The Pathos of Distance

THIS IS AN ANNOYING LOG-IN POP UP JUST FOR YOU
The Pathos of Distance

- Agile Minds in Perpetuum -


    is god mad?

    Share

    Zoot Allures

    Posts : 525
    Join date : 2018-02-07
    Age : 500

    is god mad?

    Post by Zoot Allures on Sat Feb 10, 2018 8:59 am

    Mitra-Sauwelios wrote:"The creation of the world: perhaps it was then thought of by some Indian dreamer as an ascetic operation on the part of a god! Perhaps the god wanted to banish himself into active and moving nature as into an instrument of torture, in order thereby to feel his bliss and power doubled!" (Nietzsche, Daybreak 113. Cf. my "Insightful analysis of Dawn 113")

    how else would we explain the creation of the world? kierkegaard said that god was bored. i'd believe that faster than i'd believe god was lonely and wanted to be loved, so created beings that would be able to voluntarily choose to love him. how lame is that? first of all, that kind of model is impossible for logical reasons (no freewill if GOD is omniscient and omnipotent). but we're talking about GOD here, people. GOD doesn't get lonely and sure as heck doesn't care if he's loved or not.  he's not that petty. btw, christianity is perhaps the greatest objection to GOD there has ever been. blame that moron paul, not jesus. jesus wasn't a bad guy, really. not a really good guy... but not a bad guy.

    Sauwelios once said that GOD was schizophrenic, if i remember correctly. maybe he meant multiple personality disorder as well. i can believe that, because you've got a GOD that is immanent (not separate from his creation- this is impossible), and who, since he's all that can exist, would have to begin a kind of role playing game to keep himself occupied... or else he just exists there, knowing he exists as he exists while he exists. that's got to be hella boring. so, somehow he divided himself into corresponding and conflicting parts- hence, the world. you, me, that rock over there, all roles that GOD is playing. he needed to be able to experience the power he had, so had to engage that power in both creative and destructive efforts (can't have one without the other).

    a religion (or spiritualism) is what happens when GOD recognizes some aspect of himself informing him of himself while he's playing this game. in order to fully exist, he had to be able to make mistakes, commit fallacies, and create absurdities. these things are manifested in all the ridiculous religions that have existed. they aren't ridiculous because they exist, but because they are all incomplete ideas about what GOD is. if GOD allowed himself to have complete knowledge of himself, he'd be back to square one; utter boredom.

    he's all of that, nonsense included, and that's part of the joy he experiences as he exists. if there were no nonsense, he'd take no pleasure in the feeling of power he has as he exists in the form of the courageous people who indict religion and call it nonsense.

    'aha!,' you say.

    glad i could help.
    avatar
    Mitra-Sauwelios
    Admin

    Posts : 80
    Join date : 2018-02-10
    Age : 40
    Location : Amsterdam

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Mitra-Sauwelios on Sat Feb 10, 2018 9:38 pm

    From my "God is mad" Yahoo group:

    Sauwelios wrote:I posted this on a philosophy forum on 5 November 2005. As the original article (by anarchy), to which there was a link in the Links section of this group, is no longer available, I will post this here.

    ::

    When I was looking for fellow believers in the madness of God, I searched for the phrase "God is mad", and came across a lot of Christian sites on which the phrase "God is mad at..." was used ("mad"  in the sense of "angry"). That was not what I meant. So today I searched for the phrase "God is insane", and I happened upon a true kindred soul:

    "First, I think the reason God exists is because it's impossible for Him/Her/It not to exist. Or if you're an atheist, it's impossible for a Universe not to exist, whatever form it may take, be it a three-dimensional universe, a one dimensional-universe, a universe in which PI=8.2, a universe in which gravity is stronger than the electromagnetic force, whatever. SOMETHING has to exist. There can't just be nothingness.

    "I hear people ask questions like 'What if God didn't exist?' or 'What if there was never a Big Bang? What if there was just nothingness?'

    "Well, what would 'nothing' look like? Is nothing an empty void that stretches to infinity? Is it a colorless theoretical solid that cannot be divided into smaller fundamental particles (aka a TRUE solid) of infinite size which fills all the space in which 'something' could possibly exist? What is nothing? Precisely that. Nothing. It has no characteristic by which it could be described or understood. It is impossible for NOTHING to EXIST. If it did, you wouldn't call it nothing.

    "So by process of elimination, SOMETHING has to exist. There is no alternative. I believe consciousness IS existence. Without consciousness there truly would be nothing. And it would be impossible to describe because there would be no consciousness to comprehend and describe it. Everything exists within the mind of one consciousness which pretends to be many.

    "Why does It pretend to be many? Because the fact that It is alone terrifies it. It is all that exists, trapped in oblivion with no Other it save It. It is truly alone in ways that cannot be described. And so it screams a scream that can't be heard, that does not rattle a voice box or an eardrum, does not stop with the emptying of lungs, but goes on for eternity. The terror rips its mind apart into a trillion trillion personalities, each one screaming at birth but then forgets what it is screaming about as it is wrapped in a blanket and placed in its mother's arms.

    "But it goes even further than that. Humans are in a process of evolution. There are life-forms in the astral planes undergoing a process of involution. These are the multiple personalities that are still ripping apart from the momentum of the raw terror of God's  aloneness, breaking up into smaller personalities, electrons, neutrinos, quarks until at some unknown point of miniscule scale the momentum dies and the process of evolution begins.

    "Lifeforms evolve as they realize their oneness with each other, joining to form atoms, joining to form chemicals, cells, organic tissue, organisms, people who join together metaphorically by mutual understanding, physically by sex, psychically by telepathy, in joining together there is joy as they realize their oneness. Trillions of tiny bubbles in a shaken up bottle of soda press against each other, spontaneously clumping together into larger bubbles. The larger bubbles have more surface area and therefore press against more bubbles, absorbing them more rapidly. Individuals are not lost. They never really existed. They are the imagination of the same mind. Just as the bubbles fizz from the same root beer and nothing is lost when they rejoin. There is ever increasing joy until all is one and ascends to Godhood, realizing once again its aloneness.

    "Only this time the terror is worse. This time there is something to contrast with the fear. All the hope, all the love, all the unity and joy of embracing other souls and becoming one suddenly seems so empty and hollow. It was all for nothing. It was a joke. A dream. A cheap and cruel illusion. All that ever was considered sacred and pure and holy was just an illusion. The reality is the stark terror of aloneness. So the mind rips apart again with even more terror, breaking up into even more personalities, more souls than before, hiding itself ever further into the illusion of there being 'many' instead of one. But the love intensifies as well. There is so much more rejoining of souls, so many more perspectives from which God sees Itself, so much more God learns about Itself, so many different parts of God that come together, forming whole new concepts of what God is.

    "Both of these are real, the love and the fear, both feeding off of and intensifying each other for all eternity. Anyway, that's my take on existence." (anarchy, "I think God is insane (no, really), terror, the engine that drives creation".)

    This fellow also agrees with me as to what "nothing" is. But the main thing is, of course, that God is insane.

    The reason I post this here, however, the "feature of interest", to speak with Holmes, is in our disagreement. The passage I disagree with is the following:

    "There is ever increasing joy until all is one and ascends to Godhood, realizing once again its aloneness.

    "Only this time the terror is worse."

    I agree with the former, but not with the latter. Because, according  to the theory of the eternal recurrence, there is no first time God realises his aloneness. As Gilles Deleuze says, "it is not the same that returns, it is the return that is the same of that which becomes"...

    God's moment of self-realisation, his joyful moment (or rather, short period...) of realising that he is God, is "the flash of gold on the belly of the serpent vita [life]", to speak with Nietzsche,--of the serpent which bites itself in the tail. And just after that comes the bite itself: the terrible realisation that, as God, he is absolutely alone. From there, the poison spreads, until it dissolves, even as God dissolves "into a trillion trillion personalities" again. That is the serpent's tail, whereas the gold flash flashes from the serpents head--from the top, I think.

    " 'God' as the moment of culmination: existence an eternal deifying and un-deifying. But in that not a high point of value, but a high point of power." (Nietzsche, The Will to Power, section 712.)
    avatar
    Barracuda

    Posts : 151
    Join date : 2018-02-11
    Age : 353

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Barracuda on Sun Feb 11, 2018 8:31 am

    I am god. In some peoples eyes, I am mad.
    Its a matter of opinion.
    Would humans have sent God to the madhouse for creating the world? No fucking doubt.

    Zoot Allures

    Posts : 525
    Join date : 2018-02-07
    Age : 500

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Zoot Allures on Sun Feb 11, 2018 8:36 am

    Barracuda wrote:Would humans have sent God to the madhouse for creating the world?

    an equally curious question would be: could GOD have designed man to believe GOD was mad without GOD also being mad, himself.

    hey, we just work with what he gives us.
    avatar
    Barracuda

    Posts : 151
    Join date : 2018-02-11
    Age : 353

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Barracuda on Sun Feb 11, 2018 12:56 pm

    I agree with the guy who says God is an accomplishment, rather than an origin.

    A mad accomplishment yo.

    Then with that tool in your tool belt (see god as a Swiss army knife, available as a solution to many a problem) you get ahead in life.
    avatar
    Barracuda

    Posts : 151
    Join date : 2018-02-11
    Age : 353

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Barracuda on Sun Feb 11, 2018 1:02 pm

    Now there be different brands of God.
    I support the Thundergods. Theres another guy who said that taste is the origin of all judgment, so logic is subservient to coming to terms taste-wise first.
    Taste, tongue, the way peoples speak.

    Try explaining "A" to a Chinese child.
    What are these sticks?

    They don't have characters that are that abstract. All characters are originally representations, symbols, and the sounds they represent also contain a lot of meaning. So they don't have the law of identity. They have a different way of binary arguing. More about how the nature of a thing contradicts the way that it must behave. Yeah its complicated. Asian IQs are high for good reason.

    Instances are never equal to each other. The law of non contradiction is a blatant artifice. "Apollo", if you want to talk to the roman about it.

    Bottom line; the assertion of the subject, integer.
    But wait - WHO (or what) ASSERTS the subject?

    Therefore: it is the asserting that we recognize.
    This is what exists and manages to interact with itself, so as to be aware of its existence.

    But an "I" is not given. If it were really given, would it be such a fucking mess, such a struggle to be one?
    Therefore Decartes is a copout, even though a great guy with a sense of humor that could charm the birds out of their regular songs into whole new one.
    He was an I. He should have written: I write, therefore I am. But only because I am Rene fucking Descartes you puny pseudo existent peons.
    avatar
    Barracuda

    Posts : 151
    Join date : 2018-02-11
    Age : 353

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Barracuda on Sun Feb 11, 2018 1:18 pm

    Philosophy has been wrong-headed since the Sophists for a simple reason: philosophy must rule. Wherever it can't, it should not exist.
    Now this poses a problem which Leo Strauss calls politics without the complementary man.


    Zoot Allures

    Posts : 525
    Join date : 2018-02-07
    Age : 500

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Zoot Allures on Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:34 am

    Barracude wrote:Philosophy has been wrong-headed since the Sophists for a simple reason: philosophy must rule.

    do you mean because of the sophists or do you mean because it has become something other than sophistry, which is what it should be?

    you know socrates and plato couldn't stand the sophists. those two were playa haters who drank haterade.

    Sponsored content

    Re: is god mad?

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:14 pm