Creator is not a god.
Your logic suggests a man made ideology of what a superior entity or designer would be, based on human logic and deductive reason. Both approaches are proven to be false by, ironically, both sensational and scientific means.
Anything man focuses on with great intend and defends with greater passion can be defined as a god. For the record, the current form worshipped is the self and the appendicitis known as technology.
Must also know who is giving the opinion - the shaman with the collection plate or the recipient of God's attention. A hurricane survivor, perhaps, that lost the rest of their family.
If there is a god, creator of the universe, it would be nice to think it is good and loving. Unlikely as it would be, it would still be nice.
If that god is also the Christian God, it is absolutely malevolent. All of it's recorded actions point to that and even though the spoken descriptions from the god itself are different, actions speak louder than words.
I don't think God is the Christian God. I have reason to believe God wants us to be good, so I suspect he is good as well.
God is pure love. He wants us to be happy. Heaven is within. Jesus explains that the Kingdom of God is within.
If you want to be safe go within and find God. Feel your love for God. You love God, God loves you.
All this is done through the third eye of intuition. If you do not believe in intuition, never mind.
Hard to tell. When we try to apply human attitudes and morality to an non-human entity from another universe, that has nothing in common with humanity and that refuses to have any contact or communication with us we're bound to get it wrong.
I have had contact with God. Many people have.
It happened when I started meditation.
I'd have to say then that you had contact with your innermost self, with what is deep inside you rather than surface thoughts. No one I've ever heard of was able to provide any evidence they've had contact with a god, any god, outside their own proclamation that it happened.
Of course, when we define what the term "god" means, it is possible to claim contact with that definition. We just don't all agree on what that word refers to - some find "god" in a sunset, some declare that they are gods and some find it in the writings of ancient peoples.
That is your opinion. It fits because you are an atheist.
If you experienced what I have, you would change your mind. And I was an atheist when I experienced it.
There is a difference between experiencing an event and deciding it was a god and experiencing an event and recognizing that we don't know what it was. It is quite common to decide a god is involved, simply because of our ignorance of the what's, why's and wherefore's of an event, but it doesn't make it so.
Personally, I will never use my ignorance to declare a god's existence regardless of what the event is. Others disagree.
The fifth chakra is devotion to God, the fourth is service to mankind, the third is socially reactive, the second loves sex and the first loves power. As Hubber Jewles explains, the thrill of living is being in touch with all the chakras. But the thrill of not dying, living forever (in awareness) means escaping the illusion of it all, especially the illusion of death.
I wrote a thread about chakras. Maybe it will interest you.
Likewise. But I question how any of us can define and interpret the experience.
As you say, much of it is hard to define (what was actually going on) and interpreting it (correctly).
What goes on in a spiritual experience is beyond the material. Consciousness is brought somehow to a different level. I can't personally describe much of my experience. All I know is that there was a very definite "knowing" it was God.
I think God is all good and loving however we can perceive him as otherwise.
I won't be getting into a protracted argument on the subject (for anyone who reads this). Sorry. This is my opinion and I don't believe anyone must, necessarily, agree.
The God I know is passive and benevolent. Whether God is an actual conscious being is unknowable.
There is no moral or logical justification for an active God that creates the possibility of mass murders, gang rapes and other atrocities.
Extending another thread into this one, in a way, what do you mean by the term "God"? I ask because the concept of being passive and benevolent but not conscious is something I'm not following. Even if God is a "force of nature" somehow, or is a part of all of us I can't fathom how it/He can be benevolent but not conscious. Or even not intelligent - to be benevolent would seem to require intelligence, which in turn requires consciousness. I guess a rock could be termed "passive", but don't believe that is what you really mean there, either - that it means what we associate with an attribute with intelligence, life and consciousness.
Good question. Forty years of meditation have produced some fairly powerful spiritual experiences unlike anything else I have ever known.
They are rare, but when they happen, they bring a profound sense of bliss and sometimes even rapture (common in many religions). In that sense, the source is benevolent. But these words are inadequate to describe the actual experience. They changed me from an atheist to someone who thinks these experiences are common and form the basis of the belief in God.
Then the arguments start because people and cultures rush to interpret the experiences. They muddy the waters a lot.
The source of these experiences could be a unique type of non-being, non-conscious energy. For all I know, it could be a conscious being that dates back millions of years.
Either way, I have a firm belief that "God" exists because I have clearly experienced that existence. Otherwise, I have no idea what He or it is.
I see (I think ) - thanks. Yes, it can be tremendously difficult trying to explain experiences that are not shared, and doubly so when it comes to interpreting or provide details - the "feeling" that arises from them.
Did you learn anything about God during your experiences?
Is the Source of the universe, (causal God), a force of malevolence? No.
But positive and negative forces must exist separately in order for creation to manifest.
" … in 1897 an English physicist, JJ Thomson, discovered that cathode rays (electrons) were beams of negatively-charged particles,"
http://ingeniousireland.ie/2011/02/the- … -electron/
"Electrons play a fundamental role in everything that humans experience on a day-to-day basis. Their mutual electrical repulsion prevents solid objects from passing through one another, despite the fact that the atoms from which the objects are made are mostly empty space. These particles are also responsible for allowing atoms to join together to form the molecules that make up the Earth and life itself. Modern civilization and technology are heavily reliant on electricity, which involves movement of electrons."
http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Phys … atom2.html
"But positive and negative forces must exist separately in order for creation to manifest."
Are you talking about the forces of good and evil, or are you talking about electrons?
I'm talking about division of the causal/neutral force. What is benevolent vs malevolent if not division? God manifests as both good and bad, positive and negative, light and dark, illusion/reality as we know it.
Good and bad is based on what? Reactions. Does "God" react to this and that?
Or does "God", in the purest condition, just love?
Maybe God is like us. We have both good and bad in us. We open our chakras by defeating the lower base instincts and emotion, and gain spiritual aspects as we open the higher chakras.
Maybe God went through a process like this.
God caused us. I believe he invented a body for himself and then decided to share that blue-print with selves of Himself! I believe all animal bodies are adaptations of His original God-body. I believe He is the guiding hand of evolution.
He is Causal God and originally did not even need a body. But yep he just had to get all creative! (Understatement) or maybe He invented a female version of himself cause he was lonely. And it was Mother Nature who invented all !?
Father God is very patient with Mother Nature.
"… a proton and an electron will attract each other. The closer they are together, the stronger this attraction will be. Two protons (or two electrons) will repel each other. And again, the closer together they are, the stronger the repulsion. Now the nucleus of an atom is positively charged, while electrons are negatively charged. As a result, a nucleus will attract electrons. These electrons will swarm around the nucleus, and the result is an atom.
Now we haven't explained everything yet. The electric force explains how the electrons are bound to the nucleus of an atom. But we haven't said anything about what holds the nucleus together. The electric force can't account for this, and in fact, the electric force actually works against holding the nucleus together.
Remember, the nucleus contains neutrons and protons. The neutrons are electrically neutral, and so the electric force won't hold them in. Furthermore, the protons are all positively charged, and so they all repel each other. So if the electric force was the only force involved, you couldn't create a nucleus. You could try to push all those protons and neutrons together, but as soon as you let go, the protons would all shoot away from each other, and the neutrons would drift apart as well. There has to be some other force that holds protons and neutrons together.
Of course, since the electric force is constantly trying to drive the protons apart, the force that holds them all in must be stronger than the electric force. And keep in mind, the electric force gets stronger as charged particles get closer together, and the protons in a nucleus are very close together. As a result, the force that holds protons and neutrons together must be very strong. Well, in a brilliant stroke of imagination, physicists have named this force "the strong force."
The strong force is a force which attracts protons to protons, neutrons to neutrons, and protons and neutrons to each other. The force has a very short range, and this is the reason the nucleus of an atom turns out to be so small. In addition, the strong force is also responsible for binding the quarks and gluons into protons and neutrons.
So the nucleus of an atom is held together by the strong force, while the electrons are held in the atom by the electric force."
http://webs.morningside.edu/slaven/Phys … atom2.html
So, originally our bodies were more etheric and our energies were designed to exist and operate in the higher chakras. But as mankind became more grounded to the earth and the animal kingdom the energy and consciousness fell to the lower chakras. It is our job to raise our consciousness and energies back up to the higher chakras. Eventually we can escape the body though the crown chakra at the top of the head.
by jah1z5 years ago
I read and hear stuff like that all the time. Of God's greatest miracles in the Bible, He never laid a hand on humans. In all His Majesty of inflicting Egypt, He never put His hand on the Pharaoh. Read those scriptures...
by Mark Needham4 years ago
I believe that there is a lot of misconception about God. These misconceptions are a result of; traditional religion, science and narcissism. Let me know who your God is and conceptualize his existence with me.
by Grace Marguerite Williams3 years ago
What is YOUR concept of God or the Universal Force? Do you believe that God is one's highest self or consciousness? Do you believe that God or the Universal Force is involved or uninvolved in one's life and...
by Mahaveer Sanglikar5 years ago
If God is Almighty, Omnipotent, All knowing etc.etc, why he do not stop the bad things his children are doing (especially in his name) and the bad things happening with his children?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.