Jump to content


Photo

The end of the world


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#1 Drewry

Drewry

    title available

  • Project Team
  • 258 posts
  • Location:Alabama, USA

Posted 03 December 2005 - 12:58 AM

Whether you believe as a Christian and that the world will end as told in revelations, or that the world will be bombarded with asteroids from above; either way we all have some sort of realization that sooner or later this world - or rather humanity - will end. In this thread I will discuss several theories and my own personal opinion on how the world will end.

To begin we start off in Northern Ireland with St. Malachy. He prophesized 112 popes that would reign after, him each of which containing a motto in Latin describing their papacy. All of which bear chilling accuracy. To name of few "Of the eclipse of the sun," was the motto for Pope John Paul II. John Paul II was born on a solar eclipse and was buried on a solar eclipse. "The glory of the olive" the motto for our current pope. Pope Benedict XVI was seen holding an olive branch at the ceremony of his papacy. The Benedictine order is symbolized by olives. Furthermore, St. Benedict prophesized that the pope before the end of the world will be of his order. The current pope is the 111th prophecy; the 112th is to be known as Petrus Romanus:

During the final persecution, the seat of the Holy Roman Church will be occupied by Peter the Roman, who will feed the sheep in many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed, and the terrible Judge will judge his people. The End.


If you are not convinced by some crazy Christian prophecies perhaps you should know that the Mayan Calendar’s last date is December 2012. Even more accurate it is said to be between the dates of 21-23.

Edgar Cayce said that between the years of 1958 - 1998 there would be much global change. Indeed there has been, but most importantly is the reason for this. Nostradamus said that the year 1999 would begin the 'third millennium' on earth, and would be the most radical of change. The theory is that the world's poles are going to switch soon (2012), but when it does this, much havoc will come. Natural disasters will get worse: floods, earth quakes, hurricanes, etc. I believe these natural disasters to be the least of our problems though. What sort of effect will a polar switch have on our technology? Our magnetic field is the only thing that is keeping our technology going from a solar flare. If something were to happen to it there is no telling what could happen. Without our technology we would be back in the Stone Age, and the truth is none of us are ready to go back.

However, despite all of these prophets pointing to the same future, Nostradamus and the other Nostradamus (Edgar Cayce) have two possible ends of the world scenarios that I have concluded to. The first, the world will end in 2012 by the means mentioned, humanity fails and we all die - Christ comes again etc. Or second, the world ends in 3739, we pull through the disaster and we are able to survive for a much longer time.

I am going to expand on all of these thoughts and throw in what I personally believe. I believe that the bible is a huge clue to the end of humanity. When Christ first came, it set the beginning mark; the clock started ticking to the end of humanity. It was at a time when humanity was at its worst ever (morally). I believe the world will end when humanity is once again at its worst ever (morally) in history or equal to the romans. The midpoint will be when humanity was at its best. This time I believe to be now for when humanity is at its worst once again. Our current midpoint is the year 1006 - a time when humans were very moral and pious, the most so ever in history. A time when people were generally good. In order to change the future, we will need to be once again more moral than at the time of the middle ages, which would put the end of the world at a later time (perhaps double of the year it happens).

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. (2 Timothy 3:1-4).


All of this is pure speculation and mostly just to think. There is no such thing as thinking too much. "I think therefore I am"; to think is what makes us human, to not is to be a robot and a drone to the system. Whether you believe this, or you want to debunk it with several technicalities, post your opinions.

Edited by Drewry, 12 February 2006 - 08:22 PM.

Drewry H. Morris V - Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici
www.druvianism.org

#2 Ragged

Ragged
  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:phlolida
  • Projects:Meh

Posted 04 December 2005 - 10:08 PM

I think we are just as likely, or even more likely, to blow each other up.

Is there any physical eveidence that polarity is going to change or is it just a speculation?


And why is everyone always saying that our society is at it's lowest morality wise? Some say that our music is "satanic", just because it uses electic guitars and electronic pianos instead of violins and regular pianos. That's just absurde. We are more sexually open than than we were 50, 100, 1000 years ago, yes. But what is so wrong with that? It's natural for us to be attracted to opposite sex. Why should we hide our feeling and desires? I don't advocate public fornication or anything like that, cuz that would violate other people's right to be rid of it. I think there nothing wrong with porography, though. Yes, our goverments are corrupt, desire and lust for money and power have great influence on our society today, but that's not any different from any other period in history. Don't tell me that people in 1006 didn't step over each other to get the best for themselfs. Medieval times have been marked with excessive violence and brutality, injustice, prejudice, mistreatment of life, economic slavery, etc., more so than most other times in human history. There are many other points that deserve adressing, but I think that's good for now.
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." ~ Voltaire

#3 Shuya-Lee

Shuya-Lee
  • Members
  • 202 posts
  • Location:Shitcaster
  • Projects:Documentry on Emo

Posted 05 December 2005 - 12:51 AM

hmm, i think the prophercies are bit silly really, nostradamis has got some pretty good guesses in the past but has anyone ever seen Paycheck??

a human will do what it is told, if told that its right

the machine that is created in paycheck shows war. so people create war.

thats why i think nostradamis was right a lot of the time. i personally belive the bible to be a big bunch of BS. the end of the world in my theory will be created by humans. well its already been created its just waiting to start. everyone knows that there are nuclear silos situated all over the globe. once the first goes up say good bye to life as we know it.the H-bomb was tiny compared to the ones we have today. think of the destruction that can be created.

the way to hold back the end of the world is to destroy and never again create these huge death devices. we dont need them. ever.

war is raised upon stupid issues. religion is the main factor.

to correct Ragged. Medevil times were actually quite sound (for a place infested with disease). with the death and violence that you are thinking of was based in the Dark Ages. that was the cruel times.

#4 Hostile

Hostile

    Benefitting Humanity Simply by Showing Up!

  • Veterans
  • 9,551 posts
  • Location:Washington DC
  •  T3A Founder
  • Division:Revora
  • Job:Global Administrator
  • Donated
  • Association

Posted 05 December 2005 - 12:59 AM

And he laid hold of the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years.

And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little while...
Revelations 20:2-3


This may symbolise the era where one comes to a close and another starts. While I do understand Drewry's post and am familiar with it's quotes I'd also like to add that this above qoute also projects another telling of the story.

While May 23rd 2012 may end one calender it also starts another. The return of Lucifer and chaos. As written, choose to believe what you will.

#5 Ragged

Ragged
  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:phlolida
  • Projects:Meh

Posted 05 December 2005 - 01:01 AM

to correct Ragged. Medevil times were actually quite sound (for a place infested with disease). with the death and violence that you are thinking of was based in the Dark Ages. that was the cruel times.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I was under impression that Medieval Ages were Dark :p , but this technicality doesn't even metter. What I mean is that there were times when morality was on even a lower point than it is today.

Morality in itself is a very loose term, anyway. What was not considered moral 500 years ago is concidered moral now, and visa versa. Even if we use bible as a basis for what mortality is (or should be), its still hard to draw any parallels.
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." ~ Voltaire

#6 MSpencer

MSpencer

    Think Tank... Legend?

  • Hosted
  • 4,120 posts
  • Location:Montreal, QC
  • Projects:Admin @ Meaaov Gaming, university studies, ugh... research. GNP's Flagship of the Left.
  •  Angry, angry bastard.

Posted 05 December 2005 - 01:42 AM

to correct Ragged. Medevil times were actually quite sound (for a place infested with disease). with the death and violence that you are thinking of was based in the Dark Ages. that was the cruel times.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


I was under impression that Medieval Ages were Dark :p , but this technicality doesn't even metter. What I mean is that there were times when morality was on even a lower point than it is today.

Morality in itself is a very loose term, anyway. What was not considered moral 500 years ago is concidered moral now, and visa versa. Even if we use bible as a basis for what mortality is (or should be), its still hard to draw any parallels.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The majority of the medieval era falls within the characterization of the Dark Age. Dark is traditionally used over medieval to designate the period between the Classical era and the Renaissance from roughly 600 AD until about 1400 AD.

Never use the Bible as a model for morality. It's the same book which has caused millions of deaths since its writing (Crusades, imperialism, etc.).

Edited by MSpencer, 05 December 2005 - 01:43 AM.

Posted Image
My Favorite Website.My UniversityAnd... Mein Kampf?
C. elegans for President

#7 Drewry

Drewry

    title available

  • Project Team
  • 258 posts
  • Location:Alabama, USA

Posted 06 December 2005 - 12:32 AM

Never use the Bible as a model for morality. It's the same book which has caused millions of deaths since its writing (Crusades, imperialism, etc.).


Did war not exist before the bible?
Drewry H. Morris V - Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici
www.druvianism.org

#8 Ragged

Ragged
  • Members
  • 15 posts
  • Location:phlolida
  • Projects:Meh

Posted 07 December 2005 - 02:37 AM

Never use the Bible as a model for morality. It's the same book which has caused millions of deaths since its writing (Crusades, imperialism, etc.).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



It wasn't Bibles fault that people are so irrational and warhungry.

Edited by Ragged, 07 December 2005 - 02:38 AM.

"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it." ~ Voltaire

#9 Hostile

Hostile

    Benefitting Humanity Simply by Showing Up!

  • Veterans
  • 9,551 posts
  • Location:Washington DC
  •  T3A Founder
  • Division:Revora
  • Job:Global Administrator
  • Donated
  • Association

Posted 07 December 2005 - 02:41 AM

The Bible has little to do with it, it's a historical reference like the rest. I just qouted cause I did...

#10 Samael

Samael

    Living life to the fullest

  • Project Team
  • 1,477 posts
  • Location:Seraphim
  • Projects:Living my Life the right way
  •  Baller

Posted 07 December 2005 - 04:49 AM

I thought that the end of the world would happen between good and evil on a battlefield which I can't remeber, but it is told that the humans would use all their power and might twisted in technology that will blow up everything and in the admists of all this hell we open up to release the souls of the dead to reap revenge upon the living(also it is said when there is no more room in hell the dead shall walk the earth). At the end God will look down upon the darken earth and use his hand that is all good and powerful, wipe the world of all of its evil(including the the innocent) and turn the world to a peaceful untouched by evil world(meaning it will be the beinging again of everything).

That is the thorey.

#11 anonymous

anonymous
  • Members
  • 177 posts

Posted 07 December 2005 - 02:54 PM

Here is a view:
Morality is not at its lowest right now, period.
Within any negative positives can form if given the chance.
Take the middle east for example, these countries have existed for thousands of years without western interference. They have there own codes and views separate from most nations. They have placed themselves in a "protective" bubble from any outside influences. You have to ask yourself if that is the best route to take for the future of mankind or is it the best route to take for Arab kind?
The demise of man will not come at the hands of man, if it happens it wil come from nature. (climate change, asteroids, etc..)
The future is happening right in front of our eyes and most people can`t even see it.
What our society is heading towards is a global cohesiveness. There will no longer be this dark ages mentality of us against them. The individual nations that are true will and have the understanding that it is about mankind and not just their individual nations. The nations that fight this "upheaval" in the status quo that has been around since the beginning, are now worried about losing their identities as a people. Take for instance certain countries in the middle east that have basically enslaved their woman, are they morally true or better yet is it even logical?
Without woman we die it is that simple. Should we not logically respect and love them as life givers or should we enslave them and strip them of power because we fear them? Men and nations that strip women of power are fear based societies and furthermore are insignificant hurdles that mankind needs to convert in order to co-exist as one global nation. These are some of the fundamental societal changes that are going on in the middle east. Some middle eastern nations are having trouble with these changes, because to them it seems like western philosophy has condemned their ideologies. Which is not the case at all. In order to learn from ones mistakes one must first acknowledge said mistakes. Take us Americans for instance, we had slaves and treated women unfairly quite recently but you know what, once mistakes or flawed logic are acknowledged positives can thrive. The same theory goes for prejudices they make no sense. We are all here, in order to survive, a global manifestation of truth to oneself must be understood to effect such a change. It is no longer about advancing ones own nation to achieve ultimate power, it has become a push towards advancing mankind as a whole and not sitting idly by while mankind repeats the same mistakes over and over again.
In order for mankind to thrive we must and will unite as a whole because if we don`t we all die. If you are of the notion that this global push has and will not happen, all you need to do is look around you and invert your negative views. Remember these moral codes that we have lived by have been around for thousands of years and if you think you can wipe out thousands of years worth of misguided ideals you are sadly mistaken. To effect change on such a large scale will take time but at the end of the day there is no way the negatives of such a leap will out weigh the positives. It becomes a global nation of mankind.
I find it hard to believe that the true nations of this realm are so misguided as to not see truth that resides in front of their eyes.

Remember this is just a view within many views, this one just happens to be positive.

Drewery: cayce also believed you could change the future.... :grin:

#12 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 07 December 2005 - 04:08 PM

Here is a view:
Morality is not at its lowest right now, period.
Within any negative positives can form if given the chance.
Take the middle east for example, these countries have existed for thousands of years without western interference. They have there own codes and views separate from most nations. They have placed themselves in a "protective" bubble from any outside influences. You have to ask yourself if that is the best route to take for the future of mankind or is it the best route to take for Arab kind?

But what right do we have to influence and impose upon their customs? They can bloe eachother up and kill eachother as much as they like, so long as they do it in their own damn country and not mine...whether it's the best route for mankind, Arabkind or whether it's the worst route for one or both is irrelevant. I say let them get on with it. Sooner or later they have to put on their sanity glasses and see that what they're doing is pointless. They're fighting over dirt that was there long before they were born, and will be there long after they die. They didn't create the dirt. The dirt is not 'theirs' any more than it is mine. It's this idea of possession that causes the stagnation of all society. It has been a slow decline, ever since the first early tribes which fought over territory...greed has always existed. Even in medieval times or the dark ages. All were frought with slaughter, bloodshed, and the obvious peasant-lord system.

However, disturbingly, religious zeal seems to be the principle cause of war throughout history, even if the war wasn't directly caused/influenced by religion. It's this religious opposition which leads me to believe that either mankind has no right to hold one (due to his duality and inability to follow its teachings correctly), or that they should not exist purely on the basis that they cause this fanatical zeal which drives us all crazy and calls eachothers heathens and heretics.

The demise of man will not come at the hands of man, if it happens it wil come from nature. (climate change, asteroids, etc..)

What makes you so sure? I'd say climate change is as much a manmade change lately as natural...however mankind certainly has the capacity (and probably the insanity somewhere) to reduce itself and most of the planet to glass.

The future is happening right in front of our eyes and most people can`t even see it.
What our society is heading towards is a global cohesiveness.


While I am skeptical, I would hope you are right. Humanity's greed and lust for power have driven it to some utterly obscene acts throughout the whole of history, and from every situation, somebody always seems to profit from it.

Your discussion of the oppression of women was not totally relevant, though it was interesting. One day, they'll have a women's movement same as the western nations did. Or you'd think they would. I can walk through town and see women in full burqa. I don't trust them, since they could be hiding bloody anything under those robes...and what's more, they won't show their faces, yet people are required by law to remove their motorbike helmets when in a shop. Yet racial comments aside, I'm not sure it says anywhere in the Koran that they are to be opressed as much as they are. I don't blame the religion for it. The veil is a tradition, not a religious demand...infact, from what I read, women are more or less equal according to the Koran. I find it disturbing that the women would go along with the opression...I guess it's ingrained into their culture. While I might not agree with it, it's my subjective opinion. They havent' died out so far, so it must be possible to say something for it...bah.


I think the end of humanity will either be from nuclear war, some natural disaster or simply by us evolving into something else. I don't think it will happen on 2012 or some other specific date. I don't believe the world will end until it's engulfed by the sun. Whatever happens, something will survive.

#13 Drewry

Drewry

    title available

  • Project Team
  • 258 posts
  • Location:Alabama, USA

Posted 07 December 2005 - 10:18 PM

The demise of man will not come at the hands of man


I do not agree with this, ever since we first started eating from the tree of knowlege we have been observing our world and using it to make our lives better. This is what makes us human. If the world ends it will ultimately be because of man, even if the world ends by climate it is still our fault in some way or another.

also it is said when there is no more room in hell the dead shall walk the earth


That is a quote from Dawn of the Dead :p

cayce also believed you could change the future....


When did I say the future could not be changed? I believe it can be changed and I continue to believe so. Nostradamus believed the same thing. Once again refer to my topic on human philosophy.

Within any negative positives can form if given the chance.


Today's negatives are tomorrow’s positives. Humanity has a natural bind to order and grouping - read my topic on human philosophy. These polarities that we give to everything we encounter do not truly exist in nature. Is a lion evil for killing a gazelle? Or is the gazelle evil for running away? Preventing the lion from the very thing it needs for survival. In nature neither are evil and they are both just two different organisms fighting for the same thing - survival.

We as humans can only conceive the concept of what is good and what is evil because of the emotions we bear. Emotions like desire, and fear; we can define what is evil by something that prevents the elements of desire to another thing - love, power, honor. What we fear and what we desire is irrelevant. What truly matters is this concept of good and evil. Fair is foul and foul is fair. I had an interesting thought today: for those who do not believe in god, what is preventing these people from going out and doing whatever they want to, as this is their only existence according to belief.

Why does morality have such a strong hold on humanity, so much that someone that believes in only one life will still not do the things it wishes because of these beliefs? Whether you believe in god or you do not, either way we are all bound to the same thing - this concept of morality. It is this concept that keeps us from robbing the bread maker if we are hungry. But even with all of this, how can we truly define what is good and what is evil? Is a robber evil if he gives the money to charity organizations?

Questions like these I believe are the answers for god to decide, it is my personal opinion. I think it would take a higher existence to be the judge, I do not think any human can decide what is right and what is wrong. Primarily because the concept it self is so unstable and is rarely consistent. To say that a human can be the judge of this, and that the judgments of these actions are to be paid for only on earth, is to be a complete flaw of the very concept of humanity. If you do not believe that there needs not to be a higher existence, then you do not believe in morality, therefore there is nothing keeping you from doing whatever it is you want to do – within the boundaries of law (which was based on religious morals).

I do not call something a belief until it has been tested, I want you to test my belief and tell me what you believe. I look forward to your replies.

Edited by Drewry, 07 December 2005 - 10:46 PM.

Drewry H. Morris V - Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici
www.druvianism.org

#14 AdmiralGT

AdmiralGT

    title available

  • Members
  • 1,702 posts
  • Location:Bristol, UK
  • Projects:Petrolution

Posted 07 December 2005 - 11:23 PM

Sigh, Nostradamus is a 16th century equivalent of a fortune teller conman. If anyone has actually read any of his "prophecies" then you'll realise they are so ambiguous that it could refer to anything in the world, and his works are "interpreted" after events in order to say that he predicted they would occur. Added to the fact he made so many "prophecies" that stastically some are likely to occur. The fact he wrote over 1000 prophecies, and yet we can count on two hands the number that have come true.

There are people in the world who are regarded as being "highly susceptable". When shown a picture of random dots on a page and told a face in present in the dots, they will find a face in the dots even though none exists. It's the classic tale of seeing the future. You work to avoid it, only to actually fufill what you set out to avoid by trying to avoid it (Episode 3 anyone?).

As for the world ending when morality is at it's lowest, how can you define what is the lowest state of morality? What can you define as having no morals?

And for the love of god, the poles will not switch in 2012, and if they do, it will not be the end of the world, merely we'll be susceptable to geomagnetic storms for a few thousand years. Poles don't switch in an instant, it takes thousands of years.

#15 anonymous

anonymous
  • Members
  • 177 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 02:59 PM

Within any negative positives can form if given the chance.


Questions like these I believe are the answers for god to decide, it is my personal opinion. I think it would take a higher existence to be the judge, I do not think any human can decide what is right and what is wrong. Primarily because the concept it self is so unstable and is rarely consistent. To say that a human can be the judge of this, and that the judgments of these actions are to be paid for only on earth, is to be a complete flaw of the very concept of humanity. If you do not believe that there needs not to be a higher existence, then you do not believe in morality, therefore there is nothing keeping you from doing whatever it is you want to do – within the boundaries of law (which was based on religious morals).

I do not call something a belief until it has been tested, I want you to test my belief and tell me what you believe. I look forward to your replies.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


You went off topic or didn`t understand what view I wanted you to see but anyway...

you should read some earlier posts about the subject so you get an understanding of where some of the people on this board are comming from, just a suggestion.

I will quote myself from a past post since there is nothing new in your post.
This post was a reply to a rather intelligent atheist on this board

When you get to the level of understanding that you have you must really grasp the fact that you are judging the all knowing and all seeing deity that is most commonly refered to as "God".
To take things a step further you must realize once confronted with your own moral code you are your own judge and jury not God.
You have in essence become your own deity with out peer. Leaving only your own judgements when you pass.
If you can not justify your path to yourself at the end of the day it will dictate how you transcend.
We all lie to ourselves it is the human condition it is a fact of being mortal in this realm.
When you pass from this plateau you will be set free from the physical realm and be unfettered unto the upper-plateaus having instantly realized the lies that you have told yourself giving you an objectivity never realized while existing as a physical entity.
When you are finally shown the illusion of death all things will become known as an unforgiving stream leaving you asking where you fit and what you've learned dictating where you will wake up next.
If you question "God" you are in essence questioning yourself because as you should know by now traveling in those DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP WATERS you've been traveling in GOD is YOU and YOU are GOD.......

Oh one more thing there is no such thing as good and "evil" they are just the results of your choices....... :p

#16 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 08 December 2005 - 03:09 PM

If you question "God" you are in essence questioning yourself because as you should know by now traveling in those DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP WATERS you've been traveling in GOD is YOU and YOU are GOD....... 

Oh one more thing there is no such thing as good and "evil" they are just the results of your choices.......      :p

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Only by your beliefs, Anonymous. Not everyone believes what you believe. To some people, God is an all powerful omniscient diety. To claim that you are god would identify that you are worshipping a false god and therefore this implies that everyone on the planet is a heretic, creator, giver of life, bringer of death and everything in between.

I would be more inclined to say that you are your own master and what you do is wholly your choice, not those of something you cannot see or taste or touch. There is no all-powerful being to control your destiny, and chance alone made us all what we are. I would not be so bold as to call myself God.

And Good and Evil are dictated by societal norms. Your choice is simply...your choice. Whether that choice is seen as Good or Evil depends on what you did and the society you live in.

#17 anonymous

anonymous
  • Members
  • 177 posts

Posted 08 December 2005 - 03:28 PM

If you question "God" you are in essence questioning yourself because as you should know by now traveling in those DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP WATERS you've been traveling in GOD is YOU and YOU are GOD....... 

Oh one more thing there is no such thing as good and "evil" they are just the results of your choices.......      :p

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Only by your beliefs, Anonymous. Not everyone believes what you believe. To some people, God is an all powerful omniscient diety. To claim that you are god would identify that you are worshipping a false god and therefore this implies that everyone on the planet is a heretic, creator, giver of life, bringer of death and everything in between.

I would be more inclined to say that you are your own master and what you do is wholly your choice, not those of something you cannot see or taste or touch. There is no all-powerful being to control your destiny, and chance alone made us all what we are. I would not be so bold as to call myself God.

And Good and Evil are dictated by societal norms. Your choice is simply...your choice. Whether that choice is seen as Good or Evil depends on what you did and the society you live in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Ok lets get real about it comrade....
I would venture to guess the galaxies and planets were formed by stardust, therefore we are also stardust. It is the essence of our physical make up. Now if god made us it would be safe to assume that he, she or it formed everything from itself mainly in this scenario stardust... That would mean you are god and god is you physically. You are one, not seperate no matter how hard you try to believe thats not the case. If you do not believe "God" is also made up of stardust then let me know so i can expound....
This is just a way for me to have you see the beginnig of what I see within this particular concept.
There are an infinite amount of views, once one is opened others start to open, its like opening pandoras box....

#18 Athena

Athena

    Embody the Truth

  • Undead
  • 6,946 posts
  •  Former Community Leader

Posted 08 December 2005 - 03:32 PM

Not everyone believes in God. I don't believe God made us, nor do I believe he built the earth in six days (or seven), some thousands years ago. Science has proven the Earth is much older, and that it came to exist due to a phenomenon called 'the Big Bang'.

#19 Ash

Ash

    Foxtrot Oscar.

  • Undead
  • 15,526 posts
  • Location:England
  • Projects:Robot Storm
  •  Keep calm and carry on.

Posted 08 December 2005 - 03:50 PM

Ok lets get real about it comrade....
I would venture to guess the galaxies and planets were formed by stardust, therefore we are also stardust. It is the essence of our physical make up. Now if god made us it would be safe to assume that he, she or it formed everything from itself mainly in this scenario stardust... That would mean you are god and god is you physically. You are one, not seperate no matter how hard you try to believe thats not the case. If you do not believe "God" is also made up of stardust then let me know so i can expound....
This is just a way for me to have you see the beginnig of what I see within this particular concept.
There are an infinite amount of views, once one is opened others start to open, its like opening pandoras box....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


So...what you're saying is 'God is atoms'. :p

Why didn't you say that in the first place? :) Woulda saved a shitload of time, haha.

The concept of an actual God (Ie, a sentient, omniscient, omnipotent being who created everything) is wholly different than the concept you believe. Basically, what you believe is that our 'God' is essentially our component parts. Ergo God is atoms. Atoms are not sentient...therefore saying God is us, and that God is our component parts...are two somewhat contrary postulations.

I'm not saying your beliefs are wrong...I'm saying you believe differently from me, or from others. ;)

Edited by Comrade Jerkov, 08 December 2005 - 03:54 PM.


#20 Athena

Athena

    Embody the Truth

  • Undead
  • 6,946 posts
  •  Former Community Leader

Posted 08 December 2005 - 03:55 PM

Oh I didn't really get that either.
I don't really believe God is atoms either, but as CJ said, we're all entitled to our own opinion :).
EDIT Perhaps I shouldn't look in 'Deep Thought' when having a headache :p




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users