Jump to content
The mkiv Supra Owners Club

hows it going guys! new supra here


trev the rev
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 403
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Sorry for another long post guys but hey Ian, what's your view on how this all 'came about' so to speak? I don't mean Clever Trevor's antics. That's an even deeper mystery unless it really was you! I don't think so somehow though.

 

My brother thinks that it's all just a 'random accident', but the laws of physics prettymuch preclude random events or gravity wouldn't even exist. Nothing so coherent would or could. Even chaos has to be based on cause and effect at some level. At what point did someone decide that the laws of physics would limit the amount of energy in the Cosmos and doom us all to live in a closed loop? That can only happen if this were a part of the whole and not the whole. Therefore, there is much more to it than meets the eye, as theoretically atleast, the energy source must be infinite. If not, why does there have to be a limit to it? Because we can't imagine or accept infinity as a concept? Yet again, I digress. :innocent:

 

I visualise chaos like Brownian motion or how a gas behaves; seemingly random and utterly chaotic from our perspective but simply the collision of countless tiny molecules or particles, the properties of which, if they were known, would make the entire Universe predictable into infinity but for one thing: the organising principle or consciousness that bends and shapes what we laughably call 'solid' matter.

 

This is what gives atoms their nudge, I reckon, so that they collide non-randomly toward order. Gravity, if you like. The Matrix, magnetic fields, the mind of God, even. Either way, that which decides, guides and then collides and ultimately, provides. ;)

 

To say that God doesn't exist is like saying that the sum total of all that is, actually isn't, since that's what 'God' by definition, must be for it to be of any authority, for want of a much better word. Perhaps 'objectivity' or 'complete awareness of itself'. It must be everything, (including that which it is not).

 

I guess that your reasoning is that God is a similar creature to us and can't exist because 'he' wouldn't allow such suffering etc. being 100% good and all. People believe the bit that says that He made us in His own image and then use this as the excuse to deny His existence because of what we think that 'He' would be like. Fascinating cognitive dissonance. Talk about a selective memory!

 

That's what most people get hung up on; some childhood Biblical Fairy Tale. Of course God doesn't exist if 'He' is supposed to intervene everytime we 'wrong' eachother, as clearly He doesn't give a Monkey's unless He's keeping score for Judgement Day to keep Himself amused.

 

What sort of sadistic megalomaniac would do that? Why would a God worthy of the name damn His own children to Hell for all eternity? Malice? If so, I'll keep looking, thanks, not that I'm looking to worship anything or anyone. What God would demand to be worshipped? Would God need defending also? Yet people kill to 'honour' 'His' name. Cannot God take care of Him/itself? We insult God or Allah by assuming that He needs our help!

 

So, having established that this storybook definition of God is hopelessly limited, absurd and invalid, we have to re-define what God is, since some form of intelligence had to organise this whole 'reality' of ours and they obviously didn't intend for it to be without purpose or pleasure, (see photos below, trotters or hoofs, whichever turn you on the most guys!).

 

You can argue that it's all just logical progression, of course. The only way that it could have been and I'd agree. There's a mechanistic and predictable environment. It's the organic forms of matter that fascinate me the most, so called because they are organised beyond the norm, of course. We call them 'alive' or infused with an energy of a higher order. Intelligent, even.

 

We call ourselves intelligent and yet deny our Creator this privilege, whatever form or formlessness it takes. Everywhere yet nowhere, or now here. Everywhere yet now here, i.e. all things simultaneously yet able to observe from a single relative perspective, that which it is. That's our job, by the way! ;)

 

Are you a fan of intelligent design Ian, as I'd like to find something upon which we can both agree for once? :)

 

Yeah, after the first paragraph that was me done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. You might also be interested in our Guidelines, Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.