Perhaps the explanation that everything is a cosmic coincidence is the worse of the two. While God is undefinable, just like the universe (uni = all in one) is undefinable, since we know neither its origin nor its space. Making a person out of God seems as nonsensical to me as making the universe a bunch of randomly colliding bodies.
Although the destruction of God is in full swing and very successful, an existence without God is merely depressing. To believe that we can explain the creation of the universe by an explosion seems to me to be a superstition. It leaves us with nothing but a fearful existence, after which all the planets drift apart and leave us in eternal darkness. I share the view that we are all God, like the widely dispersed parts of a soul unable to remember itself, but in constant search of it. If we destroy this, it means destroying ourselves. Similarly, just as parents do not have an omnipotent influence over their children, however hard they try, they cannot precisely direct their paths. Therefore, children who, as adults, do not refrain from accusing their parents of their misdemeanours and omissions are as futile as accusing God.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
As close as I could come to some kind of philosophical basis.
I'll stick to 'All I know is that I'm wrong about what I know.' I know that's true.
Thank you.
That is helpful in being in conversation about external topics, in particular in the natural sciences. I very much share it.
It is less helpful to find a stand within a relationship, though.
There, I need better to know what I want, what my goals are, what I need to take responsibility for. Or, to put it differently, to make a strong commitment to my man or woman and those near me (or far away friends).
This separation mindwarp that the controllers of the ideas allowed to us have put on us has left us blind to the reality of nature around us, imo.
When we shut out the reality of magnetic/electric influence on our own magnetic/electric resonances, finding solutions is near impossible.
This explains why control freaks would restrict the knowledge of that to us, they don't want us to escape their plans.
But, should we remember that we are all one with all the other stardust around us then so many questions go away.
There is no need to answer the questions about is there a god, there is only the need to follow the rules set for our selves by the magnetic resonant frequencies around us.
Some people are naturally, organically, correctly serial killers, while others are intended to be their victims.
Were we 'god' we could decide who is whom and what to do about that, but, as we are equally stardust to those around us we have no authority to do so.
We can only make the choices for ourselves.
I can't write my rules down and force them onto you, nor you me, nor can we delegate to some other an authority which we don't have.
'All authority comes from the barrel of a gun.'
Mao Tse-tung
Ergo, all authority is false.
I challenge that notion. How I see it, it directly results from thinking of God equal to a human being. But if you try not to define God as a person and see him not as omnipotent, you cannot by any means decide who is whom and what to do about that. The idea of omnipotence is very human. But as parents cannot fully predetermine the life-path of their children, we cannot determine the path of our cells in our bodies. If I were able to control them, I might become immortal. Since I can't, I find it easy to say that even though everyone is God, omnipotence cannot be present. Though potency is.
Magnetic resonance frequencies give me no indication of humanly rules. As we are relational beings and put ourselves in each other's shoes, there are no human rules to be found in electromagnetic frequencies. You don't talk that way every day, don't you? At most, I find linguistic confusion. The term "human" does not need to be replaced by other terms, it is as appropriate as it is old.
I answer that that's an incorrect logic.
I am a parent. I have authority over my young child. No gun involved. You need authority since the infant depends on it.
Now, because a lot of practiced authority goes into the wrong direction (putting the barrel of a gun towards one) it is a mistake to deny authority altogether. If you don't have authority, you cannot be free. That does not mean that your authority is omnipresent and omnipotent, right?
If you think the idea of "no authority" to the end, don't you find eventually out that it cannot be thought nor lived without it?
To hand over the ultimate authority to God is a very elegant move, I think, since we humans have found out that we cannot be the leaders of everyone on earth, since we are not infallible. To put the ultimate authority into God puts into perspective what we can and what we cannot. Now, if you take God out of the picture, all what is left is us. If you kill the ideal, all what comes after it, is less ideal, in fact, it becomes weaker and weaker since every following sub-ideal is replaced by another sub-ideal; until you cannot call it an ideal any longer. Where we are at, the new age of a confused language, if you ask me.
We certainly do, and in fact, cannot NOT do that.
Yes, for ourselves, but not for others.
Others must come to their own conclusions.
I we let them.
That is a factor in the equation.