The only thing greater than God.

[Greatest I am]

The only thing greater than God.

 

Man.

 

Religion and God were invented to free man. Not enslave him.

 

 

This man is showing God the only thing greater than God. A human being.

 

Man is God's evolutionary Master. We brought him from barbarism to civilization.

 

Without Us, there is no God. Man is who gives God life. The concept, the reality, the imaginary reality, useless and useful speculation of God, all will have been like they never here without man.

 

God is man’s creation, be it the word itself or the concept or WORD as some believers say it.

 

To our knowledge, there are no other intelligences able to speculate or have any kind of notion of God as a concept, reality or myth.

 

Animals know their God. God as their perfect example and role model that is.

 

It is always one of their own. I do not think that they have the ability to assign moral values to it. Only Mankind can do such with our higher intellect.

 

God is in our image and we in his.

 

Without man, God dies because he can only live within the consciousness of man.

 

This is irrefutable at this point in time. God may be the one we put as head but without the body Man, he ceases to be. Him and all notions of a God.

 

Religions have denied Man his heritage by having us forget that we choose God. He does not choose us. When will you people recognize that you are WsIP--WorksInProgress-- junior gods and part of your duty to yourself and mankind is to elect yourselves a new and true God.

 

How will you know he is a true God ?

 

You will name him so and give him power and dominion over the only thing greater than himself. Yourself.

 

God is dead. Long live God.

 

A man.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

P. S.

 

First step.

 

 

 

[Phi for All]

This doesn't seem like an opening for a discussion. You ask questions and then you answer them.

 

It looks like someone with their mind made up who wants to preach.

[md65536]

I've had similar thoughts:

 

Humans desire to know where they come from. Most cultures have creation myths. We tend to explain unknown things in terms of known things. So for example, we see that humans have the ability to create things, so when we imagine a creator it is easiest to imagine it in terms of something already known to be able to create. So I figured that humans imagined the concept of a creator having a human form.

 

At the time I thought it was a revolutionary idea but it's been thought of before. I recently read the notes in the liner of Jethro Tull's album Aqualung:

 

 

1 In the beginning Man created God;

and in the image of Man

created he him.

 

Their message with this album is that organized religion creates the image of a god that they envision, and then distorts that image in all sorts of ways for all sorts of reasons.

 

 

I would agree that we don't have a good understanding of the nature or even questionable existence of gods, but that we as humans have always made assumptions about the unknown based on the known, and that humans are the most god-like known thing.

 

Depending on your definition of "god", humans may fit that description. For example, a conscious being who is aware of all my thoughts and actions and judges me for what I do... this describes my conscious mind. Or, if you describe god simply as "a giver of life" you might interpret it such that the sun fits your definition of god. It may be only that we assume that a god must be human-like, that we think it foolish for ancient civilizations to call the sun a god, when really it need not be more than just an admiring name for what it really is.

 

The God that many major religions describe typically has both human and super-human properties, that define something that must be more than just a human.

 

 

But I think it would make more sense if you phrased ideas and vague or conditional thoughts as such, rather than stating them as absolute facts.

Edited October 25, 2011 by md65536

[Greatest I am]

Well put. Thanks for that.

 

FMPOV, the above is irrifutable facts.

 

As to the definition or how we should view the word God, I would say that we should think of it as rules.

At the end of the day, there is no representative of God to follow but only the rules that he set out.

 

Regards

DL

[questionposter]

The only thing greater than God.

 

Man.

 

Religion and God were invented to free man. Not enslave him.

 

 

This man is showing God the only thing greater than God. A human being.

 

Man is God's evolutionary Master. We brought him from barbarism to civilization.

 

Without Us, there is no God. Man is who gives God life. The concept, the reality, the imaginary reality, useless and useful speculation of God, all will have been like they never here without man.

 

God is man's creation, be it the word itself or the concept or WORD as some believers say it.

 

To our knowledge, there are no other intelligences able to speculate or have any kind of notion of God as a concept, reality or myth.

 

Animals know their God. God as their perfect example and role model that is.

 

It is always one of their own. I do not think that they have the ability to assign moral values to it. Only Mankind can do such with our higher intellect.

 

God is in our image and we in his.

 

Without man, God dies because he can only live within the consciousness of man.

 

This is irrefutable at this point in time. God may be the one we put as head but without the body Man, he ceases to be. Him and all notions of a God.

 

Religions have denied Man his heritage by having us forget that we choose God. He does not choose us. When will you people recognize that you are WsIP--WorksInProgress-- junior gods and part of your duty to yourself and mankind is to elect yourselves a new and true God.

 

How will you know he is a true God ?

 

You will name him so and give him power and dominion over the only thing greater than himself. Yourself.

 

God is dead. Long live God.

 

A man.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

P. S.

 

First step.

 

 

 

 

That makes sense, and I think even Douglas Adams in one of his smart-alic tangents in his hitchhiker's series wrote "God: Proof denies faith and without faith, I am nothing.

Other person: Ah, but the bable fish is proof of your existence, so QED, your not really here."

 

Although, couldn't other intelligent animals have thought of a concept of some greater being? I mean if they've ran into humans who can either destroy their entire enviornment or help them greatly, there's probably room for interpretation.

Edited October 26, 2011 by questionposter

[md65536]

FMPOV, the above is irrifutable facts.

The problem is that you'd have to back up those claims with irrefutable evidence.

[Greatest I am]

That makes sense, and I think even Douglas Adams in one of his smart-alic tangents in his hitchhiker's series wrote "God: Proof denies faith and without faith, I am nothing.

Other person: Ah, but the bable fish is proof of your existence, so QED, your not really here."

 

Although, couldn't other intelligent animals have thought of a concept of some greater being? I mean if they've ran into humans who can either destroy their entire enviornment or help them greatly, there's probably room for interpretation.

 

Impossible to know what animals know at this point in time.

 

Except in the Bible, they are not talking.

 

We know they can discern what is profitable or not and in a human sense that is knowing good or evil but we cannot know if they recognize it as such mentally or just instinctively.

 

I know. Instincts are a mental function but you know what I mean.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

 

The problem is that you'd have to back up those claims with irrefutable evidence.

 

Is man exercising dominion here not good enough evidence for any thinking man?

 

For God, is absence of evidence not evidence that he is a human construct.

It is more proof against his existence than any believer has ever come up for his view.

 

Regards

DL

[John Cuthber]

I disagree with the initial assertion made in the title.

I think many things are greater than God, for example my dinner is greater than God.

 

My dinner exists.

[questionposter]

Impossible to know what animals know at this point in time.

 

Except in the Bible, they are not talking.

 

We know they can discern what is profitable or not and in a human sense that is knowing good or evil but we cannot know if they recognize it as such mentally or just instinctively.

 

I know. Instincts are a mental function but you know what I mean.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

Good and evil are relative though, other animals have a perfect sense of it. If something's trying to kill them, them that thing is evil. If something's trying to help them, that thing is good. That exact principal is basically how humans have defined good and evil, by what is good and bad for humans. Although in the bible, I suppose it's what's good and bad for God's will, although in the bible, something that is bad for humans, like Satan, is still evil.

[Greatest I am]

I disagree with the initial assertion made in the title.

I think many things are greater than God, for example my dinner is greater than God.

 

My dinner exists.

 

You got me. Nit picker.

 

I should have said the only thing that can know that they are greater than God. Humans.

 

How is that?

Not as catchy but more accurate.

 

Regards

DL

 

Good and evil are relative though, other animals have a perfect sense of it. If something's trying to kill them, them that thing is evil. If something's trying to help them, that thing is good. That exact principal is basically how humans have defined good and evil, by what is good and bad for humans. Although in the bible, I suppose it's what's good and bad for God's will, although in the bible, something that is bad for humans, like Satan, is still evil.

 

That depends on the POV.

 

The Jews see Eden as man's elevation and not his fall. They would perhaps say that Satan helped man be all that he can be.

 

Scripture also show God doing a lot more killing than Satan.

 

Evil is as evil does.

 

Regards

DL

[John Cuthber]

"I should have said the only thing that can know that they are greater than God. Humans.."

 

It seems entirely possible to me that there are others in the Universe with the same viewpoint.

[A Tripolation]

The only thing greater than God.

 

Man.

 

This is only true if you abide by your narrow, strict, and wholly unorthodox view of what a God-like entity would be.

 

Without Us, there is no God. Man is who gives God life. The concept, the reality, the imaginary reality, useless and useful speculation of God, all will have been like they never here without man.

 

You are using circular reasoning to support your own beliefs. This is a fallacy. This logic only works if we all agree that God is an imaginary concept. If there is some higher deity that transcends humanity's understanding, then it would be perfectly capable of existing without us. I challenge you to refute that statement.

 

God is man’s creation, be it the word itself or the concept or WORD as some believers say it.

 

Again. An assertion that you can't prove is true.

[Greatest I am]

This is only true if you abide by your narrow, strict, and wholly unorthodox view of what a God-like entity would be.

 

 

 

You are using circular reasoning to support your own beliefs. This is a fallacy. This logic only works if we all agree that God is an imaginary concept. If there is some higher deity that transcends humanity's understanding, then it would be perfectly capable of existing without us. I challenge you to refute that statement.

 

 

 

Again. An assertion that you can't prove is true.

 

LOL.

 

You provide not one but two logical fallacies for me to refute.

 

Seriously?

 

It is to the one who cries wolf to show the tracks or the shit.

Not for others to show that the wolf was never there.

 

Regards

DL

[Appolinaria]

Well I think we confuse different aspects of the trinity, with God. He is all three coexisting.

 

He is the beautiful symphony created when 3 different instruments come together.

 

 

We see the trinity everywhere in religious texts, stories, mythology, etc.

 

You might be able to transfer this symbolism to nature.

 

The stellar, lunar, and solar influences are similar, but differing. But all equally important.

 

Each portion of the trinity is equally important, but the combination of all three is defined as God.

 

 

 

 

Father: Sphere, Stellar, Spirit, Air, Mercury, El, Saturn, Creative

 

Holy Ghost/Mother: Cube, Lunar, Body, Water, Salt, Is, Asherah, Wisdom, Sophia, Feminine, Ruling

 

Son: Pyramid, Solar, Soul, Fire, Sulphur, Ra, Word

[A Tripolation]

LOL.

 

You provide not one but two logical fallacies for me to refute.

 

Seriously?

 

Name them. I simply pointed out that your premise only works if God isn't real and we define this imaginary God according to your terms. That's wholly irrational.

[Greatest I am]

Well I think we confuse different aspects of the trinity, with God. He is all three coexisting.

 

He is the beautiful symphony created when 3 different instruments come together.

 

 

We see the trinity everywhere in religious texts, stories, mythology, etc.

 

You might be able to transfer this symbolism to nature.

 

The stellar, lunar, and solar influences are similar, but differing. But all equally important.

 

Each portion of the trinity is equally important, but the combination of all three is defined as God.

 

 

 

 

Father: Sphere, Stellar, Spirit, Air, Mercury, El, Saturn, Creative

 

Holy Ghost/Mother: Cube, Lunar, Body, Water, Salt, Is, Asherah, Wisdom, Sophia, Feminine, Ruling

 

Son: Pyramid, Solar, Soul, Fire, Sulphur, Ra, Word

 

Are you familiar with how Constantine pushed the Trinity concept down Christian throats?

 

 

 

 

Originally Posted by animefan48 Well, the reality is most Christians do buy into the trinity doctrine because of persecution of the early Gnostics and non-Trinitarians, and the religious councils were dissenters were forced to agree to a Trinitarian theology. Many Unitarian and Universalist theologies argue that when Jesus said he was the way, he meant that he was an example of how to live to be united/reunited with God. As for the name, God does give other names for himself including the Alpha and Omega, as well as some believe a name that should not be written (or even spoken I believe). Honestly, I think using the name I Am That I Am would just be confusing and convoluted, seriously. I seriously do not believe that it is a continuation of Gnostic/mystical/Unitarian suppression. Even the Gnostic and mystical traditions within Islam and Christianity do not tend to use that name, and among the 99 Names of Allah, I did not find that one. Also, many Rastafarians believe that the Holy Spirit lives in humans and will sometimes say I and I instead of we, yet they don't seem to use the name I Am for God/Jah either, so I really don't think it can be related to suppressing mystical and Gnostic interpretations. I think that originally oppressing those ideas and decreeing them heretical are quite enough, the early Church did such a good job that after the split many Protestant groups continued to condemn mystical and later Gnostic sects and theologies.

 

　Yup, the bishops voted and it was settled for all time!!1 (Some say the preliminary votes were 150 something to 140 something in favor of the trinity)

 

But then Constantine stepped in: After a prolonged and inconclusive debate, the impatient Constantine intervened to force an end to the conflict by demanding the adoption of the creed. The vote was taken under threat of exile for any who did not support the decision favored by Constantine. (And later, they fully endorsed the trinity idea when it all happened again at the council of Constantinople in AD 381, where only Trinitarians were invited to attend. Surprise! They also managed to carry a vote in favor of the Trinity.)

 

http://home.pacific.net.au/~amaxwell/bdigest/bd12bbs.tx

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

 

Name them. I simply pointed out that your premise only works if God isn't real and we define this imaginary God according to your terms. That's wholly irrational.

 

You are getting quite predictable in trying to deflect whatever the O P is about to some other issue.

 

Get on topic or get lost.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

[rktpro]

The only thing greater than God.

 

Man.

 

1. Religion and God were invented to free man. Not enslave him.

 

This man is showing God the only thing greater than God. A human being.

 

2. Man is God's evolutionary Master. We brought him from barbarism to civilization.

 

Without Us, there is no God. Man is who gives God life. The concept, the reality, the imaginary reality, useless and useful speculation of God, all will have been like they never here without man.

 

God is man's creation, be it the word itself or the concept or WORD as some believers say it.

 

3. To our knowledge, there are no other intelligences able to speculate or have any kind of notion of God as a concept, reality or myth.

 

Animals know their God. God as their perfect example and role model that is.

 

It is always one of their own. I do not think that they have the ability to assign moral values to it. Only Mankind can do such with our higher intellect.

 

4. God is in our image and we in his.

 

Without man, God dies because he can only live within the consciousness of man.

 

This is irrefutable at this point in time. God may be the one we put as head but without the body Man, he ceases to be. Him and all notions of a God.

 

Religions have denied Man his heritage by having us forget that we choose God. He does not choose us. When will you people recognize that you are WsIP--WorksInProgress-- junior gods and part of your duty to yourself and mankind is to elect yourselves a new and true God.

 

5. How will you know he is a true God ?

 

You will name him so and give him power and dominion over the only thing greater than himself. Yourself.

 

6. God is dead. Long live God.

 

A man.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

P. S.

 

 

Sir,

 

1. No. There are only three entities- Braham(God), Jeev(soul) and maya(power of God which makes us materialistic)

So, there can be only two religion- One which leads to God and other which leads to maya. Thus the path leading to God has no effect of religion. Every religion would suggest contradicting ideas but look for the Vedas which would help you understand why contradicting facts are written.

 

2. Look, God and soul are both eternal but soul is a part of God. If I ask you who you are, you would say you are a scientist. But that's your post. Then you would say that you are Greatest I am but that would be your name. Than you would say that you are human. But that's your body. Look, you are soul why because you relate to body as something other than you. We say," My eyes are black" but not "Me eyes are black." Nor God created man nor man created God. God is no senior to us in terms of age.

 

3. Surely, getting human body is the top grace which God and bestow.

 

4. God lives everywhere. He provides the power to soul to work. Even if the soul attains a body of dog, God would be still with the soul.

 

5. What everyone wants is happiness without even being taught. Have you seen someone who wants pain? No, even if he practice for hundred or thousands of years he would still want happiness. Why is it so that naturally, without being taught, everyone wants happiness? Because we are a part of God and God is happiness or Bliss. Read again. Happiness or Bliss doesn't lie in God but he is happiness. from time immemorial we have worked to attain happiness because human can't remain non-doer for a second. (This is why even people of heaven wants human body). But we have rejected all and still continue to find it. Every part loves his whole. We would remain doing so for time immemorial again because until we attain God we can't attain bliss. No one can get milk out of water.

 

I would like to remove your misconception about God. God is one and eternal. He has two parts- Anshavatar- The parts which are governed by Swaroop Shakti an power of God. These have never been under maya or they have never been materialistic. They have their different abodes. Other is Vibhinanshavatar- which are under maya from time immemorial and would remain unless they attain God. All souls and people of heaven and hell are included. So, God is one and eternal.

 

6. He can never be! He remains inside you even if you are against him.

 

Regards.

Edited November 1, 2011 by rktpro

[Appolinaria]

If I am Alpha/Omega= I am the first and last. I am the father, and son. God is not solely the father, or solely the son. He is the manifestation of both father & son, the relationship of the two.

 

This idea is exactly the same as the trinity.

 

Same concept, different quantity.

[A Tripolation]

You are getting quite predictable in trying to deflect whatever the O P is about to some other issue.

 

Get on topic or get lost.

 

I can post wherever I damn well please. How am I supposed to talk about a topic that is intrinsically flawed? You need to learn how to properly phrase your posts so that it's actually a discussion, and not just you bitching about whatever trivial "proof" you have now constructed that generations of philosophers and theologians have somehow missed.

 

Name my fallacies. Do it. You said I used fallacies. Name them or retract that statement.

[Greatest I am]

rktpro

 

Thanks for the offer to help me with God but no thanks. I am covered.

 

"r6. He can never be! He remains inside you even if you are against him."

 

 

 

He can be whenever we decide to create a new God.

 

God is in man's hands. Not man in Gods.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

If I am Alpha/Omega= I am the first and last. I am the father, and son. God is not solely the father, or solely the son. He is the manifestation of both father & son, the relationship of the two.

 

This idea is exactly the same as the trinity.

 

Same concept, different quantity.

 

If?

 

Do you not know for sure?

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

Edited November 1, 2011 by Greatest I am

[rktpro]

God is in man's hands. Not man in Gods.

 

Didn't you go through the concept of natural demand for happiness and the eternal existence of all three entities referred. It's in the Vedas.

Even in heavy rains, you can't get a glass filled with rainwater when it's upside down.

[Appolinaria]

rktpro

 

Thanks for the offer to help me with God but no thanks. I am covered.

 

"r6. He can never be! He remains inside you even if you are against him."

 

 

 

He can be whenever we decide to create a new God.

 

God is in man's hands. Not man in Gods.

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

 

If?

 

Do you not know for sure?

 

Regards

 

DL

 

 

 

Ah... yes.... good human.... I am God.... you have discovered me.... please turn to page 63 to see your fate.

 

[tar]

Appolinaria,

 

 

Father: Sphere, Stellar, Spirit, Air, Mercury, El, Saturn, Creative

 

Holy Ghost/Mother: Cube, Lunar, Body, Water, Salt, Is, Asherah, Wisdom, Sophia, Feminine, Ruling

 

Son: Pyramid, Solar, Soul, Fire, Sulphur, Ra, Word

 

 

 

 

Do think you are onto something. Not sure I see the reasoning, why those different entities would go particularly with each concept. Perhaps you can explain a bit, but I like your thought...

 

If I am Alpha/Omega= I am the first and last. I am the father, and son. God is not solely the father, or solely the son. He is the manifestation of both father & son, the relationship of the two.

 

This idea is exactly the same as the trinity.

 

Same concept, different quantity.

 

 

Add rktpo...

 

1. No. There are only three entities- Braham(God), Jeev(soul) and maya(power of God which makes us materialistic)

 

And Freud with the Id, Ego, Super Ego.

 

And Hegel with Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis.

 

 

There seems to me to be a theme here, that is not foreign to anyone.

 

Like you say. Same concept. Different quantities.

 

Interesting to me, that there is this "meaning" that seems very understandable and real to all, that is argued about and denied, simply because the phrasing is different, and the conclusions drawn somewhat arbitrary and/or self serving.

 

I would like to throw into the mix the concepts of 1st person, 2nd person and 3rd person.

 

Seems all languages have the concepts of I, you, and he/she/it.

 

Who and what we put in the we camp with us, probably has a lot to do with the credos we go by. What "we" believe.

 

Seems relevant to me, to consider the "translation" between one's own credo, and "their" credo.

 

Not to say that the conclusions are not dissimilar. But the meaning behind the belief in question, might very well be the same meaning behind the credo of the "other". This guess is based on the fact that there is only one reality and "we" (who or whatever, that group may consist of) are in and of it.

 

Regards, TAR2

[Appolinaria]

Appolinaria,

 

 

 

 

Do think you are onto something. Not sure I see the reasoning, why those different entities would go particularly with each concept. Perhaps you can explain a bit, but I like your thought...

 

 

 

Add rktpo...

 

 

 

And Freud with the Id, Ego, Super Ego.

 

And Hegel with Thesis, Antithesis, Synthesis.

 

 

There seems to me to be a theme here, that is not foreign to anyone.

 

Like you say. Same concept. Different quantities.

 

Interesting to me, that there is this "meaning" that seems very understandable and real to all, that is argued about and denied, simply because the phrasing is different, and the conclusions drawn somewhat arbitrary and/or self serving.

 

I would like to throw into the mix the concepts of 1st person, 2nd person and 3rd person.

 

Seems all languages have the concepts of I, you, and he/she/it.

 

Who and what we put in the we camp with us, probably has a lot to do with the credos we go by. What "we" believe.

 

Seems relevant to me, to consider the "translation" between one's own credo, and "their" credo.

 

Not to say that the conclusions are not dissimilar. But the meaning behind the belief in question, might very well be the same meaning behind the credo of the "other". This guess is based on the fact that there is only one reality and "we" (who or whatever, that group may consist of) are in and of it.

 

Regards, TAR2

 

 

 

Probably got the ideas from Secret Teachings of All Ages by Manly P. Hall.. I made a chart from all of the trinities I came across, whether elements or celestial bodies, etc... and attributed them to the Father/Son/Holy Ghost trinity. Made it a few years back while kind of lightly reading... there is logic to it. I need to go back and re-read it more thoroughly, though. I think chapter 33 stood out to me most. It's available in it's entirety online, if you want to read it out of curiosity.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Appolinaria

[Greatest I am]

Didn't you go through the concept of natural demand for happiness and the eternal existence of all three entities referred. It's in the Vedas.

Even in heavy rains, you can't get a glass filled with rainwater when it's upside down.

 

 

Calling something eternal is a logical fallacy and un-provable and I reject it out of hand.

 

As to the Vedas, I have enough of one fantasy to deal with without adding another to the mix.

 

Regards

 

DL