A radical idea about God

[_palerobber]

no offense, but you sound like you're still Mormon to me.

[_moksha]

Make sense? What are your thoughts?

I am keeping my fingers crossed that the descendents of Wil Weaton and others like him may someday take their place in the Q Continuum. Until then, I am hoping for all our return to the presence of God. That idea cheers me up.

[_DonBradley]

You mean like this, Joe?

http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/05/09/mor ... -religion/

http://transfigurism.org/assets/60/transfiguration.pdf

http://transfigurism.org/

Don

[_DonBradley]

no offense, but you sound like you're still Mormon to me.

Prefixing such a compliment with "no offense" is simply redundant.

Don

[_Nomomo]

Any sober mind need only contemplate that we have stands of straight trees, convenient to mill and build with to know that there is a God. A random world would have only provided bramble.

This argument is 10 times worse that the one about the complexity of the eye being impossible to arise without a "Creator".

Back to the drawing board for you Nightlion.

[_huckelberry]

I'm trying to figure out what I believe after the recent fiasco of learning the truth (or lie) of Mormonism.

I've toyed with the idea that rather than God being the cause of creation, God may actually be the ultimate result after millions of years of evolution. In other words, as we (humans) evolve over time, WE become God...with God being the sum of all totals which is us.So rather than God being a cause, he's more of an effect. As more of us come to know truth, we count ourselves as part of that God. God is attained over time, and God is more of an awareness than an actual physical being. Coming to understand God may take many lives.

I've also toyed with the idea that eternity is NOW and we are, in fact, progressing through the different levels of "kingdoms" (for lack of a better term) and have been for many many thousands of generations. Our separateness from God is an illusion. Once we personally shatter that illusion, we become part of this "God".

Make sense? What are your thoughts?

i think this is pretty much what is implied in Mormon teaching. Mormonism does not have an eternal God who created us and the universe but an eternal universe with eternal spirits. I think Mormonism assumes that the God who has arrived at an exalted state has some sort of control over the paths of development for everybody else. I suppose a person could wonder about just why or how that could be. If the universe and spirits are eternal why would there not be multitudes of paths to success?

[_huckelberry]

...

The problem here is being out of time means there is no past, present, or future (as all have to do with time), so if future events do not yet causally exist, God cannot be causing them to exist. The reason why is because if he was causing them to exist, they would, in fact, exist in their respective times.

Any definition of "God" which makes use of the term "exist" or "existence"
will ultimately result in absurd statements.

God as the basis for existence -- or as the ground of being -- is a little
more palatable, theologically speaking. But in the realm of reason, that
sort of statement is like postulating zero multiplied by infinity, or infinity
divided by zero.
UD

I sometimes doubt that the phrase, God outside of time, can have a literal meaning. I think even if literally incoherent it would maintain the meaning that events and things are in time and change while God does not change but remains God. Philo's comment seems to mean that if God is out of time things and creation would be as well. Or maybe it meant that if God is out of time then God could not relate to or cause change in time. I am not understanding why not. What ever meaning ,out of time has, in traditional theology it does not mean God cannot touch time. To say all time is contained in Gods eternity would be a possible traditional construction.

Dale I am puzzled by your math. Why would you introduce multiplication and division? If you think the idea of God being eternal is incoherent you could say why.

[_zeezrom]

I'm trying to figure out what I believe after the recent fiasco of learning the truth (or lie) of Mormonism.

Hi Joe!

Why is it a fiasco? What truth did you learn?

Thanks!

Zee.

[_Uncle Dale]

...
Dale I am puzzled by your math. Why would you introduce multiplication and division? If you think the idea of God being eternal is incoherent you could say why.

I was attempting to demonstrate that reason alone will never serve
to produce a paradigm for "God."

Neither will human experience -- investigation -- deduction -- emotion,
nor any of the other methods attempted so often by theologians.

We are thinking human beings, so of course we attempt to communicate
with the means and methods which work for us in common consensus
reality. But when we make that attempt in the realm of metaphysics, we
end up with absurdities, paradoxes and impossibilities.

That is what I was trying to hint at. What IS zero? What IS infinity?
What limitations do our rational minds place upon our theorizing on what
happens when those numerical terms are thrown about in discussions?

Is it even possible to speak of God as simultaneously transcending
time-space, causing time-space, and manifesting to sentient beings
within time-space?

My profession is -- that when we attempt to think of such things, we
inevitably end up visualizing "a god" -- or perhaps "some god/gods." And
I'd say that trying to express "God" as an object, or a force, ends up
incompatible with the simple realization of "God is." Adding qualifications
to that simple statement only leads us around in circles -- or, for some
of us, to the opposite conclusion: "God isn't."

How do we even begin to express the realization of all things being only
one thing -- and that the word "thing" itself must be removed from the
attempt at communicating such ultimate truth?

I do not believe it can be communicated. All definitions of "God" fall short
of transcendent realization. Perhaps that is why the Zen Masters refuse
to talk about enlightenment -- refuse to teach or speculate upon the
metaphysical. It cannot be touched by reason and human words.

UD

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I'm trying to figure out what I believe after the recent fiasco of learning the truth (or lie) of Mormonism.

I've toyed with the idea that rather than God being the cause of creation, God may actually be the ultimate result after millions of years of evolution. In other words, as we (humans) evolve over time, WE become God...with God being the sum of all totals which is us.So rather than God being a cause, he's more of an effect. As more of us come to know truth, we count ourselves as part of that God. God is attained over time, and God is more of an awareness than an actual physical being. Coming to understand God may take many lives.

I've also toyed with the idea that eternity is NOW and we are, in fact, progressing through the different levels of "kingdoms" (for lack of a better term) and have been for many many thousands of generations. Our separateness from God is an illusion. Once we personally shatter that illusion, we become part of this "God".

Make sense? What are your thoughts?

Interesting! I don't have the time or focus to read/ponder this right now but will come back to it. Meanwhile, are you familiar with ACIM?