What Makes A God?

PS this isn't a condemnation of everyone who's religious, that would be silly.
Just those who delight in using it to manipulate others.
I think that is utterly sick behaviour.

 

To me God is just a placeholder for "the most awesome thing". It grants a reverence for the thing that I think it deserves. For instance, if a toaster oven was the most awesome thing in all of the universe, I wouldn't simply call it "toaster oven" as though it were some ordinary thing. I might call it God. Either that or "toaster oven" would have to convey all the importance that "God" conveys, so there would be no difference.

I think it's not too far-fetched to suggest that the most awesome thing that exists is the universe itself. I suppose the word "universe" does convey the awesomeness of it pretty well, but I think it fails to convey the fact that the universe is sentient. When we think of the universe, we tend to distinguish ourselves from it.

I think the universe would meet the requirements typically assigned to God. Omnipotent -- The universe possesses all power that exists. Omniscient -- The universe possesses all knowledge that exists. Omnipresent -- The universe is everywhere.

I totally get that people are going to confuse what I'm talking about with a supernatural God no matter how clear I make myself, though, so maybe "God" is still off limits. If so I think we need another word that describes the highest awareness that exists, this being universal awareness. Even though the highest awareness that exists must necessarily be God, in my view

I'm pretty sure if we knew what the highest awareness was for certain, people would liken it to God whether it was supernatural or not. Of course it may be that there is a supernatural God. But if you're asking me what makes a God, I think it is the fact that there is no comparison to God. Which, if the sentience of the universe is the only sentience, there is no comparison to it.

 

Which, today, is two galactic eyes blinking in the sky? What about 3 eyes blinking a year later? Would you then point at the first 2 eyes, and say "Oh, my mistake, that's actually not God, because its no longer the MOST awesome thing, I now understand that these 3 eyes blinking are God, for sure this time!"

"The most awesome thing" is completely subjective and can change in an instant you would be floored by what large swathes of humanity consider "the most awesome thing"

 

No, you choose to mock me rather than address the subject I am talking about. Scorner! Never said that the most awesome thing was great big eyes in the sky. Said that a self-aware universe may be the most awesome thing. This was represented by eyes in the sky. What I was saying is that I think we'd be more prone to recognizing a self-aware universe by gigantic eyes in the sky than by tiny eyes in human beings, and I don't see why.

I disagree that the most awesome thing is subjective. People may say they feel various things are the most awesome, but there may be one thing above all others that, from the proper perspective, instills the most fear or reverence. And no, I can't think of too many things that would instill more fear or reverence than discovering that the universe had two enormous eyes dangling out in space.

But you're right, to replace us with God is stupid. Equating us with the universe, and the universe as the most awesome thing, is just a phony ego trip.

Me: We are God.
Person: So, what now?
Me: Uhhhh... *slowly hangs up telephone*

 

the only thing that can make a god is itself. not being one i'm not real sure how this is done.
or at least i don't KNOW that i'm one.

sometimes things happen, but that of course is just psyonics, if even that.
i'm not very good at it, or this world would be a very different place.
mostly there would be so many people who hate logic.
and obviously from that, the results of their doing so.

a god just is one if it is. there's nothing a god has to be to be a god. just itself.
and not what anyone thinks they know about it or that it has to be either.

 

independently and objectively existing, without being a prisoner of physical form.

that's basically the root of it.

had my previos reply actually been the 666th? that's cute.
silly but cute. so i guess don't trust me or something. well sorry to break that if true.

the unknown, having no limitations, billions of gods could exist if they felt like it.
no limitations, just one big caveat, that it is, and remains, unknown.

 

2 ways of looking

there is no god

2 you cannot define a god

 

well there's no reason there would have to not be,
just no reason it (or they) would have to have anything to do,
with any way we might choose to define one.

you know, i like the idea of there being invisible things,
without the attitude humans keep trying to insist they would have to have.