What is God?

Hello, there is a question here in the "Agnosticism and Atheism" forum: "What Is Mind?", thats sounds interessting, but the answers not. It would be possible for me to connect to this question, however, the forum "Agnosticism and Atheism" does not fit. It should be noted that there is no belief in "God" on my part. So also no doubt and non-existence exists. For me, "God" is not what "God" is for most including agnostics and atheists. The questions of agnosticism and atheism do not arise for me.

Because, the forum "Agnosticism and Atheism" dont fit, the forum "Personal Development" was chosen, also because no other fits. The title is indeed "Philosophy and Religion", but a subforum for philosophy is missing. Since the thing is very new, and no other person thinks the same way, for now the forum "Personal Development" should fit.

Lets talk about "God" or "Allah" or other "Gods".

There was no religious education for me. So there is an impartiality in this respect. Apart from that, there was an interest in uncovering what "God" is all about. It was a long way, many thoughts. The first insight came with the revisiting of a dropped thought. This thought was too simplistic for me at first. But then there was interest not to discard it and to check it again. This was not an insight, but a first glimmer of light, very vague. Only with the time, over many months, this thought proved itself more and more. In the end, this new way of thinking that came out of it is all-embracingly true.

The question: "which came first: the chicken or the egg?".
This question is a misdirection. First was not chicken and not egg, but "egg laying" (oviparous). "egg laying" is in the first a adjective and in the second a property word. The question is founded in the consideration of whether first was a thing or an activity. So was the first activity caused by a thing? Or was the first thing caused by an activity? If there was a thing first, who or what made it? The question can only be answered by the fact that first there was an activity, no thing. Interestingly, the Bible says just that: "God" is spiritual (mental), also not a thing (body).

What does this consideration look like in science? Interestingly, it fits there too, even up to the quantum level. In order not to explain everything to the smallest detail a jump:
space-time, never existing separately alone.
space = move
time = transform
Nothing is without move.
Move is never without a acceleration.
First was an acceleration.
Physical acceleration: accelerate, decelerate, change direction at the same speed.

Body&Mind is the same as space-time.

"God" is not a body. "God" is mind, "God" is acceleration. "God" makes everything. "God" makes all and nothing - because of that "God" is almighty. But its not "God", its acceleration.

The most people thing, "God" have a body. Thats false. "God" is an another word of an activity. Because, "God" have no body, is not corporal, the slogan fits: "God is not". About that, the agnosticistic question arises: exist "God" as exist acceleration? That's a matter of the perspective. One the on side yes, on the other side no, also both.

If you want to know more about it, much has been published by me on this website: ► God is not ◄

 

Beliefs in the gods who we worship on this planet, is what petrifies governments on admitting that their are forms of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.
Revealing the truth, would cause vast upheaval and threaten world peace.

Admitting that human life may not be native to this planet, would be even worse.
Ask yourself 2 questions.
If we evolved from monkeys, why did some of the monkeys decide not to evolve.
Why can humans not produce a hybrid species.

In fact, are all the animals native, or are we some kind of zoo.

 

It is if then an initial acceleration. This is - like "God" = unexplainable. The ways of "God" are inexplicable. Already the approach to try to explain the initial acceleration ("God") leads astray. The inexplicability is a part of the whole (and not outside). Everything else are digressions, which are quite legitimate. Because if the basis of the thinking is correct, all digressions are a fun.

It is an initial acceleration into / out of not (not nothing). I had already noticed in discussions that people have problems to imagine a state if there is no move. Many can't imagine such a situation. They then think of something like a potential moving force that is only asleep. With the energy this is explained scientifically in such a way — the energy potential. But without any move is also no potential. That is absolute standstill, absolute silence, without any potential. Many people cannot imagine such a situation. Example: "Think of not." exactly "not" and not "nothing". no move. But also no emptiness (vacuum). Simply "not".

Everything is subject to mutual interaction. (with some so far unexplainable things like black matter / energy). If there is no move, then no mutual interaction. Move is also something like thought transmission as well as any action and reaction. If there is no move, then no interaction and no communication. If there is no move, then one knows not from the other and not even from itself. It is then not only that each knows not of itself, but it does not exist without move. Without move nothing exists. Even in a stone the electrons move around the atomic nucleus. Neutrinos pass through everything. Even a vacuum (void) can exist only if there is compression (planets, suns, black holes).

Science has a problem because it excludes the inexplicable, the incomprehensible, and leaves it to religion. The religion in turn uses this circumstance and commits an immense digression, however not directly, but by withholding from the people what "God" actually is = (initial) acceleration. The religions say, everybody can "experience" (feel) God. Yes, in the move which exists by initial acceleration. That is "God". If everyone thinks more exactly, everything what is linked with or as "God" will be able to reduce to move: creates = accelerate/move. make = accelerate/move.

not ↔ (physical) acceleration ↔ move ↔ (physical) acceleration ↔ not

So, yet you can say/think: not = "God". Thats the slogan: God is not. But that don't fit with the religions. And also don't fit to atheism or agnosticism. Or you can say: (physical) acceleration = "God". That fits with religions. Because, acceleration is a verb (doing word) like "create" or "make". The agnosticism has then the question: exist accelerate?

It is not a way of thinking that corrects other ways of thinking. It is a new way of thinking, which in turn is not so new, because it is very simple. It's just not compatible with other ways of thinking. It is, however, compatible with science and religion. It is against science only in so far as the exclusion of "incomprehensible" concerns, as well as against religion only in so far as the deception by secrecy concerns. Otherwise, this way of thinking is in harmony with science and religion and connects both to a new sight.

Do not think about »not«, because it is the same as not thinking, except it is fantasized. Fantasizing is perfectly legitimate if one is aware that it is fantasizing. Its OK when you think "God" is more than that. It's perfectly OK if you fantasize. Only you should be aware of it. And in no case force others to fantasize or force them to understand your fantasy as reality.

"God" can be something different for everyone. But this way of thinking says: "God" not "be". Because every idea of "God" as something being is fantasy.

Nobody can be convinced by this way of thinking. This kind of thinking is freely available to everyone. Everyone can try this way of thinking. If one does not like it, then not. "God" not »be«, but "God" »makes«.

PS: Might comes from make. See also "may" (maybe).

 

God is a concept by which we measure our pain
- John Lennon

 

A three letter english word which by belief in such,represents freedom from fear of death by homo sapiens. That which cannot be proven.

 

No. With initial acceleration arised space and time.
space = move
time = variation (change)

initial acceleration begins with non-move.

The space is the object, respectively objects are inside the space, also inside the move, because, objects are only because move. No move no objects.

To try to explain how acceleration can arise from "not" is doomed to failure, because this lies in the realm of the inexplicable. Therefore to explain the whole way of thinking as wrong is exactly therefore wrong. Include the inexplicable in the thinking and all is good.

 

In the beginning there was a sea of spirit and it filled all space. It was static, content, aware of itself, a giant resting on the bosom of its thought, contemplating that which it was.

Then it moved. It withdrew into itself, until all space was empty, and that which had filled it was shining from its center, a restless, seething mind.

This was the individuality of the spirit; this was what it discovered itself to be when it awakened; this was God.

 

what is not known is not known, and owes nothing to what anyone tells themselves or anyone else to claim they know about it.
yes there MAY be gods or even billions of them, the unknown requires nothing to be or not be, but also requires nothing to be based on what any of us want to think we know about it.

a very psyonically powerful self aware being who is neither physical nor imaginary, might be a reasonable deffinition, should such a being choose to exist, which is not known,
which is why it is called belief. personally i like to think such beings do exist, AND do so, WITHOUT owing anything to ANY known brand name flavor of belief.

 

And you know this? Were you there?

 

In the ancient greek were metapher in use. sea = spirit (mind). It is also the same in this matter. Thales of Miletus used the metapher "hydor" (water). See also Behemoth (land, body) and Leviathan (water, mind) and Zyz (air, mental mind). See also the religious trinity. and also and also ...

In the body&mind way of thinking, the point of view must always be considered. The result of one point of view cannot be valid for another point of view. From there there are apparent contradictions. However, they are not contradictions, but different points of view.
Yes, in a certain view, everything is one as well as everything is mind (move). Body is always only an illusion, a consolidation of mind, with properties (characteristics). Every body is only because of move (mind).

@themnax , belief is true only when the basis of the belief is true. If the basis is false, then the belief is also false. Or rather, it is not always necessarily false, but pure fantasy. However, this is only problematic if it is not conscious / known that the basis is false. Fantasy has its own justification.

 

This question is way beyond my pay grade, but your conclusion that God is "accceleration" seems unusual--mainly cuz it doesn't conform to any of the characteristics associated with God, or even gods, nor perform the psychological or social functions expected of them. If we're goin' for science concepts as our deity, seems to me a better candidate would be SuperString. That postulate exists in ten dimensions, unifies gravity with the other three forces, and contains quantum gravity. Give it a beard and some lightening bolts, and you might build a cult around it. I know it's existence hasn't been proven to everyone's satisfaction, but isn't that the way it goes with God?

But acceleration? Can it help the farmer with the weather or protect his crops? Or cure Aunt Matilda of her lumbago? Or stir people when it is invoked on special occasions? Do you pray to it in times of trouble? Does it answer prayers? Does it help to comfort the sick, inspire the faithful, improve our morals, or rally the troops in battle? Does it know when you've been sleeping, know when you're awake, know when you've been bad or good? (I know, that's a different spiritual entity, but same difference!) Does it bless America, or any other country for that matter? Stand beside us and guide us? Save the King? Does it watch over and protect us, or be with us in the life to come? Account for the integrated complexity of the universe? Or even (by itself) the Big Bang? Do atheists disbelieve in it? If not, what part of the job description of divinity does it meet? Might just as well say that gravity is God, or my pet goldfish is God. {Matter of fact, I haven't named her yet. Hmmm).

 

Hello Tishomingo! You have many questions. Here my answers:

> characteristics associated with God
"God" / "gods" = character, property (word) = move.
Without »move« = not.
Task: Take your mind of not(hing).
It's the same as "think not".
not.
Without »move« is no "God".
Without »move« is not(hing).
For »move« to be, (initial) acceleration is necessary.
This acceleration is a jump, example from 0 to 1.
With this space _and_ time are founded.
Without »move« no space and no time.
All what »is« (be), is only because »move«.

Ancient gods are a complex given of move, like the god of "thunder" (sound and light), or the goddess of love (body and brain activities). Everything has something to do with move. Even the phantasy is only possible with move.

> psychological or social functions
= »move«

> a better candidate would be SuperString
Also the SuperString theory does not get along without move.
However, the SuperString theory starts from »particles« first and does not explain how they were created. Only because of the history of origin there can be no particle at the beginning, but move (acceleration). At first there was not. And when you say, at first was Superstrings, than: At first of first there was not. At first of first of first of first of first of first of first of first ... there was not. Thats not my idea. Thats the big bang theory: Causality. Action → Reaction. Yes, its allowed to criticize and refute it.

> ten dimensions, unifies gravity with the other three forces, and contains quantum gravity.
All only with move.
dimension: only with move and not without move.
gravity: only with move and not without move.
forces: only with move and not without move.
quantum gravity: only with move and not without move.

> Give it a beard and some lightening bolts
Give some simple or complex »move« a beard and name it "God".
Give some simple or complex brain activity (»move«) the name "God".
Thats "God".

> Can it help the farmer with the weather or protect his crops?
Yes, when he no longer just prays, but tries to understand and subsequently predict the complex »move« of the weather.
weather = intervals

> Or cure Aunt Matilda of her lumbago?
nice throw-in. and yes, because »move« (the musculature) helps by lumbago. standstill worsened.

> Or stir people when it is invoked on special occasions?
stir: only with move and not without move.
All is in move, in continuous change.
come and go.
arise and perish.

> Do you pray to it in times of trouble?
In times of need, people pray on the hope that something will move, something will change.

> Does it answer prayers?
pray: only with move and not without move.
very simple said: to pray = move.

> Does it help to comfort the sick, inspire the faithful, improve our morals, or rally the troops in battle?
Think opposite: standstill/stagnancy don't changes the situation.

> Does it know when you've been sleeping, know when you're awake, know when you've been bad or good?
This concerns the change that has already happened, which is perceptible. Like working a stone into a tool. These ancient stone tools can be found after thousands of years and transmit knowledge. The knowledge that we know today what was then. With mental memories, this is also on the mental level.

> Does it bless America, or any other country for that matter?
very simple said: to bless = move.

> Stand beside us and guide us?
very simple said: to guide = move.

> Save the King?
very simple said: to save = move.

> Does it watch over and protect us, or be with us in the life to come?
very simple said: to watch/protect = move.

> the life to come
Life after death is referred to by most people in terms of the body or thoughts. So that memories (thoughts) remain with the death. That is so only nearly correct. What "survives" are properties, but not as memories (thoughts). A body&mind-unit decays into its individual parts, however not into body _and_ mind, but into many smaller body&mind-units, which continue to exist in each case. For some this is an explanation beside the spiritual life after death. But there is a much more interesting life after death. It concerns the properties (charateristics). Each person, during his life and especially in the phase of development, adopt properties (characteristics) of other people to his environment. Some are also physically inherited. However, many are mentally inherited. This also applies to lifestyles, among other things. People then want to be like their idol. In the process, the idol passes on his properties (characteristics) to his fans. A simple example. That is the life after death. The properties (characteristics) live on.

> Account for the integrated complexity of the universe?
Why not? move and change about billions of years results in a very complex condition. Consider, the universe is only because »move« (acceleration). Without »move« no universe.

> Or even (by itself) the Big Bang?
This is a key question. Because it does not contradict the big bang (acceleration: 0 → 1).
[PS: in another of my projects, the big bang is considered necessary only for science. Without science, there is no big bang. But please note, this is not the topic here. Discuss it somewhere else, please. The topic here, in this reference, is the union of science and religion.]

> Do atheists disbelieve in it?
No, because atheist believes: "God" = not. And she don't believe: "God" = move.

> If not, what part of the job description of divinity does it meet?
In my project, "God is not" is only one of many points of view. So atheists are included. All is included, but not by me, the body&mind-thinking includes all and not(hing). The body&mind-thinking is all-inclusive.

> Might just as well say that gravity is God, or my pet goldfish is God.
OK, here a simple explanation:
Gravity/Goldfish is not »move« and also not "God", but is because of »move«.
to gravitate = »move«.
golden = »move«.
fishy = »move«.
Only verbs and adjectives = »move«.
Nouns are because of »move«.

It is endless to answer all the questions of the world one by one. It is easier to start with a body&mind-thinking. With that, everything explains itself.

 

Your answers don't answer much. Acceleration presupposes something to accelerate. What is that?How did it get there? Why should we care?

 

The Creator does exist but not in the way human beings think of God, or Creator.

To begin with, in the Inipi (Sweat Lodge) the 6 directions represented by very hot "grandgathers" or rocks from the sacred fire are brought into the Inipi then the 7th "Grandfather" is brought in. It is called the Great Mysterious, what man cannot describe.

When the "run button" was "pushed" creating this Universe, Creational Energy was manifested, and from there, randomness occurred. The Universe had all what was needed yet it was manifested, just like sexual energy is manifested on earth, stepped down from billions of Kelvin temperatures. Most religions step away from sexual energy which is Creational Energy, yet, that energy IS Creational Energy and healing energy. It is the spark from Creation.

Tornados, earthquakes etc., are not a "punishment" from the Creator. God had nothing to do with those events and they are part of the Universe's randomness.

We don't know or cannot identify the Creator. If the Creator sat next to you at a cafe you would not be able to identify its power. The human mind would not be able to comprehend what it saw. Back to the Seventh "Grandfather" rock.

The greatest mystery is from where the Creator came from? It is infinite. The atom is infinite as well as space. So from where did the Creator come from forming another universe? Logic tells us nothing comes from nothing. that is is about as far as the human mind can navigate to.

It boils down to faith at our human level. But not to create a human manifestation of the Creator. Its power is all around us and can be seen during the explosion of life in the Spring. It is all around us all year.

 

Thanks for sharing your conception.