So how do you explain existence ?

Well this is how I figure things out....works for me.

1. Imagine you know nothing....because there was a time when you did no nothing...before your parents and schools programmed you....and before the TV and books...and before the internet and conspiratorial theories...confused you even more. Oh and by the way...that means forget the Bible and God too and language and maths and history...because those concepts were also taught to you.

2. Realize that everything you "know" is mostly things you actually have no first hand knowledge of...For instance I believe and am convinced there are elephants in Africa, because ive seen them on TV.. but I have not actually been to Africa or seen an elephant...so its possible that its a huge conspiracy and a lie...highly unlikely but still possible. Same as the Buddhist Koan..."What sound does a tree make when it falls when nobody is around to hear it?".

3. Further more...you could ask this question...if I have a dream which seems real, at the moment i am dreaming...and Im convinced its real...then when I am awake is it also possible that I am also just experiencing a dream state or hallucination..? Again, its highly unlikely, but its an age old concept..and one that has been taken up recently by scientists who speculate that we "human beings"..may only actually exist as part of an advanced computer program..a simulation..now..that goes further than even the Matrix movie...because at least in that movie people..are still people...even though they are connected to the matrix...but as I said..some speculate that we may not even have that much uniqueness...being nothing more than computer code.

4. So when you have gone from knowing nothing..to attempting to know everything...what do you gain? Well...mostly you gain a headache...So I stick to remembering I know nothing...see the method of educating and indoctrinating people into knowledge about the world...is basically an attempt to enforce beliefs and therefore behaviors onto society..so that the society will be coherent and cooperative...I mean you cant build a civilization if everyone has radically different views....and even on this web site...you will find a commonly held view on aliens...for instance..and where do people usually get those views...well..from the media and movies...mostly...belief in aliens is no longer a fringe belief...most people believe in them...this indicates that the alien belief system is also indoctrinated into society...from the top down..after all movie directors like Spielberg...had to be funded by movie studios..and im speculating that many movie studios have at very least very close ties to the very top decision makers within government etc..the movie business is simply too important, in terms of propaganda and conditioning to be allowed to be completely interdependent.. ..... we know and believe what certain people want us to know and believe.

5. So as far as God goes...and why are we here etc...well...if you take into account all knowledge and belief are indoctrinated onto us..they are not naturally occurring things, that spring into human consciousness from birth..they are tools to control civilization...including the concept of God...the concept of "why are we here" even...So looking at the blank screen...the empty mind...your here to experience sensations through your 5 senses...why? well what else would you be doing?

Hello!
Im glad I stumbled upon your thread here because just within the past couple of days I believe I have I found the information we have all been searching for. It is believed that the Freemasons have been hiding the truth from us, however, George Washington (33 Degree Freemason) has left many clues that are undeniable (in my opinion). Author Wayne Herschel deciphered The key of Solomon (King David's son), and on his website he gives a detailed breakdown of symbols, numbers, and the alignments of stars.

Author Wayne Herschel - The Hidden Records

I have been watching random videos on youtube because the information is astounding! It might be a bit lengthy for some people but I was immediately captivated! I really hope you find your answers! Enjoy!

-BreeAnna

Originally posted by randyvs

If God created everything....then who created God?

And that is impossible, so at some point there must be a causeless cause. And God would suffice. Also what some see as proof when they open their eyes ? Others refuse as proof. As I said in the OP we see the proof everyday that existence and consciousness only come from existence and consciousness. I marvel at some of the responses so determined not to see that. And can only believe their lifestyles must lead them to be willfully blind because they certainly aren't stupid.

You have allowed yourself to fall into a trap. Even though you seem open to other opinions, you would still deny the truth of what you actually see (of the truth that is in our faces everyday, what we've discovered throughout earth's history, and what we actually do know of the universe).

And what do you know and see?

You KNOW that all of the stars and galaxies were created by the natural laws that govern the universe. You KNOW that there is a logical reason why the earth orbits the sun. You know and can see how every living thing is born, lives, and dies without any kind of supernatural intervention. We see EVERYTHING occurring from start to finish through natural chains of events and processes that can be explained rationally and scientifically.

Then we come to the question of how the universe was formed, and how the first living cell came into existence. Granted, we don't know how, but wouldn't the evidence of EVERYTHING we see and know up to this point suggest that these things were also created through natural means?

Where is the evidence that even ONE thing was created through supernatural means? When is the last time you witnessed something just pop into existence without any explanation? Again, I'm not even stating here that a god didn't create the universe. I am claiming that the evidence YOU see does not, in any way, point to any outside intervention. And in fact, EVERYTHING you see offers only evidence of natural causes.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull


It sounds to me as if you think by explaining the mechanics of life you can negate the mechanic. And you're right I see God as the causeless cause. That's what makes him God. By suggesting thereis no causeless cause ( God ) you and many like you suggest an infinite number of retro generations. Which I already touched upon in this thread. So don't try to reflect that back on me. That was a nice try but I won't allow it to fly,.

reply to post by TheBlackHat


TheBlackHat ladies and gentlemen.

Excellent topic. I think the belittling and toxic nature of this argument, and the topic of religion in general, is oftentimes due to the internet effect, communicating with people without direct contact. Because there's no face to face interaction, many folks think its OK to speak to others in ways they would never do face to face, in a very disrespectful manner. Instead of openly discussing differing viewpoints, we tend to belittle them because our views are obviously superior (see politics for a better example).

With regards to a better theory, one which isn't as cookoo, isn't that in the eye of the believer? I tend to think there's something to Genesis, although not exactly as written. I think ancient cultures tried to record creation as they saw it, or as they were told it. Our creation, I think, is more a science experiment than a mystical creation, something like the SIMS computer games. In this theory, we were created by a more advanced civilization and were allowed to evolve, except for times when an intervention was needed to correct something. I will admit, this theory is just as "looney" as the others, but there it is.

reply to post by jiggerj


No jigger I don't think I've fallen into a trap.

How is it you can consider nature as an explanation for anything ? When nature itself had to be initiated at some point ?

Lets go by sound strictly

Oh everything natural just happens naturally because nature is natural and so naturally that's how natural things happen in nature. Come on !

Daddy

Excellent topic. I think the belittling and toxic nature of this argument, and the topic of religion in general, is oftentimes due to the internet effect, communicating with people without direct contact. Because there's no face to face interaction, many folks think its OK to speak to others in ways they would never do face to face, in a very disrespectful manner. Instead of openly discussing differing viewpoints, we tend to belittle them because our views are obviously superior (see politics for a better example).

Thank you
I am doing my best to provide a decent open discussion of view points this time around. And I at least seem to be succeeding for the moment. I hope I hope.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by jiggerj

 

No jigger I don't think I've fallen into a trap.

How is it you can consider nature as an explanation for anything ? When nature itself had to be initiated at some point ?

Lets go by sound strictly

Oh everything natural just happens naturally because nature is natural and so naturally that's how natural things happen in nature. Come on !

You are arguing AGAINST my statement instead of FOR your statement. Come on, now, be a true investigator. Where is the evidence that you see every day that leads to any type of intervention from outside of the universe?

reply to post by jiggerj


But I don't recall putting anything outside the universe. Granted to create the universe God would have to be outside of it. But if he created it to be a part of something ? Well now I site that as a whole different ball of carbon based possibilities. Even if he's only part of it from a completely different dimension coming and going. The proof I'm siting as in day to day examples are not with out argument but how credible are the arguments ? The proof I speak of is simplistic and can be picked apart but how credible is the argument ? Nature did it, God did it ! What's the difference ? One suggests intelligence at least. Why is that so impossible ?

I don't see any problem with people regarding Biblical Creationism as a myth. Because it is. It's an account of Creation written by people from different ages, that thought their divine revelation was the valid one among so many others -- even though many others were nearly identical.

I think the simulation theory is a candidate to look at, & in this case you could look at 'God' as a programmer/grand player. I'm not just saying that because it's been proposed many times & is becoming rather well-known -- but because... well it actually makes sense.

reply to post by Raelsatu

well it actually makes sense.

Now explain to me how it makes more sense then the different identicals you mention as myth. Which by being identical should be considered an attribute to validity, at least where I grew up. You don't think everything being a computer generation just sounds utterly fantastic ? Not saying it isn't possible at all.

When we put all the possibilities on the table is the creation account in Genesis there or not ?
Maybe that should have been the title ?

reply to post by randyvs


Infinite regress is a philosophical issue that many arguments for God fall victim to. The idea of a causeless cause is not anything new.

Infinite regress is not a problem for the origin of life Randy, life is organic chemistry and though we haven't figured out exactly how it happened there's plenty of evidence that life could have originated via perfectly natural processes on the early Earth.

Now the origin of the Universe itself, as in pre-Big Bang, that's another issue entirely. The difference between us is that I am willing to admit that I have no idea where the Universe came from but you have added an extra supernatural step to fill in the gaps, here's how it works:

atheist: "If everything has to have a cause than what caused God?"

theist: "God simply exists, he is causeless."

atheist: "than why can't the Universe ITSELF be causeless? If God can simply exist with no explanation than why can't the Universe."

If you get to exempt God from the rules of logic and causality, rather than simply admitting that you don't know, than we could just as easily exempt the Universe itself. And you know what Randy, we can and do observe the Universe, can't say the same for your God.



To be fair I don't think a causeless Universe IS the answer. I don't have the answer for the great cosmic mystery and I wouldn't pretend to, but that doesn't justify leaping to supernatural explanations that don't actually explain anything and are unsatisfying and empty.

reply to post by randyvs


Unfortunately, this is one for the philosophers, as I think the scientists will never know for sure. After a lifetime of searching, within and without, I have come to some conclusions, based solely on gut instinct and a good feel for truth/lies.

I believe in the transpermia concept, or that we were influenced genetically by an alien race. Possibly several or even many times basing that on the fact that incredible and improbable structures exist that we cannot account for even with modern construction methods. These structures predate us modern humans, hence my belief in at least several waves of intelligent beings rising and falling on this planet.

What plagues me is how tenuous the conditions for life are on this planet, and the nagging feeling that the moon is an artificial construct because it really does not fit into my picture as logical, hanging in space just so, with the same side always pointed towards the earth. It's being an artificial sattelite seems much more probable than the astronomical chance that it settled there just so on it's own. Inertia comes into play here.

Existence relies on a very fine string of coincidences to continue, and it seems to me harder than trying to balance a pencil on your finger for a thousand years to keep it going. I also believe it could blink out in a second as we hurtle through this universe full of celestial objects. Enjoy your time here while you have it and live every day like it is your last.

I believe our existance is solely to experience and react. I believe in a collective consciousness that grows, learns, and evolves from our individual reactions, and this growth is our sole reason for existing. We are all here to learn and grow ourselves, and the collective grows as we do.

Anyhow that is what I believe...

First of all, we already know that the genesis account is scientifically incorrect.

Besides that, we really don't know how everything started...and that's the only honest answer, and the one science gives. Sadly religions on this planet don't seem to be honest enough to ever admit they're wrong, or that their claims aren't proven by objective evidence. Instead, all those hundreds of religions all claim they are the "right one".

In short, as for the last few thousands of years, religious followers are actively using the "god of the gaps" to explain something they simply can't explain. Another word for it would be "guessing" and then insisting that guess is somehow a fact. Sometimes it's even worse than that when their actual guess is demonstrable false...like that silly global flood claim.

Originally posted by randyvs

Now explain to me how it makes more sense then the different identicals you mention as myth. Which by being identical should be considered an attribute to validity, at least where I grew up. You don't think everything being a computer generation just sounds utterly fantastic ? Not saying it isn't possible at all.

When we put all the possibilities on the table is the creation account in Genesis there or not ?
Maybe that should have been the title ?

Well there are a few points to make; the Bible is self-proclaimed as the inerrant word of God. With no mistakes, no lies, & no false interjections by Satan. Therefore if you're going to take the Genesis account as valid or true, then you also must accept the rest of the scriptures as being truth. Christians aren't supposed to cherry pick which parts of the Bible they agree with (even though that's the case most of the time), and so if we're going by the aspect of consistency, the rest of the Bible must be as true as the beginning.

The "different identicals" are not as identical as you think. Refer to my last paragraph and as you see, the Genesis account refers to a specific Creator -- is a text written by man with no observable basis, and includes the ridiculous notion that all of humanity is damned to eternal suffering because the first two people that existed ate a forbidden fruit - one that was placed there to begin with, and in a so-called place of perfection where the most powerful/evil angel was allowed into. If you're willing to accept every fantastical word in this set of scripture, that's fine.

The simulation theory is was it is, a theory. Yet there's a reason this theory is more valid as a whole. It's based simply, and only on the fact that we're connecting our own path of creative awareness directly to our own state. I.e If we can create & use devices that will potentially simulate alternate universes, realities, & sentience like ourselves; then it can be said we might be in that very same predicament. You can go from here and say that God is a programmer or player of our reality. However from that point you must also take into account that God may not be all-loving; omnipotent or omniscient; the singularity of pure consciousness; and that he may be [inside] a simulation himself.

So the two theories are no so compatible. Simulation is based on what we see in our own technological state; Genesis is based on words & faith alone.

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

If you get to exempt God from the rules of logic and causality, rather than simply admitting that you don't know, than we could just as easily exempt the Universe itself. And you know what Randy, we can and do observe the Universe, can't say the same for your God.

K I can very easily give you what you want when I believe I know what it is you want. ( if that makes any sense ?) At least in this case, so hear it is.

Me by myself as in I ? I know nothing.

FYI peeps I'm growing tired and I'm going to take a break.

It seems to me the big fallacy here is that a lot of people take the Bible creation myth literally. They read, among other things, that God created the world in six days, and rested on the seventh day. They read that Eve was created from Adam's rib. They read about Noah's Flood. They know that creationists believe the earth is only 6000 years old (This is NOT in the Bible, BTW. It was the creation of an Irish Bishop during the Renaissance.)

Now these people are infinitely logical, really, really bright and they certainly can put two and two together, and they know without a doubt that the Earth could not have been created in 4004 BC on October 23rd at 9:00 in the morning. They know Cain had to have found a wife from, er, somewhere, so what's up with that? And they can point to a wealth of evidence disproving nearly every word in Genesis.

And you know what? They are absolutely right! I agree with them completely. It's all bunk, but.......

you would think these people had never heard of metaphor, allegory, or parables, did not like poetry, and were completely turned off by Shakespeare's sonnets. Have they ever studied folklore or mythology? Doubtful. Read the Dead Sea Scrolls? Not in your life.

To take creation stories literally is to completely miss the point. The same is true of a fundamentalist who believes in the Bible's literal truth. In that respect how are they different from the abject atheist who points out the world could not have been made in six days? They both are taking the story literally. Both the atheist and the fundamentalist are making the same mistake. Atheists, please welcome your fundamentalist brothers in crime. Turns out you both believe in a literal Bible.

And as for, "Let there be light!" That's a pretty succinct description of the Big Bang.

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by jiggerj

 

But I don't recall putting anything outside the universe.

You wrote that:

And that is impossible, so at some point there must be a causeless cause. And God would suffice.

Granted to create the universe God would have to be outside of it. But if he created it to be a part of something ? Well now I site that as a whole different ball of carbon based possibilities. Even if he's only part of it from a completely different dimension coming and going. The proof I'm siting as in day to day examples are not with out argument but how credible are the arguments ? The proof I speak of is simplistic and can be picked apart but how credible is the argument ? Nature did it, God did it ! What's the difference ? One suggests intelligence at least. Why is that so impossible ?

edit on 16-10-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

The conversation between you and me is on how you pointed out that:

... ****we see the proof everyday that existence and consciousness only come from existence and consciousness****.

This debate is not on whether or not a god exists, but on that "proof" of a god (that evidence) that we supposedly see everyday. And that's just not true. Absolutely nothing we see can be used as evidence to substantiate your claim in any way.

Humans give birth to babies that grow up to give birth to babies that grow up to give birth to babies... Chickens lay eggs that give birth to chickens that lay eggs that give birth to chickens... Trees drop nuts that grow into trees that drop nuts that grow into trees...

The ***EVIDENCE*** for a god just isn't there.

Example: We know that cows exist. However, I am standing in a milk factory and watching little pint containers being filled with milk. I see how the milk is pouring out of a hose that is connected to a huge tank in the middle of the factory. I move to another area where quart bottles are being filled with milk. This hose also runs to the big tank. Once more, I observe how gallon jugs are filling with milk from a hose connected to that same big tank.

You ask me, "What does the evidence show where this milk comes from?"
I say, "The evidence shows that the milk is from that big tank."
"You're an idiot," you say. "You know downright well that this milk comes from cows on a farm on the other side of the city."
I reply, "But, that is not what you asked me. It doesn't matter where the milk is from; you asked me what the evidence shows. And that evidence shows that the milk comes from that big tank. There is absolutely no evidence in here that proves this milk is from cows."

The life cycles of empty-brained babies, dumb chickens, and mindless trees offers no evidence whatsoever of an outside intelligence. Like the cows, maybe an outside intelligence does exist, but the evidence you claim is just not there.

Originally posted by randyvs

Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by randyvs

 

Just because we don't have the answers doesn't mean we should stop looking for them and return to stone age thinking. What makes genesis any more relevant than any other creation myth? Science has proven, for the most part, that the bible's claims are entirely unfounded, and as such genesis will likely be no exception.

Lets say for the sake of argument I did say Genesis was more relevant. Wouldn't that be covered by what I already said at the end of the OP ? Existence and Consciousness coming from same ? The story in Genesis is also very well documented.

edit on 15-10-2012 by randyvs because: (no reason given)

Documentation, and history for that matter, of events prior to the 1500's is very unreliable. Sure, major events such as wars are generally accepted as fact, but the details are always blurred. People did not keep records of many events, and the records that have survived throughout the centuries have often been written by people with a bias or an agenda. With that being said, I wouldn't taken anything written in the bible, or any holy book, as undisputable fact. Blind faith is not the key to wisdom.

Christianity is, by and large, an adaptation of Egyptian mythology and lesser known pagan religions with different character names; it's still primitive sun worship at best. Given it's (ongoing) historical record of being used as a means of politics, wealth, and power, I'd think anyone with a hint of critical thinking ability would come to avoid religion, but I'm constantly reminded of the seemingly infinite human capacity for stupidity and inability to learn from the past.

reply to post by randyvs

Oh everything natural just happens naturally because nature is natural and so naturally that's how natural things happen in nature. Come on !

I love this statement! It's been going through my head for an hour.

You honestly have no idea just how logical it is, do you? Well then, how logical is this statement:

There is an all-knowing, all-powerful, invisible being who created the whole universe, who lives in another dimension, is perfect in every way, and who was never born and will never die.

If anyone believes this statement, HULLOOO, time for the loonie bin!