An argument for the non-existance of deity

no he meant me, im reefer madness

did you even read any of my posts? i suggest you do.

 

No you see, God as we know it, YHWH, Allah, etc. These are Gods, but nothing compared to the supreme force and being behind the universe. They merely exist in it. We perceive them as Gods because they have harnessed a power we cannot fathom, light travel.

I suggest you read about the Annunaki and Ancient Sumerian beliefs. This God you speak of, you are confusing him with a different thing entirely. The proof exists in Sumerian text, unless of course you want to debunk ancient beliefs because there's not enough proof to support it. Read my post The Real God, maybe you'll learn something.

The reason we're having this circular argument is because Nimrod's Apprentice is talking about the supreme force behind the universe, and your talking about Enlil...YHWH, Allah, the god that created humans (sped up our DNA and evolutionary process). This God can be proven, if you believe what the Sumerians wrote down. These Gods were also created by this unfathomable force of the universe, sitting on the highest dimension, while all of its energy spirals down into the dimension we exist in.

 

Well I see were just going in circles with this, but if you agree that believing in God as the dude in the sky with the beard doesn't exist, than your right. Thats BS. As for the personal cracks Im sorry.

But still you play with swords and shit, like the middle ages. If it was up to me Id revoke your chivalry and behead you. The God with the beard ruled the dark ages and the middle ages. It was all about blind faith, which you obviously don't have any of.

and I meant the dude R33f3r Madness that posted, not the flick.

as for the math, you got me on that one, cuz I dropped out of college and never studied math indepth. So throwing that shit at me is like a turkeyshoot. However I have studied the golden mean because of its relation to life and religion.

As for saying Dualism is not a Zoroastrian concept, that is false.
Buddhism and Taoism "officially" (there is evidence of taoism in the I ching) and that Lao Tze only compiled earlier chinese concepts), both originated around 500-600 bc. As did the concept of Ahura Mazda and Ahriman, to the Zoroastrians around the same time. So obviously there was a great truth around that time that was revealed somehow, or to the rational mind I guess its just coincidence.

I understand how you like to view things as probability, and I guess thats up to we can go on and on talking in circles about this. Think what you want.


I was just trying to prove a point with the As above so below, which was the basis for Alchemy of the spirit. They thought if you can transmute a base metal, into something greater. The same can be done for the spirit of a man, transmutate them from base lead, to spiritual "gold" or enlightenment.
Now applying this law to Social laws as you say I should call them, was me just trying to prove the point. That no permanent function in society goes on without a creator and enforcer of that function. Then applying this law of Alchemy, the same would have to go for the above IE the universe,galaxy etc. Saying Alchemy is outdated though is bullshit. Its only because the physical side is all thats being practiced in our schools nowadays. They forget the spiritual aspect because it doesn't have physical success and results viewable by the un-initiated. So the lay man doesn't care. Whereas you can transfrom a substance using a chemical reaction and its plain as day for any idiot to drool over.

Now to the real point like r33f3r m4dn3s says, we were talking about different gods. The supreme creator intelligence essence, and Yahweh. The latter being a member of the Annunaki and a short history lesson can tell you why you made this mistake and (your not wrong by the way you were just confused and if you said this straight up we would be agreeing right now).
In the ancient days before the gods were named Mars, jupiter, zeus, diana,apollo, before they were Osiris, and isis. There were the annunaki, who of Babylonian accounts were "those who came from heaven to earth" using flying vessels depicted in sumerian art with wings. Among these Annunaki there were 2 that had a "lasting effect on humanity". ENki and Enlil, Enlil being the cheif General, and Enki being the cheif Scientist programmer. They came to earth from Niburu, which is sometimes referred to as the 12th planet. Which comes into orbit every someodd years I don't know exactly.
They came looking for gold, because according to the sumerians, you could alchemize gold into a monotomic powder that granted all living organisms. (IM sure with your science loving mind youve studied BIphoton particle waves.)
Im not a scientist but it works along those lines, providing nutrients directly to your astral body, which according to science is basically about to be proven in the next decade with this BIphoton light language coming out.
Whatever the case, they wanted to create a worker slave to live in fear of them because either the mining of gold was hard or w/e.
So they mixed Neanderthal man with their genes GENETICALLY ALL SCIENCE ALL PHYSICAL, GENETIC ENGINEERING. They used a live embryo and an accelerated growth catalyst, all of this our science hasn't allowed us to develop. This is the biblical ADAM, Enki being the chief creator of man thought why go through all the effort of doing this every time we need to clone a human? So with some resentment from the rest of the crew, he created a female. Gave them sex organs, and allowed them to reproduce on their own. However it was only done in very very specific circumstances not to allow this homo sapiens, to KNOW OF THYSELF, and THY POWER.
Now things seem to be getting out of hand, for whatever reason ENLIL commander in cheif of warfare. Thinks enki is letting humans get way to smart way to fast. He then decides to boot them from Eden. Then enki responds by letting them know their sexual power, and their self-sufficiency. They are not just slaves, but actuall beings capable of living alone without their psychological "parents". This is a major shock to them.
Fast Forward again.
The biblical flood, was enlil saying hes had enough of enki teaching them, how long before he gives them the tree of life, making them equal to the gods. Most likely this monatomic gold powder that they use themselves! To extend their lives! HE WONT LET HUMANITY GET A HOLD OF THIS BECAUSE THEN THEY WOULD BE EQUAL, JUST LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS. Only in the bible the corrupters dont bother mention that genesis 1 and 2 are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ENTITIES OF GOD. THe first being the superintelligence creator of the universe, the second being physical god men from outerspace. The second one being the hebrew Elohim who are no different than the annunaki.
Now comes the flood, either a geological event or a weapon of mass destrution unleased by Enlil. What does enki do? He finds the purest man he can Utnapushtim or the biblical Noah, takes his family and his (sons) or the three races of humanity, a few animals and plants, and saves them from this flood. He would not give up on us, his lifes work about to "flushed down the toilet" more or less.
Now we are at modern history. Enki says not to worship him, worship his teachings of free thought and philosophy, he tells humanity to worship the ONE TRUE GOD. Which is uncomprehendable to them at the time. over 5000 years ago. TO PEOPLE WITH NO KNOWLEDGE OF LIGHT,HEAT,ELECTRICITY,PARTICLES,MATH,SCIENCE. I bet if enki returned we would have a better Idea of this super creator and his reality.
This is where things go wrong. THe annunaki return and ruin enkis perfect civilization. Re-establish worship of all the annunaki and you would relate with the one you recognized yourself with the most and banish enki back to Niburu. Thus being the religion of Mesopotamia and Egypt, untill the time of Akhenaten the great. Who thought man was only creating wars choosing and picking and worshipping many gods. So he being initiated in the mystery schools by the GODS THEMSELVES and their NEPHILIAM that was the main reason to destroy humans in the first place, reappeard. They put the nephiliam in charge to train the royal classes of both civilizations. Back to Akhenaten. He sought a radical reform to eliminate the corrupt priesthood CHARGING MONEY AND DEEDS FOR SALVATION. Which he knew was a scam (echoes of jesus christ?) so he cut out the priesthood, changed the capitals from Thebes and Memphis, to tel-Armana. He changed the art of the time to reflect to true appearence of the Pharoah and royal family. SHowing a very Alien looking beings with long cone type heads, long flimsy limbs, and a big round belly (they look much like the small aliens in Men IN black to tell you the truth that are in the coffee room drinking coffee, and always making weird sounds if youve seen that movie).

Akhenaten wanted to worship the sun disc as the symbol of the super creator more supreme than the pharoah and the annunaki combined. This was the first recorded idea of Monotheism. Then the priests realized that they outnumbered the royal family by the thousands. They commited the FIRST RELIGIOUS AND POLITICAL COUP OF OUR TIME. They kidnapped the pharoah killed all his eldest children, and took his wife Nefertiti into captivity. They banished Akhenaten to Sinai north of Egypt never to return, the only thing he took with him was the Royal Sceptor, seeing as he couldn't carry the ark of the covenant alone. Which was a gift from the savior annunaki enki. Next comes the first female Pharoah Smenkhare (nefertiti) a front saying that Akhenaten died of natural causes without alarming the populace. Being angry that their new freedom was all of the sudden returned back to day to day slavery. They branded him a heretic, said he was a blasphemy to the gods. Then they killed his wife. Showing now the rightfull leader is none other than TUTANKHAMEN, remember him? The boy king. HIs name was originally TUTANKHATEN, but being a front for the newly acquired power of the priesthood they changed his name and made him agree that his stepfather akhenaten was in fact a heretic. Then one day they hit him over the head with a fuckin bat. Gave him an elaborate burial and sarcophagus of the old religious faction. Then boom the true dynasty is now gone, the priests setup a new belief in RA, and then comes RAMSES meaning Ra is born.

Now this is not in the bible, for obvious reasons and I will explain that in a second.

While Hiding in Sinai Akhenaten did have another child with another woman, this is what would become the biblical moses. He floated him in a basket he was found by the royal guards, and adopted as one of their own. Now do you really think a Hebrew baby would be allowed to become one of the Pharoahs adopted sons? Does stuff like that ever happen in real life. No. He looked like them because he was an Egyptian not an Israelite. Then the bible keepts this relatively accurate. Except that Moses was sent an escort to sinai, where Akhenaten met him in private telling him that he was his long lost son, and the son of the true royal blood of egypt. He doesn't believe him, Then comes the big one "ASK THE ONE YOU CALL FATHER AND HE WILL TELL YOU THE TRUTH" this he does. He tells them that Akhenaten was not a radical but the priests didnt want society to succeed therefore making them equals. They wanted to be more so they setup a coup to destroy him. He then kills an Egyptian overlord and jets to sinai. Where he FIRSTHAND LEARNS ALL THE KNOWLEDGE OF ALCHEMY AND SCIENCE, returns with the sceptor proving he has seen akhenaten this makes Pharoah furios. Then he returns again kills all of Pharoahs royal guard in " a haze of smoke after a loud bang then the building was destoryed killing over 100 men in less than a minute." Now to them this was magic, but to modern man a smoke bomb and a few levelling sticks of dynamite while moses runs out the back would be evidence enough.

Then the 10 plagues come pharoah follows them believe whatever you want of the rest.

Now moses frees the slaves, takes the ark of the covenant and says he has a chosen place from them as long as they stick togethor. Thus beginning the hebrew religion. Now fast forward to death of King david and his son solomon, who built the TEMPLE ACCORDING TO AKHENATENS ORGINAL PLANS FOR HIS TEMPLE AT TEL ARMANA. After solomon the 12 tribes that were united split over who is going to be leader. Then the babylonians WHO THROUGHOUT ALL THIS WERE STILL WORSHIPPING ALL THE ANNUNAKI AND ENLIL and enki was never even thought of because they branded him a heretic and fool. The babylonians then corrupted the Old testament which was being put togethor during that time of the exodus and Moses meetings on mt sinai. Were corrupted by slaves to enlil. Changing the very fabric of the religion from akhenatens one god of supremacy. TO ENLIL THEIR CHIEF GOD. THE GOD JEHOVAH, and YAHWEH. NOT ADONAI which is enki, but still not the true god of moses akhenaten and the passover event.

This is the basis for your confusion, just as all of religion ever since this very moment. The one god of the bible is a corruption put there to let the true knowledge dissappear and madeup this bullshit of a vengefull god. Who hates humanity, and only saves them because he has to. Who doesn't answer your prayers and who gave the ARK of the covenant as a symbol of their Debt owed to jehovah. When in fact the ark was a gift from Enki, Adonai, to show mans true knowledge and capabilitiy in life.

They took this pure idea, and replaced with a slave driver because thats all they knew, and since the Babylonians didn't care about enlightenment and wisdom, they cared for Laws, order, and writing(which is why their records proved to be the longer lasting cunieform texts than the Egyptians hieroglyphs, and submission to the annunaki chief of warfare Enlil. The true vengefull god, Allah, yahweh, and jehovah.

 

Now after all that, you must realize that mere human words cannot begin to comprehend the true existence of God, the one who created these lesser Gods....so dont even bother. Words dont even come close to capturing whether or not god can exist outside of logic. Who knows what other mathematical equations and theories of logic exist outside our solar system. There is an answer to this, but only the Supreme God knows it, so don't even bother trying to figure it out with mortal english words.

But yes, the god you speak of, this Christian-Judeo God, it does make sense with your argument Hakuri.

Good Job distinguishing the difference Nimrod. Case Closed.

 

I see. A misunderstanding is all. You have so many numbers in your name that I didn't equate it to reefer madness.

And yeah, I read your posts. And replied to them when applicable.

When are you going to realize that I am not talking about whatever you are talking about. I am talking about the concept of "God" otherwise called Allah or YHWH.

Frankly, I don't give half a shit about your "supreme force" behind the universe. That has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, whatsoever. So stop mentioning it or bringing it up. I don't care what your belief is regarding theology, that's not what this thread is for.

Listen to yourself. "This can be proven if you believe what the Sumerians wrote down." Your "proof" is boiling down to belief in something! But belief is not proof!

I play with them? Come on dude. I am long past playing with them. Right now, they are at my home in Pennsylvania (while I am in a dorm in New York), sitting there collecting dust. They exist in name only, and are for show, because I happen to like the medieval era.

Secondly, chivalry isn't something one can revoke, no matter how powerful.

And I just think it's a fascinating time. It's not like I would actually travel back in time if I could and live there. Are you kidding? With all the disease, betrayal, famine, and sectarian war? I only find value in certain ideals which were prominent during those times, such as honour, loyalty, and chivalry.

If you don't find value in them, that doesn't matter to me. But don't make the mistake that just because I have swords, and am interested in the Middle Ages, doesn't mean I am some little child that plays swords in the back yard. You're very hasty to make such a bold assumption.

And while the link to Zoroastrianism is probably true, you said: "You say the earth is a duality, which was originally a Christian Concept, via Zoroastrianism."

It may be DERIVED from Zoroastrianism, but Zoroastrianism is not Christianity! Duality is not EXCLUSIVELY a Christian concept. This is what I was claiming to be false, not that it wasn't Zoroastrian.

Here's the problem though.

You say the Alchemy rule is "As above, so below."

However, you cite "how it is on Earth is how it is in heaven" which is not necessarily (or even probably) true.

You are using "As below, so above." However, you cannot reverse the principal like that.

What happens on heaven, reflects on Earth. But what happens on Earth is not necessarily a reflection of what happens in heaven.

(Substitute "heaven" for whatever higher realm you want to talk about)

You can't backwards-apply this law of Alchemy as you are doing.

This I will give you. Still, alchemy "laws" are prominent in modern culture, they just aren't called "laws of alchemy." Instead, they are philosophical rules, or logical principals, and perhaps chemical/physical laws.

Here's the whole problem with it:

You are saying "Yahweh" is not the "Yahweh" from the Bible.

That "Yahweh" from the Bible is the wrong concept of Yahweh.

But guess what.

I'm not talking about what Yahweh might have been.

I'm talking about what people believe Yahweh is, and which qualities they believe Yahweh has.

So, for the record, everything you said, which who knows might even be true -- but still has absolutely no functional bearing on the concept that I am talking about.

Here's why I have no patience with arguing over this conceptual difference ...

Because the concept about which I am talking was outlined several times earlier in this thread.

This thread isn't about Yahweh vs. Yahweh, which one is most correct.

This thread is about, Yahweh as he is COMMONLY known/considered, especially as portrayed in the Bible, cannot exist.

You said immediately afterwards, "This is the basis for your confusion, just as all of religion ever since this very moment."

You believe I am confused, however, I am talking about the concept of Yahweh that all of religion is talking about! Not what you believe is the "correct" Yahweh.

RAmen. (May His Noodliness watch over you forever.)

Now can we all simply ... not argue over irrelevant concepts?

 

No you dont understand, you are talking about what we're talking about. You say your talking about the concept of God, otherwise known as YHWH, and are getting the him confused with the supreme force that created him, we have merely stated the difference.

If you apply your theory that he cant exist outside of logic, YHWH that is, then your right, because he is bound by the same universal laws everything is bound to, except of course light travel and what not. But when you apply it to this supreme force im talking about, the one you call YHWH when in fact it isnt YHWH but something else, then it has has absolutely everything to do with this thread, but there is no way of proving it because of course our feeble minds cant grasp this concept of who or what created the cosmos, which coincides with your original argument.

So what proof do you need? Do you want Enlil (YHWH) to send you a birthday card with a picture of him saying "Hey Hikaru, nice sword, heres proof I exist." Or could you believe that a society that has influenced basically all of humanity was right?, but we're too ignorant and brainwashed to believe in such silly things. Proof and belief? Is it silly to believe in something when there is archaeological proof ?

I think you need to understand the difference between YHWH, and the Supreme Force, otherwise known as King Cosmos to me.

And what do you mean by irrelevant concepts? You are saying YHWH can't exist outside of all logic, and you are right, he is bound by the laws of physics. But to me you are saying YHWH and the supreme force im talking about are the same thing when they are not.

 

YHWH IS DEFINED AS:
Omnipotent (all-powerful)
Omniscient (all-knowing)
Omnipresent (all-pervading)
Omnibenevolent (all-good)

YHWH IS DEFINED AS:
Having created both the heaven and the Earth (or more accurately, the ethereal and material planes) in seven days.
Existing above all other things whatsoever; not being subservient or of a lower status than any other supreme being.

This is the definition of YHWH that the prominent religious use. Christianity. Islam. Rastafarianism.

Whatever definition YOU use, is DIFFERENT than that which these religions follow and that which the Bible claims is true!

SO FOR THE LAST TIME, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AN ENTITY THAT HAS DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS THAN THE COMMONLY KNOWN ENTITY THAT I AM TALKING ABOUT.

Then why the fuck are you arguing?

Are you arguing to get your jollies off? Or for the sake of arguing?

Jesus Christ!!™

YOU ARE THE ONLY ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS SUPREME FORCE!

STOP DETRACTING FROM THIS CONVERSATION ALREADY.

YOUR concept of Yahweh has NOTHING to do with the COMMON concept of Yahweh!

I do not care what Yahweh actually is, or actually may be! I am talking about the concept of what Yahweh is reported to be, by the major religions that believe in Yahweh, and the Bible/Quran!

When are you going to realize this? FFS.

Actually, that would be nice. ^_^ That's all I've ever really asked for to begin with, so long as it could be verified as YHWH's.

But it better have a return address to box 1 in heaven.

Archaeological proof?

WHAT archaeological proof?

That you dug up scripture?

THAT IS NOT PROOF.

That you believe the Sumerians were right?

THAT IS NOT PROOF.

What archaeological proof??

I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT YHWH AS YOU OR SUMERIA HAS DEFINED HIM.

For. Fuck's. Sake.

Gee, did you ever stop to think that I'm saying that they're not different, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE CHRISTO-JUDEAN CONCEPT IS?!

Get off your high horse! Stop talking about YOUR perception of YHWH. Stop talking about Sumeria's perception of YHWH! That perception is NOT the perception I am basing my argument off of!

 

Nah the proof is that these ancient records just somehow fit in with all of History, and the ethnocentricity, regarding the changing of hands of this knowledge and wisdom. The view of yahweh as an Omnipotent all powerfull god is only a mistranslation that occured thousands of years ago.

All I am saying is that if the general populace knew this was only an ancient extraterrestrial astronaut god then well the 3 religions based on him would be therefore bullshit, considering they all claim him to be as r33f3r m4dn3ss refers to "King Cosmos". I guess we're agreeing with you on the fact that you know this Yahweh only holds people back because it is a god of vengeance and forced submission. Islam means Submission to allah. The god that makes you get down on all 4's and beg for forgiveness, and basically bribe god into giving you success on earth for your soul in the afterlife.

This is where the all seeing eye comes into it, a symbol going back to Ra, and even before to this Enlil. A perfect symbol, pertaining that this god is always watching you like your a child.

But this is the point, instead of attacking this god which is a compilation of lies, ethnocentricity, hate, dominance, and forced submission. Why don't you instead disprove it just like were doing? Instead of attacking all forms of deity. If this is the god you have a grudge against the god thats built western civilization, then I dunno what to say. I hate how he corrupted the world, yet if it wasn't for his dominance is there a chance we wouldn't be here today using computers in a world of technology? Run that through your probability machine. I was just trying to show you one example of how History is everything when connected to these myths of god. That is the best "proof we have". To show the ruling bodies and how they want to organize the masses to follow them.

The archeaological proof is stone tablets showing birdface gods, and strange winged humanoids. The fact that beings like this exist in all the monotheisms, whether their angels, demons, jinn, or elohim. They took the god "King Cosmos" the god that you can recognize by intuition and meditation, and fucked it up. Just so we would be having this arguement today. Yet still thru history there are times when people pop up, such as jesus christ, krishna,siddartha gautama, lao tse. That change the general populace with ideas of free thinking, philosophy and an alternate belief to either the polytheism, or the false monotheism.

You say its a different entity and thats true because the god that each of these monotheisms wants to worship, is the allmighty god of the cosmos. Yet the whole fact that they follow a priesthood, pope, rabbi, Imam, go to a mosque, church, or temple. Is all relative to this Enlil character. Eliminating free thought. Jesus Christ said your body is your temple, this is evident in The Dead Sea scrolls found in Qumran. Jesus christ was a gnostic, there is ample evidence. The Gnostics are more BUDDHIST than christian. They supreme diety is the interconnection of life in one aspect. Through meditation you can tap into this conciousness that you usually can not, and the lay man has no care for. Also using psychadelics, fasting, isolation tanks, extended prayer, nature retreats,yoga. All these things are aspects of the gnostic "gnosis" knowing. Knowing you made a connection with somehting higher than yourself, that words don't define, and if you were to define it with words it would corrupt the very nature of this excercise. In another thread you said you believe in Zen Buddhism right? What if this Zen you reach is the essence of the universe? How about the buddhist concept of Nirvana? The hindu moksha? All connections where you become one with the supreme essence of the universe. You are beyond time and space, and life and death. There are accounts of this man. In tibet buddhists don't always reach enlightenment but Siddhartha did and it was DOCUMENTED IT WAS VIEWED BY THE PUBLIC. IT REALLY HAPPENED, christ mang what more proof do you want. The first cause. back to words.

Now you want an example of where words have a fault?
You say chivalry is something that can't be revoked, a simple etymology shows that the word comes from the French word chevalier which means knight. An institution of knighthood. Accepting Chivalry is accepting knighthood, thus it CAN be revoked. If you break any of the cardinal rules. WHICH ONE HAPPENS TO BE A BLIND FAITH IN GOD, THE FATHER IN HEAVEN ,THAT YOUVE NEVER SEEN, YOU MUST DIE FOR HIM, THAT IS YOUR HONOR.

 

All im trying to say is that over the past 1000 thousands of years the concept of "God", YHWH, has been corrupted, and before we have a conversation on God, we must first distinguish the two. My proof? Zacharia Sitchin. Is scripture not proof? The fact that all of these religions were based off this Sumerian ideal? The fact that Akhenaten the lost pharoah of Egypt KNEW this worship of Enlil(the common concept of YHWH) was wrong and they banished him for it? Just because this history goes back thousands of years doesn't mean it has been corrupted. It is found wirrten in cueniform tablets, so if you can't take this as proof, I don't know what more proof you need.

The common concept of YHWH is wrong, that is my point, and its going to take a while until people stop becoming too ignorant to realize that if they simply look at history from an unbias perspective.

You may think your outside the box, but you have merely opened it.

 

the only thing that has to be able to be defined in order to have meaning is a word. even a collection of sounds does not have to be deffined to exist. nor do any reality a word is intended to represent.

we make up words. we use them to indicate things. then we make the mistake of immagining we know something about a thing because we've attatched a name to it. when all we know about it is that we've attatched a name to it and what that name is.

=^^=
.../\...

 

Done. Already distinguished between your concept and the rest of the world's concept. Finished. Let's please move on.

...

Do I really need to answer that?

You're saying old Christian scripture is not proof, but then claiming it's proof for your religion ...

... that's really funny. You should write that one down.

And it's a point that I haven't disagreed with, this entire time.

I started this thread to do something similar to what you are doing.

Except, you keep sticking in your beliefs -- which have nothing to do with the conversation -- into every post, then arguing with me about them.

 

Alright, well I was just trying to throw that in because of your definition of God.

 

The demi-urge is what religions classify God as, this is my gnostic belief. The logic you speak of, one cannot speak of or define in words, because the true meaning behind logic refers to the "Logos". The true definition of the word itself has been lost and is still a basis of controversy. Logic is merely drawing a conclusion based solely on what one already knows, so you must know everything in order to have a logical conclusion, which is basically impossible. Your argument for the term logic comes from the 18th century form of it used in mathematics and computer science. But the real term, used by Gnostics, such as myself, refers to the "Logos". So your argument sounds logical, but who are we to define "logic" itself?

Oh and as for the scripture, that is merely the closest you can get to proof, and the fact that it exists is my point. Christian scripture is based off of this Sumerian belief, and also the Christian text has been distorted and skewed over time, also leaving out a major part, the Gnostic part, which is found in the Nah Hammadi library.

Oh and to brush upon something else, the term "agnostic" could define me, seeing as how "i dont know", but being a gnostic "i know that i dont know", which is what seperates a gnostic from an agnostic. Gnosticism is mainly a tool for you to use to come as close as possible to trying to understand that which one does not know...yet.

It is very close to Buddhism, and knowing that you yourself follow Zen Buddhism, taking a look at the Nah Hammadi library and Gnosticism might intrigue you a lot.

And i think my beliefs helped out a lot, otherwise this could have been another dead thread. Isn't that what makes a good argument, a contrary opinion? I think they had a lot to do with the subject.

 

This is a better summary for Gnosticism http://www.gnosticteachings.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=12&Itemid=56

 

The assumption seems to be that all existence depends upon strict adherence to those rules of logic that are accessable and known to the human mind. If it does not conform to those rules and only those rules, not one more or less, then it does not exist.

By this logic, existence depends on human understanding, or consciousness.

Of course, the impossible question is - What is the causal relationship between consciousness and existence? Is consciousness a product of existence? or is existence a product of consciousness? Is it necessary to insist upon one causal relationship at the expense of all others?

If existence depends on human understanding, or consciousness, then there isn't anything that could have existed before the human mind existed. Therefore, the human mind is all that could exist. This is a far more limited belief than all of the other possibilities.

In a significant variation of the same logic, if consciousness defines existence, then existence depends upon consciousness to exist, then all that exists must have some measure of consciousness. Therefore, existence is conscious. Consciousness is inherent in all that exists.

Now, this consciousness, which is the basis of existence, may be identified. That is, its identity may be recognized and named. Throughout the span of time in which human beings have existed, many names have been created for this identity. All of them are variations of "God."

What do you think?

Peace and Love

 

Read the original post.

The assumption is that God can't exist outside of ALL logic, not simply human logic.

If it does not conform to rules of existance, in ANY kind of logic, human, divine, or otherwise, then it cannot exist.

Since "God" exists outside of "ALL logic," such a being cannot exist, because it cannot be defined.

 

IF we can say it can, it can! WE ROCK! Words suck ass, as this whole thread has come to show us all. Words are the bastardchild of Logic. Logic is a tool of the demi-urge, logic kills men,logic saves others. Logically I can Lacerate your logic, without ever causing a logical error. Can the sound of me boning your mom in the ass on a sunday morning have a clear definition in words? Yet we know its still there man. God doesn't have any rules! Cuz hes a slick coke snorting bastard with a pack of marlboros up his sleeve! By attempting to define "Illogical" as the opposite of "Logical" you make it LOGICAL! It then can make sense, in a whacky little world! Now I know what your saying! You think if you can say it and define it then IT IS! YOUR RIGHT! IT FUCKIN IS! You define illogical! BY doing so! LET THERE BE LIGHT! The holy word! ............................
The divine logos
Now is all that logical? Come up with your explanation. Of course it can be defined NOT LOGICAL. No matter what the fuck you come up with its not that! I disagree with this theory, because I beleive god can be understood and experienced to an extent.

 

Yea, i don't think we can even conceive a thought of what God is, defining it takes meaning away from it, I don't think there is meaning behind God (not the demi-urge's), but only balance, light and dark, and the experience of God. There is no defining God.

 

Exactly. There is no defining God. God must be left as "undefined" if he is truly beyond all logic. In which case, God is merely a superfluous way of saying "undefined."

What caused the Universe's creation? God did. (Read as: "Undefined did," translate as "the answer is undefined.")

 

This is where all the ideas of a logical rational god that is not undefined came from. Such as Odin,Zeus, define gods as containing powers of magic, shamanism and thunder. These gods have definition. What god are you referring to. Very few systems of thought actually think of god on illogical undescribable terms,as you like to point out. Im wondering what religion you drew your original idea for this post was from? An illogical god, most gods are defined. Your speaking with religion inside philosophical terms.