Intelligent Design is not creationism

You're welcome.

"Many worlds" is definitely a paradigm you want to have on your plate to get the big picture of what's going on.
There are multiple dimensions and alternate universes at play.
It's actually possible to switch dimensions without knowing it.
They are now talking about multiple big bangs.
Certainly, one for each universe.
And in this way, everything that can happen does happen.
From each big bang, all is determined, from beginning to end.
Each is a closed system.
Choice can put you in another universe, another dimension.
You could theoretically live a life over again based on other choices.
But that one is also a closed, determined, system.

Negotiating one's way through these systems in the fastest, least painful way, is what I am about.
You can literally collapse vast sections of time, and the lessons they held,
based on decisions you make.
It's easier when it is understood that in any given situation,
there's really only one kind of decision to make.

At the end of the journey is good news.
It is the end of closed, determined systems.
You will be free.

Jesus

 

In a way, "many worlds" may indeed eliminate a creator.
I am the first to insist that none of this is real, or has even happened at all.
Therefore, it has no creator.
All of us exist here as ghosts.
We "haunt" places long since void of life.
We believe we have a place and a purpose..."here".
We don't.
We may leave anytime.
If only we knew how.


Jesus

 

"god" is an ideal... man is anything but

 

The tongue of man speaks truth and falsehood simultaneously.
I will look upon the truth in this statement.
Certainly, "god" is an idea.
This is a good thing.
You can share an idea without reducing it.
All of the idea is still yours although all of it has been given away.
This is impossible with physical possessions.
But if you give an idea, and the one to whom you give it accepts it as his,
he reinforces it in your mind and thus increases it.
If you can accept the concept that the world is one of ideas,
the false association between giving and losing is gone.

Everything is an idea.
The more who believe in them the stronger they become.
Therefore, thoughts increase by being given away.
How, then, can giving and losing be associated?

God is everything.
If God is an idea,
he can give everything away,
and thereby keep and increase what he has.
What he has is what he is.

God gave everything to his Son.
His Son keeps everything and increases what he has,
by giving it all away in turn.
He does this through perfect communication.
This is "creation".
And this is how joy is kept and increased forever.

"Man", on the other hand, is the idea of a non-idea...an "ideal".
A non-idea cannot truly share or be shared.
Man cannot give anything away without 'losing' it.
Man cannot recieve anything without something/somebody else 'losing'.
Man is what's left after the idea that everything can be 'lost'.
So man is the 'sacrifice' of 'everything'.
Lacking everything, man must 'get'.
To get anything, man must 'pay'.
Man believes that to get everything back, he must 'pay', or, 'sacrifice'.
So he believes salvation is gained by sacrifice.
If his salvation is a woman, he must 'pay'.
If his salvation is God, he must 'sacrifice'.

But to get everything, man must only sacrifice bad ideas.
Sacrifice is a bad idea.
The world is a bad idea.
Man is a bad idea.
All man has is bad ideas.
So if he sells everything he has,
and follows me,
he can get everything back, and more abundantly.

Jesus

 

just a small yet major correction... my statement was "god is an IDEAL" ... idea's come a dime a billion, there are far fewer ideals
yes, and I'm aware that many people have their own ideas about what's ideal



i·de·al /aɪˈdiəl, aɪˈdil/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ahy-dee-uhl, ahy-deel] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun
1. a conception of something in its perfection.
2. a standard of perfection or excellence.
3. a person or thing conceived as embodying such a conception or conforming to such a standard, and taken as a model for imitation: Thomas Jefferson was his ideal.
4. an ultimate object or aim of endeavor, esp. one of high or noble character: He refuses to compromise any of his ideals.
5. something that exists only in the imagination: To achieve the ideal is almost hopeless.
6. Mathematics. a subring of a ring, any element of which when multiplied by any element of the ring results in an element of the subring.
–adjective 7. conceived as constituting a standard of perfection or excellence: ideal beauty.
8. regarded as perfect of its kind: an ideal spot for a home.
9. existing only in the imagination; not real or actual: Nature is real; beauty is ideal.
10. advantageous; excellent; best: It would be ideal if she could accompany us as she knows the way.
11. based upon an ideal or ideals: the ideal theory of numbers.
12. Philosophy. a. pertaining to a possible state of affairs considered as highly desirable.
b. pertaining to or of the nature of idealism.

 

Previously, I didn't understand how you could speak of creation, yet deny the validity of time. I thought your use of the concepts of a creation and a creator necessarily implied a before and after and was therefore in contradiction to how you see time. Seeing that you think of creation as an idea that is communicated and increased I understand where you come from. It makes perfect sense, thanks.

 

Sorry, but I find the creationist argument rather comical. This is how it always progresses:

Creationist says that life is too complicated to have occured without a designer. A designer is neccessary to account for this "so-called" logical flaw.

You then ask the creationist, well then by your own logic, wouldn't god need a creator too since its existence is too complicated to have occured without some sort of creator.

Creationist's response: Oh but god is different and everything. God is not explainable in those "human" terms.

How convienient. Use logic to prove that god must exist and then throw logic out the window when the obviously glaring logical flaw of god is exposed.

 

+1

The other one that I love, which the religious fundamentalists in this thread are so fond of, is

'Can you prove that God does not exist? You can't? Well, then, that's proof that God exists!'

 

I've followed this thread for its inception, or close to it ... and this response as much as any reveals the core of the argument....


it all boils down to what you're WILLING to believe.


thankfully, 90%+ are willing to believe in something beyond man

 

and another statement of nothing. I was willing to believe in the tooth fairy when I was 5 years old. It didn't require logic, proof or facts. It only required an irrational belief in something. Nothing more and nothing less.