GENIUS FORUMS

And here's why:

In an infinite system, (by definiton of said system) all things are infinite.

There is one way, for a finite system to exist in an infinite system.
Loss of memory of being infinite.

It's not necessarily true that there can be no finite system within an infinite system. For instance, I can define myself as a "finite system" within the "infinite system" i.e. The Totality. It is important to note though, that I am not a closed finite system, but a finite system none the less. This is why the christian concept of god is so obviously false. The christian god is at best a technologically advanced alien life form. He is bound by Nature through causality just as we are, and there is absolutely no logical reason to worship him, and absolutely no logical basis to give him the title of God. In fact, there isn't even any reasonable scientific evidence to suggest that there ever was such a being. All one has is one mostly primitive book telling one to blindly believe in some pagan god. The Absolute Truth of the matter is that God can be nothing less than the Totality of all there is, was, and ever will be. It is the creator of all things finite, it is infinite in magnitude, and can not be thought of as a conscious being of any kind. In fact God is inherently formless meaning no form can rightly be attached to it. Only under these terms can God truly be All Powerful, Omnipotent, The Creator, Beyond Space and Time, and Ultimately deserving of the title God.

Nick Treklis wrote:God truly be All Powerful, Omnipotent, The Creator

How can there be creation in an infinite system?

When I say God is the creator I don't mean that we are whipped up out of nothing. I simply mean we are constanctly being reshaped and recreated over and over in infinitely small increments through causality.

Yes, exactly, all we can know about ‘god’ is how causality progresses through time in our world of three dimensions. Causality seems to create hierarchies of life, with increasing complexity. That is the nature of god. It still seems quite mysterious that matter seems to naturally arrange itself into complex forms of life over time. Even when explained through the mechanism of natural selection, it is odd that it should happen at all. I haven’t been able to come with an satisfactory explanation as to why matter should naturally arrange itself from elements to molecules to organelles to single-cells to multi-cells to organisms and so on…

I find it difficult to ‘reason’ away all the mystery.

Ryan Rudolph wrote:I haven’t been able to come with an satisfactory explanation as to why matter should naturally arrange itself from elements to molecules to organelles to single-cells to multi-cells to organisms and so on…

I find it difficult to ‘reason’ away all the mystery.

DNA has to come before organelles and cells and such, and we have no clue about it, consensus-scientifically speaking. We can only guess at the intricate function of it, the ridiculously graceful operation of a molecular system with what seems to be a mind of its own.

Using a conceived God/All/Reality as the strategic starting point towards a perfect understanding has always confused me, and I'm not exactly sure what use it has. It seems to me such a thing can either be revealed or not, without any inbetween at all, and is therefore not a useful "object" for progress in the strict sense. From this side of the shore there can be nothing known about it, including whether or not it exists.

Understanding the nature of the totality doesn't have to be a starting point, nor do you necessarily have to find it useful. I find it useful because it helps dismantle the delusion of finite phenomena existing inherently/independently/absolutely. Also, if you are second guessing whether the Totality exists you are also second guessing whether you exist, or anything else you currently experiencing exists which is essentially a form of insanity. There is no logical reason to doubt the existence of the Totality because this would imply you are entertaining the notion of non-existence where "nothing exists" which is another completely illogical idea. How can nothing exist? If it's existing it is definitely something and not nothing. Even saying the Totality exists isn't truly accurate because the Totality is existence, and by definition the Totality is all there ever was, is, and will be, so it is impossible for it to not exist because that would imply there is some non-existent realm(which technically wouldn't qualify as a realm or anything else since it doesn't exist) that is not part of the Totality, but as I've already stated the Totality includes all realms whether we perceive them or not.

So, as you can see, when you begin to doubt whether the Totality exists or not it ends up leading to many insane and illogical conclusions about it's nature.

I define the totality as reality, or "existence" as you said too. I'm not doubting my existence, not doubting reality, but whether or not there is an Ultimate Reality I've yet to perceive.

Regardless, progressing toward clearer thinking is simply the right thing to do.

skipair wrote:I define the totality as reality, or "existence" as you said too. I'm not doubting my existence, not doubting reality, but whether or not there is an Ultimate Reality I've yet to perceive.

Regardless, progressing toward clearer thinking is simply the right thing to do.

You will never perceive Ultimate Reality. That is the whole point. There is just what you said. Learning. If you realize that you will keep doing that, you immediately realize that you cannot directly "perceive" Ultimate Reality, for then you would cease to progress. You cannot see the face of God and live.

skipair wrote:I define the totality as reality, or "existence" as you said too. I'm not doubting my existence, not doubting reality, but whether or not there is an Ultimate Reality I've yet to perceive.

The way I have defined the Totality means that it is Ultimate Reality if I'm understanding you correctly. If not, then what exactly do you mean by Ultimate Reality? Also, what exactly do you mean by perceiving it? If you simply mean defining it and labeling it as such then we have already done that, but if you mean forming a mental image of it then that is a completely futile task. It's kind of like trying to hold on to the present. As soon as you try to hold on to the present and say "I have it!" time has already moved on and you are actually holding on to the past. So as soon as you form a mental image of Ultimate Reality you imediately fall into error. In order for something to have form it must be finite, which Ultimate Reality is not.

There is no creator, because nothing was created. Everything was -caused- to happen to be exactly that which is, and not what it is not. Anything we label as 'creation' is a cause we value more important than the infinite other causes, at least so I have perceived. Some see women as creators because they they 'deliver' the baby. Much like the postman who delivers a package. But does the postman create packages?

I do have a question though: What is this outside?

brokenhead wrote: You cannot see the face of God and live.

Well I'd add we cannot see that face, cause we are that face.

Sorta like trying to look through the eye...at the eye.

Rem wrote:
I do have a question though: What is this outside?

Right, good catch.

I phrased it that way on purpose. In the mental realm, how can one use phrases like "inside" and "outside"?

Nick Treklis wrote:

skipair wrote:I define the totality as reality, or "existence" as you said too. I'm not doubting my existence, not doubting reality, but whether or not there is an Ultimate Reality I've yet to perceive.

The way I have defined the Totality means that it is Ultimate Reality if I'm understanding you correctly. If not, then what exactly do you mean by Ultimate Reality?

I imagine it's a major perspective shift. Without already experiencing (perceiving) this perspective shift, no matter what we define or picture AS IF from this perspective will be wrong, because it doesn't have the understanding to back it. So I don't see how the attainment itself, which we've labelled Ultimate Reality, Totality, God, Tao, Infinite, etc., can be used as a tool to get the attainment.

When I see you talk about the "Totality", iirc, it is usually to say essentially that our experience in reality is no one particular thing - no sound, no picture, no feeling, etc. And yet, we can only have one experience at a time...

Can you give me examples of how you use it as a tool to dismantle the sheer "objectivity" of things?

skipair wrote:I imagine it's a major perspective shift. Without already experiencing (perceiving) this perspective shift, no matter what we define or picture AS IF from this perspective will be wrong, because it doesn't have the understanding to back it. So I don't see how the attainment itself, which we've labelled Ultimate Reality, Totality, God, Tao, Infinite, etc., can be used as a tool to get the attainment.

I think you might be confusing the terms Ultimate Reality and Enlightenment. Understanding ultimate reality may lead to enlightenment, but they are not interchangeable terms. Enlightenment is a state of mind free of delusion, ultimate reality is beyond states.

skipair wrote:When I see you talk about the "Totality", iirc, it is usually to say essentially that our experience in reality is no one particular thing - no sound, no picture, no feeling, etc. And yet, we can only have one experience at a time...

Understanding the Totality isn't attained by experiencing it through our senses. It is done in a purely logical manner. Intellectually understanding it is only half the battle, the other half is letting it sink in through deep thought and meditation to gain a more intuitive understanding of it as well. For instance one may know that The Infinite is beyond space and time according to what logic dictates to them, but intuitively they still fell like there is an ultimate beginning and end to it because of the way their environment has conditioned them up until this point in their life. This is why sometimes its reasonable to say that faith in logic is needed for a while until you come full circle in your quest for enlightenment.

skipair wrote:Can you give me examples of how you use it as a tool to dismantle the sheer "objectivity" of things?

Logically, existence is necessarily beginningless and endless because nothing has never existed and never will exist because it's blatant contradiction of terminology because if nothing were to exist it would definitely be something and not nothing. Realizing the immensity of this conclusion we see that any amount of time and space no matter how unimaginably big is infinitely small in comparison to Ultimate Existence. Makes even the largest of galaxies that span light years across pale in comparison, not to mention women, money, power, and any other desire you can think of as well.

I not know how you guys can be so sure about misterious concept like GOD. I think you only believe what others told you is true, is that possible? You think you can contain God with your ideas and perspective? haha Many believe God is beyond all this talk and ideas about him or it. You say God you can measure with logic ruler but WHAT IF God is beyond this?
What if God makes only illogical loving open hearted people understand him/it? That is what love is all about,no. All religions say God is all about love, not about thinking!

Do you really think if there was for real a God that this God would be unable to make you dumber than he is? haha or make you BELIEVE your logic is perfect when only 98% perfect?
Is this imposssible for a God to do? haha wake up!

mansman wrote:What if God makes only illogical loving open hearted people understand him/it? That is what love is all about,no. All religions say God is all about love, not about thinking!

If that's what god is about, then fuck him.

DHodges wrote:

mansman wrote:What if God makes only illogical loving open hearted people understand him/it? That is what love is all about,no. All religions say God is all about love, not about thinking!

If that's what god is about, then fuck him.

Lol...Thats funny, DHodges.

Mansman. Looks like your god needs to go to a shrink, no? He's got some major issues there he needs to work on.