82 replies to this topic

[JGirl]

Darkwind, on 27 November 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

Read the books don't bother with the Disney movie, it was the worst. I bet poor Douglas Adams spun round in his grave on that one. (Goddess rest his atheist bones.)  The BBC did a little series on it that was pretty good.

the series was what introduced me to douglas adams in the first place, and i think a lot of others as well.
he was smiling as his book sales went up i bet!

[CRIPTIC CHAMELEON]

I always liked the term Great Spirit it doesn't donate to gender or race or stereo type its just the Great Spirit.

[SpiritWriter]

Feebs, on 27 November 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

i dont really speak to a god as such i usually send my thoughts out to the higher realms of spirit and hope they are heard ...i suppose that is my god ...our spirit and the unity of everything x

There are many theories and teachings. There are applications that are used to enhance our spirituality that have been already put in place by mystics ahead of us. They have, by their spiritual understanding erected (or carried on by expounding upon) legends, practices, understandings with devices such as: prayer, fasting, meditation, repentance, etc... They have concocted (being creative entities a part of this vast universe), have been given stories, or have recorded witness of accounts, that helps describe how this drama plays out, gives us instruction how to tap into that power (not that we cannot find that out on our own, but it is nice to compare notes)..  It is not Gods will to control us, but for us to come to him (her, it, them, etc.) in recognition of that vast and holy power. There we find the power that changes our hearts, for our own spiritual and emotional well being and the power to make us effective in the universe.

Finding these things. Coming up with and understanding concepts of God. It all began with what you have described above. Our blue prints bring us to that place, where we desire after the spirit. That to me is God. What name is there for that?

CRIPTIC CHAMELEON, on 27 November 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

I always liked the term Great Spirit it doesn't donate to gender or race or stereo type its just the Great Spirit.

me too

[iforgot]

Why would you apply human attributes to whatever created us? That's a very egotistical, human-centered way of thinking.

[SpiritWriter]

iforgot, on 28 November 2012 - 04:20 AM, said:

Why would you apply human attributes to whatever created us? That's a very egotistical, human-centered way of thinking.

Our thinking must be totally different, because what your saying makes no sense to me at all so I don't know how to respond. I will try: We share characteristics with God, we are human, so we look at him from a human perspective...

Edited by SpiritWriter, 28 November 2012 - 04:25 AM.

[iforgot]

SpiritWriter, on 28 November 2012 - 04:24 AM, said:

Our thinking must be totally different, because what your saying makes no sense to me at all so I don't know how to respond. I will try: We share characteristics with God, we are human, so we look at him from a human perspective...

What characteristics?

[_Only]

iforgot, on 28 November 2012 - 04:20 AM, said:

Why would you apply human attributes to whatever created us? That's a very egotistical, human-centered way of thinking.

No, it's natural to put the only characteristics we know to something we don't. Why are you making that seem self centered? Even if its incorrect, there are often similarities that are common in unrelated things (like 'shared abstraction analogy') that could help one understand the mysterious, by using the known as a tool. The best metaphysical books in my eye do this well, the comparisons between the physical and theoretical. It makes it so much easier to comprehend. If we were to all see these 'god' likes as totally abstract things we can't really understand, it wouldn't work. We can't really comprehend it. Comparisons to us have to be made to make it comprehensible. It's no ego trip. That is said too loosely, too often.

But even pretending it's not completely natural to see things that aren't like us in ways that we do understand, you have to keep in mind that whoever or whatever the 'god' is created us to be how we are. They gave us these characteristics. For whatever reason, they intended these characteristics to be ours. Now would it not make sense that these characteristics would be related to that 'god' in some way (be it characteristics they have, have seen, want, don't want, symbols related to this 'god')?

Edited by _Only, 28 November 2012 - 04:52 AM.

[iforgot]

_Only, on 28 November 2012 - 04:52 AM, said:

No, it's natural to put the only characteristics we know to something we don't. Why are you making that seem self centered? Even if its incorrect, there are often similarities that are common in unrelated things (like 'shared abstraction analogy') that could help one understand the mysterious, by using the known as a tool. The best metaphysical books in my eye do this well, the comparisons between the physical and theoretical. It makes it so much easier to comprehend. If we were to all see these 'god' likes as totally abstract things we can't really understand, it wouldn't work. We can't really comprehend it. Comparisons to us have to be made to make it comprehensible. It's no ego trip. That is said too loosely, too often.

But even pretending it's not completely natural to see things that aren't like us in ways that we do understand, you have to keep in mind that whoever or whatever the 'god' is created us to be how we are. They gave us these characteristics. For whatever reason, they intended these characteristics to be ours. Now would it not make sense that these characteristics would be related to that 'god' in some way (be it characteristics they have, have seen, want, don't want, symbols related to this 'god')?

This is true in a mystical (unknown) perspective. Humans will fill in what they do not know with images of themselves because they are the highest and greatest level of being they can comprehend, the "top dog" so to speak, besides the alleged 'God'.

This mystical (unknown) perspective is useless when when you fill in the gaps though.

What purpose would a human-like, egotistical, judging, and fearful (fear is the backbone of ego, so a God with an ego must fear) God serve? Does it enjoy frying ants with magnifying glasses and watching chaos (such as the current state of humanity)? If you think that God is human-like, you must first answer those questions. Existing without purpose is illogical and would not happen!

A 'huge' thought-space computer seems much more likely. This reality is only a simulation or an ongoing experiment. So in that way, reality was made in the creators image (see: computers). In this case, the 'God' would not have a name.

[laughingclone]

wow.. Being Bath in the glory of Grace,    Can wait   .... GOD  Is the name I call the One true GOD.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

SpiritWriter, on 27 November 2012 - 06:39 PM, said:

please help
I put a little thought into it but I have no idea what you mean...

http://en.wikipedia....ything_.2842.29

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

iforgot, on 28 November 2012 - 04:20 AM, said:

Why would you apply human attributes to whatever created us? That's a very egotistical, human-centered way of thinking.

Arguably, but as I said earlier (I think it was here), that's the only way that Humans could think of something as esentially inconceivable as God; it's perfectly natural really to think of whatever created us as being a father figure on a giant scale.

[Darkwind]

I been bad and joking on this thread, but when I said god's name is Darkwind, it is true, in that I see Divine spirit in everything including myself. All are different aspects of the Universe. When I do ritual, I call in the God spirit of the attributes I want to use.  If I want healing I call in Brigid, the Celtic Goddess of healing and inspiration.

[Timonthy]

SpiritWriter, on 08 October 2012 - 05:15 AM, said:

???????????

Should there be a long question to this introduction?
We are all humans on a journey, we are in our beliefs... what are they? Some are multi-theists.. is there a highest God? What is the name of this most high god. Are there many different names for the same concept/entity?

We have different perceptions, lets explore them. What is the name of your most high God.

I call my God: God
The "I Am"

I call him/her/it Elementary Particles. They made everything and are everything.

[Feebs]

iforgot, on 28 November 2012 - 04:20 AM, said:

Why would you apply human attributes to whatever created us? That's a very egotistical, human-centered way of thinking.

i make it spirit...it is within us all and the human side is just the shell.

[SpiritWriter]

Darkwind, on 28 November 2012 - 11:21 AM, said:

I been bad and joking on this thread, but when I said god's name is Darkwind, it is true, in that I see Divine spirit in everything including myself. All are different aspects of the Universe. When I do ritual, I call in the God spirit of the attributes I want to use.  If I want healing I call in Brigid, the Celtic Goddess of healing and inspiration.

I see the God in you too Darkwind