Once you assume a creator and a plan

[fiddy]

Once you assume a creator and a plan, it makes us objects in a cruel experiment, whereby we are created sick, and commanded to be well. And over us, to supervise this, is installed a celestial dictatorship. :bowdown: :rockon:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pS3riocMM7c

[Dresta]

Sounds like Christopher Hitchens, verbatim. This argument is facile in my view, and amounts to a kind of anthropomorphising of the concept of God. The idea of attributing human motivations to an all-encompassing deity is an absurdity.

And recognising you have innate human weaknesses, and that you work constantly to overcome them, is not sadomasochism, but the very basics of being a conscious, thinking creature. On the other hand, pretending you are what you are, and that human weaknesses don't exist, is an encouragement to hubris, which is the destroyer of civilisation.

Nero is actually a very fine representation of modern hubris in an old setting (he had immense responsibilities he did not take seriously, he only wanted to be himself, to the play the lyre and sing like a dandy--this is modern psychology in a nutshell--self-realisation is all!).

[fiddy]

Sounds like Christopher Hitchens, verbatim. This argument is facile in my view, and amounts to a kind of anthropomorphising of the concept of God. The idea of attributing human motivations to an all-encompassing deity is an absurdity.

And recognising you have innate human weaknesses, and that you work constantly to overcome them, is not sadomasochism, but the very basics of being a conscious, thinking creature. On the other hand, pretending you are what you are, and that human weaknesses don't exist, is an encouragement to hubris, which is the destroyer of civilisation.

Nero is actually a very fine representation of modern hubris in an old setting (he had immense responsibilities he did not take seriously, he only wanted to be himself, to the play the lyre and sing like a dandy--this is modern psychology in a nutshell--self-realisation is all!).

God is nothing but a human hypothesis. That being said, which concept of God are you citing?

[Doomsday Dallas]

God is nothing but a human hypothesis. That being said, which concept of God are you citing?


God of the MULTIverse.

[fiddy]

God of the MULTIverse.
...and beyond? Right?

[Doomsday Dallas]

...and beyond? Right?


kinda hard to go beyond the multiverse.

so that would essentially be God. (beyond the multiverse)

It will forever be a mystery... for eternity.

[fiddy]

kinda hard to go beyond the multiverse.

so that would essentially be God. (beyond the multiverse)

It will forever be a mystery... for eternity.
We cant be sure, what if multiverses?

[iamgine]

Once you assume a creator, you should not assume anything else and submit that the creator is way beyond your understanding. It is only logical.

[fiddy]

Once you assume a creator, you should not assume anything else and submit that the creator is way beyond your understanding. It is only logical.
What if his/her/its goal is for you to attain understanding of him/her/it via intellectual evolution?

[warriorfan]

Fiddy I don't know if you got the memo but it's already over

Atheists lost

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

What if his/her/its goal is for you to attain understanding of him/her/it via intellectual evolution?

That's correct.

Allah wants His creation to come to Know and Love Him.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

God of the MULTIverse.



"Audhubillahi minashaytanirajeem."
"Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem"
"Alhamdullilahi Rabil Alameen." All Praise Be to the Lord of All the Worlds.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

Once you assume Creator and a plan, it makes us creation in a world of the Test, assigned duties and a sense of right and wrong; whereby we are created innocent and ignorant, and commanded to attain knowledge and develop spiritually. And over us, to love, nurture, maintain, and protect us is One God.

*Insert youtube video where one human being finds powerful music that resonates with the individual's dark thoughts and reinforces ones worldview at that moment.*



Fixed.

[Mr Feeny]

We cant be sure, what if multiverses?

Multiverse means multiple universes. It would suffice to say "the multiverde" if you were referring to all possible universes.

[Mr Feeny]

All Praise Be to the Lord of All the Worlds.

What does world's mean, in this context?
Planets, galaxies, universes?

[GimmeThat]

off the movie Back to the Future

'just because you make it, doesn't mean you've made it'

thought I'd just drop that

[BoutPractice]

Well, a human-like God is not entirely impossible: for instance, we could be living in a virtual reality simulation or some other type of experiment (although I personally find that hard to believe).

But even then you'd have to go up another level: what about the author of the simulation? Who created them?

The ultimate deity, if it exists is probably beyond our comprehension.

As for beliefs that might guide your life... I find it best to assume that the universe is indifferent to us human beings. We're just insignificant creatures trying to make the most of our short existence. But even if we don't matter to the universe... we matter to ourselves. Our job is to make that strange journey work for us somehow.

The most effective spirituality is what I would call "cheating the universe"... the stoics did that to some extent.

Where the will of the universe accords with the needs of human beings, you can submit to it joyfully. Feel the wind, look at the stars, experience the mystical unity of all things, and so on.

Where it clearly doesn't (say, natural disaster is about to strike your city), fight against it with all your might. Revolt against your condition.

Be a mystic one minute, and a rebel the next. This way you always win.

And since both are easier if you believe in some kind of God, but think they don't necessarily have your best interests at heart, those two attitudes actually aren't as inconsistent as you'd think. You can preserve an overarching unity of meaning and purpose even as you juggle between the two modes.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

What does world's mean, in this context?
Planets, galaxies, universes?

According to another author (forgot which one), it refers to the Astral Planes, the World of Thought, the Unseen Dimensions, Spiritual World that governs material reality (Amr Alam) World of Command on (Amar Al Khalq) World of Creation.


According to Harun Yahya, [QUOTE]
All praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the heavens and the Lord of Earth, Lord of all the worlds. All greatness belongs to Him in the heavens and Earth. He is the Almighty, the All-Wise. ( Surat al-Jathiya, 45:36-37)

Our universe contains many other worlds of which humanity is utterly ignorant. For example, each plant and animal species contains numerous subspecies. Even such inanimate objects as winds and clouds have many different types. Just like people, all things might be said to live in universes of their own.

This aside, Allah created the invisible world of atoms, cells with glorious systems that form our body, and hundreds of other microscopic living beings. He is the Lord of a coral colony in the depths of the ocean, just as He controls the infinite number of micro-universes of invisible organisms, to the macro-universes of celestial bodies. He feeds all of their inhabitants and causes them to survive. The Qur'an, which proclaims that Allah is the Lord of all the worlds, states:

Allah made Earth a stable home for you and the sky a dome; formed you, giving you the best of forms; and provided you with good and wholesome things. That is Allah, your Lord. Blessed be Allah, the Lord of all the worlds. He is the Living

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

Well, a human-like God is not entirely impossible: for instance, we could be living in a virtual reality simulation or some other type of experiment (although I personally find that hard to believe).

It is straight up impossible for the combined efforts of all human beings to create the universe. But don't take that as discouragement to try and better the race, technologically or biologically; just saying human beings can't create sustain nourish Planet Earth let alone a solar system or a galaxy. The virtual reality simulation seems strange, but the nature of the tests/obstacles that occur in your life at age 30 versus age 15 get harder and compel you to pass to attain a higher rank in a different aspect of morality

Example: At 15, man is to learn self-control, how to attain knowledge (learn to learn), and responsibility.

At 30 he must put others lives before his own (i.e. learn love and mercy), put in long hours at work (learn patience and diligence), lead a household (learn judgment and wisdom)

But even then you'd have to go up another level: what about the author of the simulation? Who created them?

That's one of God's many unique attributes. Having neither been born, nor begotten. Being completely self-sustaining. Addressed in Chapter 112 of the Qu'ran. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUZ6WgbxjeE

The ultimate deity, if it exists is probably beyond our comprehension.

Correct. But you can come to know Him.

As for beliefs that might guide your life... I find it best to assume that the universe is indifferent to us human beings. We're just insignificant creatures trying to make the most of our short existence. But even if we don't matter to the universe... we matter to ourselves. Our job is to make that strange journey work for us somehow.

You should always question what you believe in.

We are insignificant and small, yet we are fed, loved, honored, cared for, provided oxygen, security, peace of mind, clothing, beautiful scenes to ponder on, children, shelter, companionship, spouses, knowledge, senses and hundreds and thousands of blessings EVERY single day that lower life forms do not. Agreed on making the strange journey work somehow. God has also promised the eternal, real life and that one day, EVERYTHING will make sense.




The most effective spirituality is what I would call "cheating the universe"... the stoics did that to some extent.

? Have you spent legitimate time meditating in a cave or fasting for long periods of time? The Islamic perspective (all Abrahamic religions and any religion that believes in Divine Decree (Fate)) is that everything in your life works to strengthen you spiritually, anyways, thus praising God through difficulties is a high virtue. Stoic, i.e. apathetic to external circumstances is getting there but not quite at unconditional gratitude for all happenings

Where the will of the universe accords with the needs of human beings, you can submit to it joyfully. Feel the wind, look at the stars, experience the mystical unity of all things, and so on.

Yezzir.

Where it clearly doesn't (say, natural disaster is about to strike your city), fight against it with all your might. Revolt against your condition.

Or avoid God's wrath in the first place.

Be a mystic one minute, and a rebel the next. This way you always win.

Or be in complete surrender and trust at all times. That way you always win


And since both are easier if you believe in some kind of God, but think they don't necessarily have your best interests at heart, those two attitudes actually aren't as inconsistent as you'd think. You can preserve an overarching unity of meaning and purpose even as you juggle between the two modes.

He does. It's the ill-commanding flawed human soul who don't have the best interests of the human being at heart. The divorce ended up being for the better. The struggles ended up eventually being for the better. People are constantly being guided to higher and higher consciousness (provided they obey His commands). Juggling is plausible for a while; but purity and integrity and simplicity and oneness are to be realized. The old quote is "a man lives as a hundred men, but dies as one." or something to that tune.

[Mr Feeny]

According to another author (forgot which one), it refers to the Astral Planes, the World of Thought, the Unseen Dimensions, Spiritual World that governs material reality (Amr Alam) World of Command on (Amar Al Khalq) World of Creation.


According to Harun Yahya,

"each plant and animal species contains numerous subspecies"
I'd assume this refers to endosymbiosis. If so, then that's interesting. Cyanobacteria (a prokaryotic organism) is basically the chlorophyll in today's plants.

With regards to the other stuff you posted, I think you'll have a tough time convincing people there's a spiritual world. This seems pretty far fetched and would require a leap of faith. At the very least, there is no scientific basis behind these claims. Nonetheless I hear people from all sorts of religions bring them up.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

"each plant and animal species contains numerous subspecies"
I'd assume this refers to endosymbiosis. If so, then that's interesting. Cyanobacteria (a prokaryotic organism) is basically the chlorophyll in today's plants.

With regards to the other stuff you posted, I think you'll have a tough time convincing people there's a spiritual world. This seems pretty far fetched and would require a leap of faith. At the very least, there is no scientific basis behind these claims. Nonetheless I hear people from all sorts of religions bring them up.

Physicists have talked of how the vast majority of matter in the universe is difficult to measure.
Plato touched on the theory of a Reality behind what is seen in his Cave Allegory.
It's pretty obvious thoughts exist and have to originate from somewhere.
Kirlian photography can detect human auras.
Even Wallace Wattle spoke off the origins of material being thought.
There's obviously some kind of a dream world.

[Dresta]

There is a scientific basis for such a belief: it's called quantum mechanics, you know, only the most elemental study of the nature of the universe. It brings into question the most fundamental assumptions of pragmatic science, like causality. There's certainly not scientific proof (for mind/matter duality), but there is a basis, as quantum mechanics has found it very difficult to exclude the concept of consciousness (see the Copenhagen interpretation related to Schrodinger's cat).

This guy would've been saying there's no scientific basis for general relativity 100 years ago.

[Mr Feeny]

Physicists have talked of how the vast majority of matter in the universe is difficult to measure.
Plato touched on the theory of a Reality behind what is seen in his Cave Allegory.
It's pretty obvious thoughts exist and have to originate from somewhere.
Kirlian photography can detect human auras.
Even Wallace Wattle spoke off the origins of material being thought.
There's obviously some kind of a dream world.
Hi there,

The "matter" that is difficult to measure is called dark energy and dark matter.
Basically the cosmological constant and a mysterious invisible matter called dark matter which we can detect through gravitational lensing but which does not seem to interact with radiation.
Those constitute about 95% of all matter/constituents of the universe.

The cosmological constant (if we're going to assume it's synonymous with dark energy in today's world) is about 69% of the energy density of the universe.

That's what astrophysicists mean when they refer to matter that is difficult to understand; it isn't a spiritual dimension. Technically, we can MEASURE the % of non-bayronic matter but we don't understand it.
Even if our estimates aren't completely precise, we're not far off as we'd need to he near critical density ( and as per our current cosmological model, the energy density of dark energy, dark matter, baryonic matter and radiation is pretty close to what it ought to be ).

2- Plato made quite a few errant observations in his time and I'm not sure this serves any purpose.

3- Wallace was a new though writer. That's all he was and for me it makes less sense to quote him than it does Plato. He was not a scientist or anything that resembles one. Half of what he wrote about was pure conjecture.

I'm open to the idea that there's another dimension should you provide conclusive or at least solid proof that might sway me in that direction. Theories, conjecture are just that. They lack substance. There is no reason to believe that any of this might be true. No more of a reason than to believe in the existence of extra terrestrials. The evidence isn't there to support another realm, for me.

Thanks.

[JEFFERSON MONEY]

Thank you kindly for the post.

As you can tell, my domain of scientific knowledge extends only to the human body and various other creatures. Appreciate you taking the time to reply.


Hi there,

The "matter" that is difficult to measure is called dark energy and dark matter.
Basically the cosmological constant and a mysterious invisible matter called dark matter which we can detect through gravitational lensing but which does not seem to interact with radiation.
Those constitute about 95% of all matter/constituents of the universe.

"Worlds" was iffy verbatim. What makes sense (from a personal standpoint thus far) is that the material reality we see is a manifestation of something that is more real, invisible, hidden, eternal world. This has been taken note of by monks, Hindus, transcendalist meditators, and other people who have undergone extensive breathing practices which still the mind completely. http://www.beliefnet.com/news/science-religion/2001/12/the-unseen-dimensions-that-may-govern-existence.aspx

Anywho to make this ineraction worthwhile, I have added the things you've touched based on (Baryonic matter, cosmology, dark matter, cosmological constant for later view on Youtube.) Here's some reading material that may be of use as general guidelines. Sayings that weigh more than the most profound poetry explained in depth. https://goaloflife.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/ayatollah-sayyed-ruhollah-khomeini-forty-ahadith.pdf



The cosmological constant (if we're going to assume it's synonymous with dark energy in today's world) is about 69% of the energy density of the universe.

That's what astrophysicists mean when they refer to matter that is difficult to understand; it isn't a spiritual dimension. Technically, we can MEASURE the % of non-bayronic matter but we don't understand it.
Even if our estimates aren't completely precise, we're not far off as we'd need to he near critical density ( and as per our current cosmological model, the energy density of dark energy, dark matter, baryonic matter and radiation is pretty close to what it ought to be ).

What makes it, not, a spiritual dimension?

2- Plato made quite a few errant observations in his time and I'm not sure this serves any purpose.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2afuTvUzBQ
From a philosophical standpoint;

There's a light projecting a shadow onto the cave.
The people are turned away from the light.
They see the shadow.
Their entire worldview depends upon their narrative of the shadow.
They are just prisoners.

The actual Reality is the Light. Islamically, we believe everything that happens in our life is good for our soul, which came before our birth from the World of Spirits. Moreover, the Prophet (PBUH) would often recite the supplication ," Ya 'Allah please help me see things as they are and not what they appear to be," as well as a supplication asking for Light in his heart while attending the mosque.
It's the shadow that's disfigured, corrupted, contrived (Denoting a broken or impure mindset stained by a combination of sin, ignorance, and ego)
The light superimposes on the chains to create shadow images i.e. playing out as the human being's reality.
Example, Present a picture of a gorilla standing side by side with a lion to people here. The violent and angry among us would see that picture and immediately zone in on the competitive brutalities; whereas the artists would appreciate the form of the creatures and so on and so forth. One should strive to be empty, empty, empty and pure and remember the Creator to get the truest, realest, accurate, most full perspective of the scene.

3- Wallace was a new though writer. That's all he was and for me it makes less sense to quote him than it does Plato. He was not a scientist or anything that resembles one. Half of what he wrote about was pure conjecture.

Him, Napoleon Hill, Tesla, and other new thought writers spoke off a superconsciousness or a Source where they derive their most sublime thoughs from when undergoing deep meditation, thinking, or dozing off. They had only I personally don't see how that's (conceptually) different from wahy, i.e. Revelation given to the Prophets of the past. Perhaps that can be extended to shamans and peyote, who knows.


I'm open to the idea that there's another dimension should you provide conclusive or at least solid proof that might sway me in that direction. Theories, conjecture are just that. They lack substance. There is no reason to believe that any of this might be true. No more of a reason than to believe in the existence of extra terrestrials. The evidence isn't there to support another realm, f

Probably best for you to go with what Dresta said and investigate on Quantum Mechanics.


Thanks

Jazakallah Khayrun