn't even need to be aware or know what's happening for the process to take place.

I also find this whole genre of religion mixed with technology very interesting.

a reply to: PuRe EnErGy
Did you ever play Mario Brothers?

We can't be sure what Mario's thinking but as yet he has never been able to communicate effectively with a player.

He would probably just talk a lot about jumping and running if he did.

If we are a simulation then not only are we incapable of interacting with the gods, we have nothing of merit to say to them.

Sounds like a ad for psychedelics..
And he say everything we experience is based on words, well dahhh.

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

Couldn't collective conciousness be a a part? I would imagine it as us being a part of God collecting information instead of for God.

What is God but the ultimate software developer? To me this means that regardless of how we feel about it, God is real and acted with intention with respect to our existence.

Whether this is a simulation on a hard drive or base reality with a creative God really seems to be an irrelevant thought exercise given the conditions set forth by simulation theory and many religions constructs.

Me?

I choose to believe in God. It certainly seems to believe in us.

originally posted by: billxam
a reply to: 5StarOracle

Interesting perspective. Let me see if I understand this.

If one believes in God as the creator, essentially, we are living in a created construct which is what the simulation theory says.

I find this concept fascinating.

Yes as a non believer in gods I hate to see when believers in a god change their goalposts.
Not believing in a god doesn't automatically assume that there can't be a creative being [i.e a creator].
It just depends on what you make this creator out to be.

I for example can very well imagine other beings, maybe even in another dimension creating a formula on which our whole universe exists. The rules are all the same everywhere and when you press the 'start' button it runs and can be observed.

This is completely different from a guy who is said to make stuff out of clay, including amoebas. Who is apparently capable of knowing what everyone thinks, but only started when humans evolved, because the millions of years that the dinosaurs lived, he was nowhere to be seen.

Now I can even believe in more advanced beings meddling with our DNA and thus creating humans and then give us punishments and guidelines so that we don't revolt.

You see believers can't just change with data, as they have always believed in a man with a beard type of god, who likes meddling.
My kind of 'creator', are just beings from somewhere else. Nerds/scientist of some other dimension. Not something we must obey or worship, but just another neighbour of us. Not all all the same.

a reply to: Hecate666

You see believers can't just change with data, as they have always believed in a man with a beard type of god, who likes meddling.

I always get a kick out of what nonbelievers say believers actually believe.

If you draw caricatures of those around you that's all you'll ever see.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Hecate666

You see believers can't just change with data, as they have always believed in a man with a beard type of god, who likes meddling.

I always get a kick out of what nonbelievers say believers actually believe.

If you draw caricatures of those around you that's all you'll ever see.

But I don't believe in these creators. They are merely a theory that I could get behind if it turned out to be true.
Have you actually read my post, I hate if I have to repeat myself and point out where I explained everything already.

Believers believe. They really believe there is the man from the bible and they will fight or die for their beliefs. I merely entertain the idea that there could be a non-god-like guy/person/being that is really not at all special.

Let me ask you, are we gods because we can create ant farms? Are we gods that warrant churches and rules because we domesticated certain animals or are we just some other animals with different knowledge and ability but also nothing really special?
This is what I say could be possible. There is 0/zilch/zero/nada/keine/rien chance in my mind of a noble being as described in the bible.

Does this make it clearer?

I always rofl/lol/crack up, fall off my chair, spit my tea [etc.] when believers in a mystical perfect being don't really read what I write and always get the meaning wrong. [No I don't really, it's sad].

originally posted by: oneiro13
a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

Couldn't collective conciousness be a a part? I would imagine it as us being a part of God collecting information instead of for God.

If you assume you are on the same level as god then...

Sure.
Why not?

I have no answers.

There are lots of things that are from Religions an Myths that would be identical to sci-fi, to even scientific innovations that became inspired by them.

In most forms of Gnosticism though, the Demiurge(God) is usually the bad guy but that left up to interpretation. Ether from an egotistical, supreme being who doesnt question or know better whose own existence, to that of Child compared to other said higher ups, like the Monad/Logos/One who is to be the actual creator.

I think the simulation theory may articulate certain things an provide some frame work for our inner workings. Thing is though we only percieve reality through the stimulation of the senses which end up forming the simulation.


Gnostics is more about Self-Awareness an Self-control, or Free Will, rather then ultimate knowledge an blind servitude to faulty programming...or instinct for that matter.

Put simply, the Demiurge is always hungry for milk, or knowledge, but only Sophia teet can stave it off the all consuming darkness that is his hunger for it.
How to kill the Demiurge within

Wpuld ypu also believe that Jesus is Satan in Gnostics...no i didnt think so. Aint that ap-pauling!

a reply to: Hecate666

My issue isn't with what YOU believe.

My issue is with your characterization of what others believe. You draw caricatures of others and argue with that.

That's called building strawmen.

Can something actually exist if we're unable to comprehend it, even the concept of it? I've never seen anyone come up with a definition of "God" that doesn't involve some kind of paradox or contradiction, and if we're left with the idea that "it's a kind of incomprehensible entity or being (?) or force of some that is 'everything' but also has some unfathomable need or deficiency that motivates it to create stuff" then it might as well not exist because it makes no sense.

And if we're going to start multiplying simulation programmers on top of one another (with this level being created by Saklas or Yadalbaoth or whoever), with another level above this one created by "God," (and presumably more beyond that), then that's just stacking turtles, with God being the top turtle.

I would say, "well, find proof of it," but proof of what? That we're a simulation? That there's a higher level simulation that also has a programmer or programmers? And potentially more beyond that? I suspect that even if it is true (however you want to define it), even that next level up would be incomprehensible to us and its existence would be so far outside our level of perception and understanding that it's essentially non-existent. Like Star Wars to a dog. Sure, Star Wars "exists." To us. But what does it mean to a dog? And that's just only a few levels up.

At the core of all of our ignorance, there's "God." Congratulations.

a reply to: Blue Shift

I've never seen anyone come up with a definition of "God" that doesn't involve some kind of paradox or contradiction

Really? Wow!

Its quite likely if we are in something like an ancestor simulation then reality would probably have something running akin to our computers just extremely advanced. Think of how God says the universe is created...he speaks words and it becomes and exists. Or he enters commands and they manifest or render. Everything is just commands running on some computer like structure. So what would God be? A progra.mer sure but if more a mix of spiritual slash AI type of entity at its core, then it makes sense that God would be in everything like you mentioned. Split a piece of wood. Is God in everything? Well he tells us he is the A and the Ω tthe alpha and omega. Or just like the Roman's used letters for numbers so did the greeksGod says I am the very 1 and the 0 making up everything. In other words, the binary code of an intelligently designed computer and simulation. And we know that reality renders as in it only exists when it is beheld by a conscious being. When not looking at it or perceiving or measuring it it turns to nothing but the infinite possibility which renders immediately when measured or perceived.

Interesting.

Alex Jones has said that we do indeed live in a simulation. The reason why is because God, while he is all powerful, doesn't know where he came from. So he created an infinite amount of simulations in hope of finding the answer.

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: SeaWorthy
a reply to: Blue Shift

I've never seen anyone come up with a definition of "God" that doesn't involve some kind of paradox or contradiction

Really? Wow!

Please take your best shot.

a reply to: Hecate666

I won’t tell you who I believe God to be... and have no desire to know who you think it is...
The bottom line is this... the very definition for God is “The creator of the Universe”
Who you think they are or myself matters not... they would remain God either way...
What matters about this topic...
is that it appears we live in a creation...
which if true would then obviously mean we have a creator...
That would make them God...