So where did God come from in the beginning? How was He created? Did something else create Him or did He create himself?

Answer that one, Christians. :p

God has always been. He is the Uncaused Cause... Shit! I can't continue to type this nonsense.

God was created by God's God. It's kind of an infinite progression thing.

I think some mysteries are intended to remain mysteries; I give my God the benefit of the doubt.

I know where God came from.
God came from us. We invented him, just like we invented Santa, The Easter Bunny, and the Jews.

My logic wins. Fuck you all. :p

I know where God came from.
God came from us. We invented him, just like we invented Santa, The Easter Bunny, and the Jews.

My logic wins. Fuck you all. :p

I could not say it better myself.

Have a cookie.

People have created higher forces to give their own lives purpose.


Hundreds of thousands of years ago, higher beings were imagined by humans.

The living quality sucked. You were born, lived 30 years, and died. Life was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." People had to create an afterlife in order to disillusion themselves into thinking that things would get better.

That is why religion is dying. People no longer have a use for it, and it is crumbling. In fact, the crumbling started October 31, 1517.

The quality of people's lives today are just too good. Why waste time praying to some sky daddy when you can enjoy your life now?

Instead of questioning where God came from we should be questioning why he exists

Yet another worthwhile thread over-run by open minded people.

Yeah... the cosmological argument never made much sense to me.

Everything is a dependent being but God. Why?

Because while people are programmed to think there is something above all people, they are conditioned to accept hierarchy. Having accepted a supreme hierarchy they are subject to accepting lesser hierarchies.

The church and the state are symbiotic. Man will only be free when the last king is strangled on the entrails of the last priest.

There never was a 'before', there will never be an 'after'. God has always been.

There never was a 'before', there will never be an 'after'. God has always been.

Oh! It all makes sense now! :rolleyes:

God has always been. He is the Uncaused Cause... Shit! I can't continue to type this nonsense.

Funnily enough, most theists fail to realise the argument "The universe has always existed" is completely identical to that of the "Uncaused cause", except replacing the deity with everything.

The worst part is when you try and explain and they just look at you funny.

There never was a 'before', there will never be an 'after'. God has always been.

I always thought Descartes was a far better read.

Because while people are programmed to think there is something above all people, they are conditioned to accept hierarchy. Having accepted a supreme hierarchy they are subject to accepting lesser hierarchies.

The church and the state are symbiotic. Man will only be free when the last king is strangled on the entrails of the last priest.

Hahah, oh man, quoted for truth. That last part is great.

The worst part is when you try and explain and they just look at you funny.

Well yes, because you cannot explain what you don't understand.

Our imagination. He was initially used to justify what we couldn't understand. Plus, when most of the World was stricken with poverty, hunger, and disease, praying and faith in god(s) actually gave people a reason to live. It was nice for people to think that even though they suffered at the hands of the rich and tyranical, that when they died they would go to heaven and their oppressors would rot in hell. I guess it made them feel better.

Well yes, because you cannot explain what you don't understand.

I understand what you mean. I understand your ENTIRE philosophy.

Obbe's philosophy:

Everything is an illusion. The only thing that you can know is I AM.

What's so difficult to understand? ^---THIS is your philosohpy is it not? The pinnacle of your belief?

DONE. Understood and dismissed as a complete, utter waste of time and energy. I believe you understand it as well b/c you declined a debate set up JUST FOR YOU in this very forum to further explain your load of shit you refer to as a belief structure. Does this make you a coward, or simply point at your OWN lack of faith in the very faith you "discovered" in your angst ridden adolesance?

THIS is your philosohpy is it not? The pinnacle of your belief?

A philosophy is a way of living, and since that says nothing about how to interact with experiences, is not my complete philosophy. But that does cover my belief on the extent of knowledge of truth.

Does this make you a coward, or simply point at your OWN lack of faith in the very faith you "discovered" in your angst ridden adolesance?

Neither, it means I can't understand Hare's arguments.

I don't understand why you enjoy debating my concept of God so much, what does it do that is ruining your expereince of life? What connection does it have with your pet-peeve, Christianity? What is your problem with my believing in my concept?

And why are you bringing this up? I thought you wanted to prevent my concept derailing threads, not cause it.

Neither, it means I can't understand Hare's arguments.

This is b/c you are intellectually inferior. How is it someone as base as you has stumbled upon the truth of everything?

I don't understand why you enjoy debating my concept of God so much, what does it do that is ruining your expereince of life? What connection does it have with your pet-peeve, Christianity? What is your problem with my believing in my concept?

And why are you bringing this up? I thought you wanted to prevent my concept derailing threads, not cause it.

I don't enjoy debating your concept of God...there is no debate to it. I love to shove your own bullshit back into your mouth and watch you choke on it. I think, as happened before, you will tire of eating your own shit and leave here in tears for a month or so, then I don't have to clean your diaper leavings off of my threads.

Man. Only a God invented by man requires a man to be made known unto man. Also, OP, that is a loaded question.

This is b/c you are intellectually inferior. How is it someone as base as you has stumbled upon the truth of everything?

I really wonder if you understood Hare's argument, you've never commented on it.

I don't enjoy debating your concept of God...there is no debate to it. I love to shove your own bullshit back into your mouth and watch you choke on it.

Is that the reason you're derailing this thread?

The reasoning behind that is quite unreasonble. What about other religeons and thier gods?

Magicks. thats all that is nessessary to know.

I could not say it better myself.

Have a cookie.

acolyte cookies are nasty.

Man. Only a God invented by man requires a man to be made known unto man. Also, OP, that is a loaded question.

Just in cased it was over looked.

God has always existed.

It's quite simple really, either something (eg. God) has always existed or at some point something can from nothing. Since something coming from nothing is absurd, something has to have existed forever.

Just in cased it was over looked.

Sweetie, if someone cared you wouldn't have to repeat yourself

He came from my weavos.

I'm not a theist, but I think there's an argument to be made from the following:

Your question says "come from," but there's no where for God to have come from. God exists outside the realm of locations, beginnings, endings, and time. Our monkey brains can't comprehend the incomprehensible so we say he's sitting in the clouds on a throne. No one (at least around here) truly believes that, they think of it as an accurate representation. There's great trouble in this, because you can stamp God as anything. A mean old bastard, a fertile and healthy woman, an infinite energy, etc. They're just human labels to describe something that isn't even close to being human.

God has always existed.

It's quite simple really, either something (eg. God) has always existed or at some point something can from nothing. Since something coming from nothing is absurd, something has to have existed forever.

And yet, you say everything needs a designer....BOLLOCKS

Three things in the universe has No beginning and NO end.

1) GOD

2) living creatures

3) Non-living things.


This is what i can give to your question right now.

God has always existed.

It's quite simple really, either something (eg. God) has always existed or at some point something can from nothing. Since something coming from nothing is absurd, something has to have existed forever.

It is really that simple. You believe the thing that has always existed is God, I believe it to be the universe (b/c we have evidence for the existence of the universe).

You believe it to be God b/c you need an emotional crutch to deal with things in life, b/c your weak minded.

If it was God's will for us to know, than it would be. :cool:

*vomits*

It is really that simple. You believe the thing that has always existed is God, I believe it to be the universe (b/c we have evidence for the existence of the universe).

You believe it to be God b/c you need an emotional crutch to deal with things in life, b/c your weak minded.

Why can't the universe and God have existed always together?

Seems to me one kinda implies the other one.

Yeh, yeh, it's the whole "primary cause"/"first cause" thing, which Aristotle went into....

It's all so logical and simple-dimple in some ways, but in others.... it's just totally illogical and a huge fallacy in any sort of "logical" argument about God.

The whole shebang is just one cycle of pointless, in my opinion. These kinda arguments depress me, and confuse me.... kinda, as they can go on forever. I'm not sure which is more irritating, the "philosopher" asking smarty-pants questions about "teh rok he cant lift" or the theologian who breaks it all down with his big works and constructs a whole load more bullllllshit..... heh. At the same time, both parties are coming up with pretty good thinkin' and it makes philosophy as a discipline actually relevant, and a whole load more interesting...

I guess personally I don't believe God came from anywhere. Assuming that God "exists" outside the universe, in some form, possibly beyond time and space... (but able to interact within it :rolleyes: ) then yeh, you can say He's always been kickin' it back there. Firstly, "coming into existence" implies a change in the nature of God, which kinda knocks the classical-theistic view of an "unchanging" entity, beyond time and space. People such as Descartes went off on one over "proving" God's existence, using the example of the triangle; it's illogical to consider God without His "existence" as some part of his character, which Kant pretty much owned with "existence is not a predicate/characteristic". But still, God exists as a timeless entity according to Descartes' argument, similarly to the fact that a triangle only "exists" when it has three sides. God must exist in order to be God....... at the same time, His existence is bound into that of reality, where things begin and cease.

I guess I believe God is a paradox beyond logic, which makes philosophy kinda weird for me, as it's like trying to find a gap in a circle by racing 'round it..... heh. "God" as a concept I view to be part of the universe, as well as beyond it.... you can say "well, what is there outside the universe" but if God is central to the existence of the universe anyway, there doesn't necessarily have to be a space, or time in which His existence could begin, or "reside".

I guess I do really only believe that God "comes from" the human mind (thus, through the universe in some form, effectively), or from contemplation of how reality "seems". At the same time, I do kinda believe in God, through the fact that.... He doesn't "exist". With the death of contemplation comes the death of God.... and yet He's still around, "reality" (before/after the universe, whatever) carries on... with the end to the universe comes the end of God, until well... it's possible for consideration, once again... I'm sure you'll hate my "logic".... :p

Why can't the universe and God have existed always together?

Seems to me one kinda implies the other one.

Why does one imply the other?

There COULD be a God and it COULD exist alongside an eternal universe as you are suggesting. We have evidence for the existence of the universe and none for God, whatsoever.

SO.....if something must be eternal, why not the very thing we have evidence for (The Universe)? You can throw God in alongside as an afterthought if you wish, I could also throw in the invisible flying spaghetti monster, Peter Pan, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Lorax, and the ascended thetan of L. Ron Hubbard, but it doesn't make it so.

Why can't the universe, God, the invisible flying spaghetti monster, Peter Pan, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Lorax, and the ascended thetan of L. Ron Hubbard have always existed together as well?

Seems to me your logic would apply to anyone and everyone's imaginary friends.

Unless 'God' isn't an entity separate from 'The Universe', but is 'The Universe', or more accurately 'reality/allness'.

"So then why don't you just use the term 'reality', or 'allness'? By using God in that way, aren't you simply defining it into existence? Doesn't that reduce god to nothing more then a hollow word?"

I don't only use those terms because the words 'reality' or 'allness' imply separation of all that they include. God is the oneness of the allness, the observer of experience and the 'soul' of all.

'Evidence' is meaningless unless you already assume other things to be true, for no reason other then they appear to be true. Just like a Christian believes Jesus existed because theres 'evidence' of it in the bible and they already assume the bible to be true, you believe I exist only because you assume the reality you experience is true, and that this text which is a part of that reality as being evidence of my existence.

We will never be able to know everything about reality, about it all. And so we will never be able to know any evidence of the allness, or in other words, of God in an exterior sense, as something to be experienced. We can only know God as the apparently singular 'oneness' of our existence.

"So then why don't you just use the term 'reality', or 'allness'? By using God in that way, aren't you simply defining it into existence? Doesn't that reduce god to nothing more then a hollow word?"


If you believe god = reality and you have PROOF of only one of those things (reality) then why not simplify a bit and JUST say the one proven to exist (reality)?

Why do you feel the need to attribute a God or God-like qualities to reality?

If you believe god = reality and you have PROOF of only one of those things (reality) then why not simplify a bit and JUST say the one proven to exist (reality)?

We will never be able to know everything about reality, about it all. And so we will never be able to know any evidence of the allness, or in other words, of God in an exterior sense, as something to be experienced. We can only know God as the apparently singular 'oneness' of our existence.

The thing is, you do not have proof of reality. You have the experience of a part of it. If you think having an experience is proof enough of the reality of said experience, then thats great, but for no reason should you believe that what you have experienced represents the accumulation of reality. You don't have 'proof' of the allness, of the infinity of possibilities; you have the experience of a very limited portion of it.

God, in an external sense, as something which you experience, is the allness. What you have experienced, your 'proof', is only a very small portion of that. And its not even proof, because it must be assumed to be true.

Why do you feel the need to attribute a God or God-like qualities to reality?

... because the words 'reality' or 'allness' imply separation of all that they include. God is the oneness of the allness, the observer of experience and the 'soul' of all.

And that the 'oneness' of the individual is all an individual can be sure of. In an exterior sense, as the 'allness' which is possible to be experienced, all things have share this 'oneness'. The term 'reality' does not recognize this, it implies the separation of all.

Here we go.

Well sure, you have to be sane enough to recognize reality before you can see the proof for reality. Even in your bat shit crazy philosophy you would have to define reality by the only thing a person can know, right?

Still more proof than for the tooth fairy being a real creature, I'm sorry I meant a divine intelligence of any fucking sort the imagination can create.

Even if you only choose to define reality by "I AM" you have more proof their than you do for God.

So I will ask you agian....why do you feel the need to include a god of any sort in reality?

Here we go.

No, I don't want THE FORCE to come down on me and crush my attempts at suggesting God could be anything other then an nonexistent emotional being said to be separate and above from all else, and must be as false as the intentions of organized religions ... :rolleyes:

Well sure, you have to be sane enough to recognize reality before you can see the proof for reality.

There you go, using terms like 'sane' and 'reality' in reference to what you are expereincing, when you have no way of knowing.

Still more proof than for the tooth fairy being a real creature, I'm sorry I meant a divine intelligence of any fucking sort the imagination can create.

More proof? No, there is not. You cannot have any more 'proof' that the world you expereince is an accurate perception of reality, then a Christian within that reality can have that shit from the bible is true. There is no reason for it to be 'more' true, whatever the fuck that would mean.

So I will ask you agian....why do you feel the need to include a god of any sort in reality?

I assume you will still not understand.

I include the oneness of allness for the same reasons I do not believe reality ends with what I have experienced. For the same reason I do not believe there to be any real difference between 'illusion' and 'reality', except when conflicting parts of reality are compared.

If exterior reality is allness, an infinity of possible arrangements of positions to be experienced by the 'oneness' which I represent, then it is logical to assume all those positions have their own unique perspective, or 'oneness', of the rest of allness (which I would appear a part of). This oneness of all is God.

And yes, I know you think differently, and have no reason to believe this, and want to go back to joyfully displaying your lack of belief in any possible conception of God in the perspective of reality which you also have no reason to believe in, but never question. So go ahead, get right back into it, and tell me why God must be something else. I'm not going to tell you how you know nothing anymore.

guyz SHUTup or ure all goin to hELL!!!1

guyz SHUTup or ure all goin to hELL!!!1

NO U!11!

Why does one imply the other?

There COULD be a God and it COULD exist alongside an eternal universe as you are suggesting. We have evidence for the existence of the universe and none for God, whatsoever.

SO.....if something must be eternal, why not the very thing we have evidence for (The Universe)? You can throw God in alongside as an afterthought if you wish, I could also throw in the invisible flying spaghetti monster, Peter Pan, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Lorax, and the ascended thetan of L. Ron Hubbard, but it doesn't make it so.

Why can't the universe, God, the invisible flying spaghetti monster, Peter Pan, the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the Lorax, and the ascended thetan of L. Ron Hubbard have always existed together as well?

Seems to me your logic would apply to anyone and everyone's imaginary friends.

I've no problem with that, I'm just saying that I can't see a reason that were there to be a God both God and the Universe could not eternally coexist.

The reason I say one implies the other is becauseif there is an infinite universe there must be an infinite God (if there is one) or else it is not God. And while I could see that the universe might not be infinite if there were a God, I can't say that I think it likely, and find it more likely that the Universe is just as eternal as God.

People created their gods and deities to give their lives and worlds greater meanings, and to explain the unexplainable (lightning, earthquakes, comets, etc, etc).

Since invented gods aren't real (ALL of them), im thinking of the force that created the universe. Im not a religious person, but something HAS to be out there. What controls everything, or at least started it? Where did the matter that compressed to form the singularity that the universe sprang from? There's gotta be something.
__________________________________________________ __________________________
There will always be things that humans or any race of creatures for that matter will ever understand. maybe we all have a need to believe that there's something bigger?

seen this thread and thought id post.
a christian would argue that god is transcendant (exists independantly outside time and the universe), and that hes eternal (always has been, always wil be). basicly, their arguement is "he is just there". this arguement is only effective on theists and idiots, however, as the rest of humanity will not settle for "it just does".

Where did the universe come from? How did an almost infinite universe explode from nothingness?

all i can say is paley's watch

So where did God come from in the beginning? How was He created? Did something else create Him or did He create himself?

Answer that one, Christians. :p

From a crazy drunken night between even more superior gods. We essentially live in a kid's snow globe.

Infinity has no beginning and no end. It comes from nothing and proceeds nowhere. It simply is.

BTW: God's highest name in the TNK translates to: I Exist By Necessity

Where did the universe come from? How did an almost infinite universe explode from nothingness?

If the vacuum is part of the universe, then isn't the infinite vacuum beyond the outermost matter still part of the universe? Wouldn't that make the universe absolutely infinite?

Infinity has no beginning and no end. It comes from nothing and proceeds nowhere. It simply is.

BTW: God's highest name in the TNK translates to: I Exist By Necessity

I agree.

In Gnosticism there is The Secret Book of John which talks about God and how God came to be... Of course it goes beyond full comprehension b/c where discussing the nature of God. But in the Beginning for God; God was only Depth and Silence just about the only things that exist when nothing exist. Than from there God grew unto itself, calling forth new aspects of self: Life, Wisdom, Peace, Love, Joy... etc

God of the Old Testament came into being because, God kind of went Mad and Insane, after losing wisdom to the outskirts of the Fullness. The creature called the Demiurge was made who is largely the creator of the Physical world and demands to be worshiped and obeyed.

The gnostic creation myth I am still trying to understand but its makes sense in my mind when I apply it to the world around me nonetheless.

Sounds like the gnostic God and Demiurge are equivalent to Yin and Yang; the two halves of the whole; present in each other, but distinct as well.

Would that be a misunderstanding?

Oh, I wanted to ask you something but omitted it:
Do you find it peculiar, that prior to Plato's crafting of the word Demiurge, the two base words translate to "the work of man" and it is the origin of evil?

I think it's kind of funny...it's a perpetual thread in religions and spirituality that the ego (or self, if you will), which carries desire, is the source of sin (or suffering, if you prefer).

Yin and Yang image the whole picture from my understanding that could be God. Theres a text though in the Gnostic Nag Hammadi Library called The Book of Thomas and The Christos says "The intelligent person is perfect in all wisdom, but the fool good and evil are the same." From what I gather they are both necessary yet they are different. The goal if you to a gnostic is wholeness and returning to the Pleroma or fullness. Wholeness is achieved when you reconcile the left and right; black and white; good and evil... Basically the Reconciliation of Polarities... Thats a part of Returning to the fullness.

To a Gnostic the Kingdom of Heaven is not some distant out there but a state of mind, see heaven right in front of you despite the world of forms putting this illusion reality over you to trick you and make you feel separate from God.

Demiurge is supposed to mean half maker... He is equivalent in largely the OT God. Who is Ignorant as to where is powers come from but when he finds out acts jealous, Judgmental to anyone who breaks his laws and damning as well. He isn't friendly in the gnostic view Jehovah is Demiurge.

Gnosticism is based on Neo-Platonist thought as well as a collection of Hellenize Jews whom which wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls, they are the Essenes I belief. It is believed that is Jesus really exist that is most likely the type of Jew he was an Essene. Essene also produced the Kabbalah, which is very similar to Gnosticism.

Actually, The Self is Psychological goal we are all supposed to reach according to CG Jung who was a depth psychologist who was profoundly interested in Gnosticism and its relationship to The Human Mind. The term Archetypes was founded through is interest in Gnosticism. Archetypes are basically the characters in our mind that have been described by Gnostic Literature...

A good way to remember is Archons which are the powers and archetypes which are various almost personality of there own aspects the mind... So I translated Archetypes as The Powers of The Mind. These powers however, aren't for your benefit, yet they make you feel like they are.

When you achieve wholeness The Ego Self is reconciled and Merged with the Higher Spiritual self which forms the new mind called The Self... According to this view Gnosis is present always we just need to develop "the eyes to see and ears to hear." The Self is an independent and free being who is not a the whims of the powers that be but does things from The Heart

If the vacuum is part of the universe, then isn't the infinite vacuum beyond the outermost matter still part of the universe? Wouldn't that make the universe absolutely infinite?

BUT the universe is expanding so how can you expand infinity ?
would it be something simple like infinity to the power of 2, damn i hate maths

BUT the universe is expanding so how can you expand infinity ?
would it be something simple like infinity to the power of 2, damn i hate maths

The material portion of the universe is expanding. The vacuum (that would be the empty space), is infinite in size. It has no beginning, no end.

What is beyond the stars furthest from the center of the universe? An infinite expanse of the vacuum, which these stars continue to move further into.

The material portion of the universe is expanding. The vacuum (that would be the empty space), is infinite in size. It has no beginning, no end.

What is beyond the stars furthest from the center of the universe? An infinite expanse of the vacuum, which these stars continue to move further into.

oh...

The universe is so full..... of emptiness ;)

Well really the earth is flat, and is supported on the back of a tortoise. then from there, there's turtles all the way down.

When I apply it to my surroundings it makes perfect sense to me.

God came from the over active imaginations of primitive peoples who slowly changed an oral tradition involving the sun, stars, moon and Earth, to suit their needs for social order and control.

God came from ignorance and gullibility. God sprung from the minds of foul men, who wanted control over their fellows. God is an insult to intelligence. God is an annoying reminder of our simplistic past and NOTHING more.

God came from lies.

God is a lie.

So I will ask you agian....why do you feel the need to include a god of any sort in reality?

To fail to do so.... on some level, is unscientific up to the hilt...

God is a very real manifestation in this world, seeing as billions believe in "him". To discredit experiences and beliefs as juvenile nonsense and delusions is failing to explore a dimension of what it is to be human; an aspect of reality which goes beyond the "can I dick it/pull pieces off it/wham it under my microscope" empiricalism.

Denial, or disbelief is hardly empirical in nature. It still exists in the minds of may.... bridging this into the world of evaluation and contemplation is therefore interesting....

...If you wana see what makes humans tic-tock. ;)

I'm not a theist, but I think there's an argument to be made from the following:

Your question says "come from," but there's no where for God to have come from. God exists outside the realm of locations, beginnings, endings, and time. Our monkey brains can't comprehend the incomprehensible so we say he's sitting in the clouds on a throne. No one (at least around here) truly believes that, they think of it as an accurate representation. There's great trouble in this, because you can stamp God as anything. A mean old bastard, a fertile and healthy woman, an infinite energy, etc. They're just human labels to describe something that isn't even close to being human.
fuck ya man you hit on a very important aspect of the matter.
our monkey brains can only deal with(time). time does not really exist .We perceive time because thats the only way we can deal with life as we know it . so we make up shit to fill in the gaps of our perception so then we have god,heaven,hell and all the other stuff to fill in the blanks.
I hope someday we can evolve to higher level and we can see more clearly.

Which is where God comes from. God seems to be the Personification of the Highest Consciousness. We will arrive to new consciousness and our awareness of the subtleties of the world will change as well. We are becoming more aware and as time goes on (if we don't kill each other to extinction) our consciousness and awareness will increase exponentially.

The truth is we are all one conscious experiencing itself subjectively... *Puts down bong*