Who created The Creator?

[Gee-Are]

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Thats a negative I stated we live in a multiverse but I still have a problem because what is holding the multi-verses and what is outside of that. If we can't get to a beginning point of creation then so to shall be the same for the creator. Kinda simple.

So, 2 simple questions for you...

1. What force started this multiverse/parallel universe you speak of?

2. Where did that force in your answer to question 1 come from?

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Again I disagree. Unless verse 1 states " In the beginning I created the Heaven and the Earth" so sayeth the lord. BUT the earth was without form and void.. You'd have an argument but it doesn't. Lets move forward.

Agree to disagree...I guess.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Let me ask you a question. Wouldn't it make sense for the Heavens which is the Universe in my interpretation to be created first? The universe is what holds everything correct? Now looking at the text it shows that the Heaven and the Earth were created out of the same primordial soup the formless void. My question is what was holding it? It couldn't have been Heaven because it shows heaven wasn't created until the second day. See how my multiverse hypothesis applies? lol

Not according to this text I don't, but then I interpret it differently than you do. You don't even have to prove your multiverse exists...Just state where it came from!

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

So the bible has two Gods? lol Okay explain more. Furthermore, I don't see how they are relevant because again you are using first person logic. Sorry

I offered the multiple god option as an answer to your question regarding why the god was repairing the earth. I did not make it as a statement of fact, just as a logical alternative as a possible answer. It's not fleshed out. There's of course opportunity for that option to not be valid, but that's not a part of this discussion.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Not true even you said when we come into self awareness doesn't denote the beginning of our existence. YOU stated earlier that our parents knew of us since the womb which is correct. Stating that the narrators knows this is GOD because the Narrator has the story in its totality. You acting like it was written in real time and if it was and the narrator was there then thats also another convo. Who is this Holy Scribe ?

Who is this Holy Scribe, indeed! Great question!

You act as if a holy scribe suddenly appeared in verse 2, or even 3 to make your interpretation valid. so then I ask how was verse 1 or 2 written? According to you, nothing had been created yet, so how could they give the account?

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

So, with that in mind who was first aware of the Creator? This is where it can go into an infinite loop, so let's say the Ultimate Creator, no one higher than that. That Creator had to become aware of him/herself, and that is when he was created. He was made manifest however when he created the universe.

Soo I guess this is when you say God is different that the creator? Is that your escape hatch used when it is found you did indeed say the creator isn't created until him/herself becomes aware of them self? lol

Um...no. That's when I applied scale to my logic that refers to humans or animals as creators.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Is that God in Verse 1 a creator? Is the God thereafter a creator too? So where did the other god go? lol

I argue yes and yes, because they are most likely the same person. To answer your third question, I'm sure when testing the other option, multiple gods in this passage might not prove to be valid. However, I only offered it as one of an infinite number of logical possibilities to answer your question.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Thank you for going here lol. I was hoping you would.

The narrator is writing about an expression but he doesn't know WHY the "God" thought the light was good. Did you not notice that? I was HOPING you went here. Lets give some examples.

IF I see a person watching television and they laugh... do I know why they are laughing? Could I conclude if I hear a joke you are laughing at it for the same reason that I am? I know you find it funny because of your expression but I don't know why you found it funny.

The rule for an 3rd person omniscient narrator doesn't mean that the narrator has to give every single thought or reason of the characters of the story. He doesn't have to prove that he is omniscient with every word he writes. It only has to be proven that the narrator has access to those thoughts and reasonings.

Otherwise in a sci-fi story, you might get a lot of accounts that would include, "Joseph was constipated and relieved himself in the ditch in front of everyone, only because he thought he was going to die."

Gross right? and not a necessarily relevant bit of information for the reader to understand why Joseph would later be abducted by aliens.

Ok, sidetrack over, yes in your example, you could as a narrator say that a character found something funny, because you can see them laugh, without knowing WHY they laughed. Again, I assert you don't have to explain the why to be labeled as omniscient.

Questions back to you, how can you tell that a character, e.g. the god in the Genesis passage, saw something was good, especially when it's not spoken by the character, or no smile is revealed on his face, or any other visual signal?

He didn't do the electric slide.

He didn't slap his mama.

So how could the narrator describe this acknowledgment of good by God without any of that stimuli, if he's not omniscient?

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

IF we both see a chick walking and both of us say 'damn she fine as shit" Do I know why you think she is fine? Hell I maybe enamored with her phat ass and you like her breast.

Not necessary to explain why, however, in that example, while you might feel like you know I think she's fine, there was an auditory confirmation by way of me saying, "damn, she fine as shit!" So no need to be omniscient to know that.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

So staying with that logic just because the narrator writes " And he saw the light and it was good" doesn't mean he knows WHY he thought it was good. Just because when he made things and the narrator writes he saw it was good doesn't say WHY he thought it was good. The first time the God of the bible reveals its thoughts was when it punishes Adam and Eve. We know that the God didn't want Adam and Eve to eat from the tree of knowledge of Good and Evil. We don't learn WHY the God didn't want that until he states it verbatim.

You're in error lol.

I feel my delineation of the passage was satisfactory to show that I am not in error, and you just proved that with the example you included. The style of narration never changes in Genesis. I believe the omniscient narrative style is revealed before you do, but the fact that you admit that the mind of god was revealed at any point, shows that the narrative style is omniscient.

You want to keep digging this hole for yourself on this issue?

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

No it doesn't the narrator uses description. Description can be used for thoughts but in this instance it's used for expression. It also uses Cause and Effect but the narrator never reveals the PURPOSE of him finding the light good. This is what we are debating now. Furthermore we still don't know WHY the God created this place to begin with. For what reason? Ninja just needed some company? lol

maybe...but that's not a part of this discussion.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Gen 1:29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. smh

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAAH: ROFLMAO2x NO 4x! GIVE UP MAN! You don't know narrative style! I only laugh because you keep pressing this issue, and it's wrong!

Yes, in Genesis 1:28-29, God uses the term "you." That would be sufficient to prove your theory that this was written in 2nd person narrative, IF...IF the "you" in the text referred directly to the reader or YOU (VuduPrince). However, God there is addressing other characters in the story, mankind. That means that the narrator is still telling the story as an outside observer, not an active participant that includes the reader.

Now, I'll grant you that since the character being spoken to is "mankind," a lot of preachers, teachers and bible students could practice reassigning themselves as the character in the text for a more personal understanding of God's words there.

For example, a speaker might say, "Now whenever you see the word, 'you,' put your name there..."

Gen 1:29And God said, Behold, I have given VuduPrince every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to VuduPrince it shall be for meat.

If that's how it was originally meant to be read, then yes, it is 2nd person narrative, again I emphasize that it is not. You could do that exercise with any character. If you wanted to emphasize to your audience that you think they are God or God-like, you could tell them, "Whenever you see the word 'God,' replace that with your name..."

Gen 1:29And VuduPrince said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

So we've just exercised the practice of proxy, but it didn't change the narrative style of the story. Which again for clarification is 3rd person omniscient. No where in the Genesis story is the 4th wall broken and the reader addressed.

Are we done here?

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Well we must first understand what your hypothesis is. If you are going to stand by your aforementioned assertion that a Creator isn't a creator until he is first aware of himself and doesn't manifest until he creates then I think using the text I have shown that. Thing is now you're saying either you didn't say that or maybe its many gods or different creators. Or there is a difference between God and Creator. Now this maybe true BUT it doesn't fit within the framework of this story.

Like I said in the earlier post, maybe you have.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Sure it hasnt because you keep flip flopping. If you challenge me in basketball an I arrive to the gym ready to hoop but you show up in football gear saying "Naw cuz I meant football" then my actions wouldn't be relevant. If I then go change into football gear and I come back out now seeing you with a tennis racket its like wtf. lol

Ok John McCain. You're claiming flip flop, when I've not done that. You just aren't comprehending my argument. Next thing you'll be wandering in front of the camera aimlessly like you're looking for your meds. lol

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

No I don't see it that way. What I see is someone revealing a story to a person or persons. They have ingested the story in its an entirety, have knowledge of its ending beforehand and they write it. Using your logic you're making it seem as if this story was written in real time. If it was.... who is this Scribe that was there during this creation?

Again, valid question, but not to answer the original question from my perspective.

Mar 21, 2010 15:10:04 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Naw you didn't answer the questions at all. The process used for your hypothesis is flawed.

Either the hypothesis went over your head, or I've done a tremendously horrible job of communicating to you, which I recognize may be a possibility, but not a probability.

Therefore, unless you introduce new information or I need clarification of your answers to my questions raised here, I will now bow OUT of the convo.

I'm not sure we're making any new ground here, and I don't want to continue discussing points of elementary narrative structure when it has nothing to do with the answer to the original question!

Answer the first 2 questions I posed at the beginning of this post, and maybe I'll continue this, but until then...

Good day, sir.

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 21, 2010 20:09:18 GMT -5 Gee-Are said:

So, 2 simple questions for you...

1. What force started this multiverse/parallel universe you speak of?

2. Where did that force in your answer to question 1 come from?

Uh I think I answered that already were you reading or just looking at the words? Let me make it clearer for you. If we state one is a Creator then we can't answer the question who created him/her until we find when was the first time they created. We can not separation the title from the action. A creator is because it creates. Therefore we must find the first time it created before we can even tackle who, what, when, where and how it was created. As I stated before if we can't pinpoint the beginning of creation then so to shall it be the same for the creator. I stated that 4 pages ago.

Agree to disagree...I guess.

Figures lol

Not according to this text I don't, but then I interpret it differently than you do. You don't even have to prove your multiverse exists...Just state where it came from!

Well we can show that now pertaining the text. If the God came upon the primordial soup then something was holding it. Even using your hypothesis that both Heaven and Earth were created in Verse 1:1 it still was being held by something. Now with this primordial soup(imperfect heaven and earth following ur logic) the "god" made a heaven to hold the earth on the second day. So right there we have two universes. The one the God was in which held the primordial soup (or imperfect heaven and earth following ur logic) and the new one it built to hold the Earth. Mind you this is why the Heaven was built first in the story. The earth was then built within this heaven.

I offered the multiple god option as an answer to your question regarding why the god was repairing the earth. I did not make it as a statement of fact, just as a logical alternative as a possible answer. It's not fleshed out. There's of course opportunity for that option to not be valid, but that's not a part of this discussion.

Dude you sat up here and said you didn't say something which you did indeed say. You were caught red handed, Here again we see you flip flopping buck dancing and being lukewarm. Either it is or it aint. Just state your facts and stand by them even when found in error. You have backed yourself in a corner a few times. Examples...

#1 You say that the Heaven and the Earth were made in Verse 1:1 when it is shown that Heaven wasn't made until the second day I contend you are stating Earth came before heaven. You say no but yet and still you stand by your initial hypothesis lol

#2 You state a creator isn't a creator until he is aware of himself and isn't manifest until he creates. When I bring this up but using God instead of creator you say you didn't say that.

Now you give us this stuff above. Okay. You like to circle jerk we see your style cool. lol

Who is this Holy Scribe, indeed! Great question!

You should use the Quran for your hypothesis it would fit alot better. The story wasn't written in real time. Again you are using first person logic.

You act as if a holy scribe suddenly appeared in verse 2, or even 3 to make your interpretation valid. so then I ask how was verse 1 or 2 written? According to you, nothing had been created yet, so how could they give the account?

Naw the writer had the story knew the ending gave an introductory sentence and went from there. Stop using first person logic while promoting third person writing style. You're being lukewarm.

Um...no. That's when I applied scale to my logic that refers to humans or animals as creators.

Now you including animals too? Hot damn. I guess aliens will be next huh? lol smdh

I argue yes and yes, because they are most likely the same person. To answer your third question, I'm sure when testing the other option, multiple gods in this passage might not prove to be valid. However, I only offered it as one of an infinite number of logical possibilities to answer your question.

So are you now saying we can attribute your aforementioned statements to you? lol

The rule for an 3rd person omniscient narrator doesn't mean that the narrator has to give every single thought or reason of the characters of the story. He doesn't have to prove that he is omniscient with every word he writes. It only has to be proven that the narrator has access to those thoughts and reasonings. Otherwise in a sci-fi story, you might get a lot of accounts that would include, "Joseph was constipated and relieved himself in the ditch in front of everyone, only because he thought he was going to die."
Gross right? and not a necessarily relevant bit of information for the reader to understand why Joseph would later be abducted by aliens.

I see you have totally bit down. Lets lay the hammer now....

The third-person omniscient is a narrative mode in which both the reader and author observe the situation either through the senses and thoughts of more than one character, or through an overarching godlike perspective that sees and knows everything that happens and everything the characters are thinking.

I could have posted that sometime ago but I'm kinda growing tired of your flip floping. You're in error. Just stop it lol

Ok, sidetrack over, yes in your example, you could as a narrator say that a character found something funny, because you can see them laugh, without knowing WHY they laughed. Again, I assert you don't have to explain the why to be labeled as omniscient.

I think third person limited point of view would have been a better choice for you but hey if you like it I love it lol. third-person limited point of view, which limits narration to what can be known, seen, thought, or judged from a single character's perspective. I still stand by TPO because I feel the narrator is giving his opinion on actions that were observed. By who? We don't know.

Questions back to you, how can you tell that a character, e.g. the god in the Genesis passage, saw something was good, especially when it's not spoken by the character, or no smile is revealed on his face, or any other visual signal?
He didn't do the electric slide. He didn't slap his mama. So how could the narrator describe this acknowledgment of good by God without any of that stimuli, if he's not omniscient?

Ha Ha . Its called non-verbal communication. Saw is the past tense of see. Go look up the term for us. Just because I see you laugh at something grin or any other facial expression as in concern to light, money, cars whatever I do not know WHY u are looking that way. I can see you like it by your expression but I do not know WHY you like it. Why is thoughts seeing is expression. Again the narrator relays observable actions of the creator using TPO. You're in error no matter how much your circle jerk.

Not necessary to explain why, however, in that example, while you might feel like you know I think she's fine, there was an auditory confirmation by way of me saying, "damn, she fine as shit!" So no need to be omniscient to know that.

Okay scratch that lets say if a chick walks by and we both turn around to look. How's that?

I feel my delineation of the passage was satisfactory to show that I am not in error, and you just proved that with the example you included. The style of narration never changes in Genesis. I believe the omniscient narrative style is revealed before you do, but the fact that you admit that the mind of god was revealed at any point, shows that the narrative style is omniscient.You want to keep digging this whole for yourself on this issue? maybe...but that's not a part of this discussion.

Again as I stated above third person limited would have been a better choice for you. You're in error..

BWAAAAAHAHAHAHAAH: ROFLMAO2x NO 4x! GIVE UP MAN! You don't know narrative style! I only laugh because you keep pressing this issue, and it's wrong! Yes, in Genesis 1:28-29, God uses the term "you." That would be sufficient to prove your theory that this was written in 2nd person narrative, IF...IF the "you" in the text referred directly to the reader or YOU (VuduPrince). However, God there is addressing other characters in the story, mankind. That means that the narrator is still telling the story as an outside observer, not an active participant that includes the reader.

Are we not men? According to the story did we not come from Adam? lol (I wonder what will be his escape hatch for this one) As Bill Duke said in Menace II Society... You know you done fucked up right? ;D ;D ;D ;D

Now, I'll grant you that since the character being spoken to is "mankind," a lot of preachers, teachers and bible students could practice reassigning themselves as the character in the text for a more personal understanding of God's words there.

Oh so do you agree or not agree that is spoken in 2nd person then lol

For example, a speaker might say, "Now whenever you see the word, 'you,' put your name there..." Gen 1:29And God said, Behold, I have given VuduPrince every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to VuduPrince it shall be for meat.

If that's how it was originally meant to be read, then yes, it is 2nd person narrative, again I emphasize that it is not. You could do that exercise with any character. If you wanted to emphasize to your audience that you think they are God or God-like, you could tell them, "Whenever you see the word 'God,' replace that with your name..."

Oh sooo be fruitful and mulitply was only for Adam and Eve. Dominion over the animals were only for Adam and Eve? Gotcha lol. Sounds dumb doesn't it?

Gen 1:29And VuduPrince said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

So we've just exercised the practice of proxy, but it didn't change the narrative style of the story. Which again for clarification is 3rd person omniscient. No where in the Genesis story is the 4th wall broken and the reader addressed.

Are we done here?

So is Adam different from us? hmmm why are we born into sin again sticking with the story? lol smdh... So using your logic there is no need to go to church or do nothing because hey guys God was only speaking to Adam.. Do we not carry the burden of the original sin sticking with the story? That is the Fall of Man not the Fall of Adam. Are you not a Man? smdh

Word to the wise whenever its easy to bite down on something when in a dialogue with me more times than none its a red herring trap for you. That's what I call Rope a Dope. Log that... lol Gotcha

Ok John McCain. You're claiming flip flop, when I've not done that. You just aren't comprehending my argument. Next thing you'll be wandering in front of the camera aimlessly like you're looking for your meds. lol

Ok lol

Again, valid question, but not to answer the original question from my perspective.

Ok

Either the hypothesis went over your head, or I've done a tremendously horrible job of communicating to you, which I recognize may be a possibility, but not a probability.

Therefore, unless you introduce new information or I need clarification of your answers to my questions raised here, I will now bow OUT of the convo.

I'm not sure we're making any new ground here, and I don't want to continue discussing points of elementary narrative structure when it has nothing to do with the answer to the original question!

Answer the first 2 questions I posed at the beginning of this post, and maybe I'll continue this, but until then...

Good day, sir.

Rigggggght . Lets see if you gonna find an escape hatch with your new assertions put forth and the sink holes left behind lol :Handshake:

[Julie Art]

Grrrrrrrrrrrr, never knew the dude who made me laugh so hard that I vomited almost 3 years ago was so philsophical! When I get my powers back, you will be exhalted.

[Gee-Are]

Mar 22, 2010 10:07:05 GMT -5 Julie Art said:

Grrrrrrrrrrrr, never knew the dude who made me laugh so hard that I vomited almost 3 years ago was so philsophical! When I get my powers back, you will be exhalted.

Well I appreciate that, I'm sure others would disagree with that assertion, LOL! So, be prepared for a spirited debate!

In all honesty, I enjoy the discussions here, but I rarely have the time to participate. I didn't really have the time for this one, but I got sucked in, and responded. Then I felt the need to clarify my positions because of repeated questions.

To that end, I don't know how successful I was. HA!

Thanks for the exalt.

[Julie Art]

Lol! No, you are regardless if anyone agrees with your stance or not. The creator of Cripmunks breaking it down. Wish I could bump that thread! You and Damie were fools, lololololol!

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 23, 2010 10:47:07 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Did VP say who his creator was yet?

You shouldn't want to believe in anything you should want to know. See its simple we all universally regardless of "religious" affiliation submit to the Universal Laws of Existence. When a child is born and I did many of these while in the Military 11 years ago they are given an Apgar test which is an acronym that stands for Appearance, Pulse, Grimace, Activity and Respiration. These things show a submission to the Universal Laws of Existence. Even a newborn will fight to exist. A newborn knows it has to eat to live, sleep to live, drink to live, breath to live BUT without the Queen Mother answering the call of the cry of the child...nobody NOBODY lives. Nobody survives. NOBODY

The only absolute evidence that exist of God sistah....is You. So when you hear me speak of the Sacred Feminine I speak of the Black Woman who is African Centered Mentally Spiritually. You are the first teacher. You have men who don't want to see the Queen take her rightful place on the throne. You have men who don't want women to know who they are. Bust you down as a help meet. Regulate you to being whores, evil queens, vampires, etc etc etc . The Irony is they hide your essence within the bowels of their religious text. They give you an olive branch with one hand and have arrows with the other- Vudu Prince Jul 8, 2009.

Again belief isn't absolute. If a person has usage of all 5 senses and is conscious of stimuli if there is a blockage innately they will attempt to remove it.Again using the child as reference.

If a Child can see when you shine a light in their eyes they react to the light. They notice the stimuli. The fact that they react isn't belief the child innately knows what to do.

When an infant is on its back usually based on how keen the senses are the childs legs are drawn up in a supine cradle position. If you grab the childs leg to straighten it when you let go the child will snatch its leg back up to the drawn position. It's comfort zone is in the womb and you to the child are a stranger. You are out of the comfort zone. That's not belief... that again is knowing.- Vudu Prince Jul 8, 2009

YOU. You are the source of the information.

Again using the infant as reference as I said before

When a Child is hungry it cries

When a Child is thirsty it cries

When a Child has Gas it cries

When a Child is sleepy it cries

When a Child can't breathe it cries

If you strip all away if the mother doesn't push while in labor what happens?

Now when you strip everything away who is the absolute that balances every above equation? The Mother. It is the mother that answers the call. It is the strength of the mother that brings forth the manifestation of life by pushing. No book can refute or confirm the absolute fact that exist every where. Instead of looking on the outside you need to look inside of yourself. Before a person had a desire to gaze at the stars, the trees, the animals, the sun he noticed you first. You'd learn more by timing the things that happen with you and recording them then correlating your measurements to your surroundings and go from there. Get on your Magic.-Vudu Prince Jul 8, 2009

Clear your mind and seek essence of real for the proof
Inner-Etheric Flame as your guide with Pure Darkness as the truth…..- Vudu Prince Jun 12, 2008

First taste of truth you go numb and wonder where the feeling went
Then ya realize you’re just a soul having a human experience- Vudu Prince Jun 13 2008

I’m incomplete turned away from the portal our Astral Bodies Hollow throughSo I’m here to ignite your fire then humble myself to follow you
I am GOD a Guardian of Destiny
But it is the CREATOR Feminine who will lead to the rest of me
- Vudu Prince June 13 2008

Foundation fail wit a flawed connection Destroying the sacred feminine wit a thawed erection Golden Calf origin Heru's Enclosure Sacred Cow second Surah fuels ya culture- Vudu Prince Jun 12 2009

Marinate amongst with thee until she summons me
Purple Darkness inside the womb is where the oneness be
Her playgrounds the Universe my seat is a small safe
Mentally its infinite but physically a crawl space
Holy of the Holies the Kaba Stone my momma's home
Guardian Of Destiny is he who GODS the throne- Vudu Prince Aug 3 2009

You were saying? See VP speaks it you just can't wrap your mind around it. It shows how far gone you are. Brother says the woman is the absolute reflection of the all and you fight it. I have been saying it and I will keep saying it. Furthermore lets call out your reasoning for ignoring while still asking this question. You feel in your mind if an argument is made against where I stand which is successful it will somehow make your Jesus real... NO it will not. The reason why your religion is full of shit is simple. The people places events times etc are all in doubt. THAT is why your religion is full of chit. There wasn't a Abraham, Moses, Solomon. David, Ezekiel, Jesus, etc. Thing is every man was born of a woman. SHE is the only constant the only absolute that exists. Therefore through the woman the womb or in your case Baptism shall the truth be found. Now skip along with your bible in tow teaching another generation that garbage.

[Julie Art]

Mar 23, 2010 10:46:35 GMT -5 @nsync said:

I really didnt find that thread funny.

iDIED all over again! That's because they messed up whatever it was they were trying to do, didn't the cripmunks e-attack you or something? LMBO!

[Julie Art]

Mar 23, 2010 10:47:07 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Did VP say who his creator was yet?

What you think, lolololololololololol!

[Kryptik]

This has been quite interesting... and unfortunately sooooo familiar.

[LogAKAlly <3'n Keef]

I am totally unqualified to answer this question - but I am thankful that my Creator was kind enough to give me the sliver of intelligence that makes me realize that I can't because - IMO - hell must be something like being asked this question and NOT knowing you can't answer it, therefore you spend (and I use that word loosely) a life time trying.

[LogAKAlly <3'n Keef]

Mar 23, 2010 14:35:16 GMT -5 @nsync said:

I dunno Loggie. I feel comfortable not knowing the answer...

I'm comfy too!! LOL - I like the fact that my Creator is smarter than me!!!

LMAO!!

[Julie Art]

Exhalt Log for that last post!

[LogAKAlly <3'n Keef]

Mar 23, 2010 14:50:31 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Do you feel that this thread may suggest that the creator is not smarter than the questioner simply because the question was asked? I am sensing a theme is this thread and I refuse to ignore it. lol

Mar 23, 2010 14:42:36 GMT -5 LogAKAlly <3'n Keef said:

I'm comfy too!! LOL - I like the fact that my Creator is smarter than me!!!

LMAO!!

No, (IMO) it would speak to the level of security of the Creator.

Like, parents who are comfortable being intellectually challenged by their children. My goal - as a parent - is for my child to become learn-ed.

I hope and assume (because I was designed to learn and understand) that the eventual goal is for me (the created) is also to learn and become autonomous.

I understand I am not there yet - but, when looking over my past (history of human development) I am hopeful.

[LogAKAlly <3'n Keef]

Mar 23, 2010 14:52:27 GMT -5 @nsync said:

I guess where I am having a problem is the underlying notion of how dare we ask such a question?

It really has taken me aback to the point where I even prayed about it. I don't see this question as out of line at all.

Yet I see that others do.

Im trying to pick up on the disconnect.

Also does someone have to not believe in a creator to ask such a question?

I don't think so at all Outtie...in fact, I believe our ability to question is a testament to our growth and development - I believe God is very pleased with that.

God - to me - represents the highest form of intelligence...and I am made in God's image.

Therefore, I possess some traits right?

When my child is able to question me about her rights as a human - beyond my rules - I will be proud.

She may not win the argument that day...but I know she's on the right path.

[LogAKAlly <3'n Keef]

Mar 23, 2010 15:12:52 GMT -5 @nsync said:

I don't quite understand your anology because I don't have children and I don't think parents create children per se.

But I do see the authority thing going on here.

I do agree with the security factor. If truth is truth it will always be truth. Truth will not ever feel challenged. Feeling challenged displays a level of fear IMO.

Mar 23, 2010 14:54:53 GMT -5 LogAKAlly <3'n Keef said:

No, (IMO) it would speak to the level of security of the Creator.

Like, parents who are comfortable being intellectually challenged by their children. My goal - as a parent - is for my child to become learn-ed.

I hope and assume (because I was designed to learn and understand) that the eventual goal is for me (the created) is also to learn and become autonomous.

I understand I am not there yet - but, when looking over my past (history of human development) I am hopeful.

I used children because it's the closet thing we come to creating or bringing into existence that would ever - independently - question us.

[Kryptik]

Mar 23, 2010 14:50:58 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Why familiar?

Mar 23, 2010 14:22:38 GMT -5 Kryptik said:

This has been quite interesting... and unfortunately sooooo familiar.

Familiar because I empathize with Grrrrr's argument and disagree with VP's attempt to debunk! (Even though he has some valid points... hmmm, did I say that?! )

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 23, 2010 15:32:29 GMT -5 Kryptik said:

Mar 23, 2010 14:50:58 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Why familiar?

Familiar because I empathize with Grrrrr's argument and disagree with VP's attempt to debunk! (Even though he has some valid points... hmmm, did I say that?! )

If you disagree because of what I put forth then I can respect that. However if you disagree just to disagree because I'm not a believer of the judeo-christian path then.....

[Kryptik]

I would never disagree just to disagree VP. Believe it or not, we share a lot of views on things. I just disagree with the argument you were making about a creator, particularly how you posed it. I just have yet had the time to think about how to best relay my thoughts.

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 23, 2010 15:09:52 GMT -5 @nsync said:

***Um...clears throat.***

Well I really was just looking for a name or something. But okay. Yeah. So you think woman is your creator....
SHE universal feminine.....


This is all good to know if we should ever speak again about religion and philosophy.

So Thanks...not to the disrespect or insults never to those...but thanks anyhow

Whatever please miss me with the passive aggressiveness. Your attempts of being facetious and condescending get exposed and then you claim disrespect? Typical. If you want to know where I stand... start at the beginning of this section and read what I have said for 2 years. When you make broad sweeping statements like "Oh your arguments are only centered on this that and the third" then it is shown I have spoken otherwise, take that lump. When you state I haven't put forth where I stand and it is shown not only that I have BUT you are posting in the same damn thread like here >>> onolympus.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=relig&action=display&thread=7004&page=3 it shows your arguments lack merit.

You're trying to fish in an attempt to formulate a baseless argument. How can I take you serious when I have written on this very board where I stand but yet and still you say haven't. Where were you during the Where are the women in heaven thread? Where were you during the What do you think "God" looks like thread? How about Decoding the Bible: The hidden Serpent Goddess? How about the DNA Proves God thread? One thing is crystal clear here....either you haven't been reading or maybe you can't tackle the stance I have put forth. Even if you could you are not and have not been sincere with your dialogue thus far. Therefore I will continue to deal with you as such during the foreseeable future. Basically I see right through you.

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 23, 2010 16:09:54 GMT -5 Kryptik said:

I would never disagree just to disagree VP. Believe it or not, we share a lot of views on things. I just disagree with the argument you were making about a creator, particularly how you posed it. I just have yet had the time to think about how to best relay my thoughts.

Cool I'll check back periodically

[Julie Art]

Mar 23, 2010 16:52:49 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Im talking about disrespect to my beliefs/religions. The stuff you say about it. That's disrespect. Actually I am not trying to formulate an argument. I told you that long ago. lol

I just wanted to know what you believe.

Nothing more nothing less.

About me being passive aggresive. If you only knew sonny...

Mar 23, 2010 16:30:15 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Whatever please miss me with the passive aggressiveness. Your attempts of being facetious and condescending get exposed and then you claim disrespect? Typical. If you want to know where I stand... start at the beginning of this section and read what I have said for 2 years. When you make broad sweeping statements like "Oh your arguments are only centered on this that and the third" then it is shown I have spoken otherwise, take that lump. When you state I haven't put forth where I stand and it is shown not only that I have BUT you are posting in the same damn thread like here >>> onolympus.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=relig&action=display&thread=7004&page=3 it shows your arguments lack merit.

You're trying to fish in an attempt to formulate a baseless argument. How can I take you serious when I have written on this very board where I stand but yet and still you say haven't. Where were you during the Where are the women in heaven thread? Where were you during the What do you think "God" looks like thread? How about Decoding the Bible: The hidden Serpent Goddess? How about the DNA Proves God thread? One thing is crystal clear here....either you haven't been reading or maybe you can't tackle the stance I have put forth. Even if you could you are not and have not been sincere with your dialogue thus far. Therefore I will continue to deal with you as such during the foreseeable future. Basically I see right through you.

Words in blue, do I have my exhalt powers back? I believe I do, once is coming your wayyyyyyyyyyyyy now!

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 23, 2010 16:52:49 GMT -5 @nsync said:

Im talking about disrespect to my beliefs/religions. The stuff you say about it. That's disrespect. Actually I am not trying to formulate an argument. I told you that long ago. lol

I just wanted to know what you believe.

Nothing more nothing less.

About me being passive aggresive. If you only knew sonny...

Mar 23, 2010 16:30:15 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

Whatever please miss me with the passive aggressiveness. Your attempts of being facetious and condescending get exposed and then you claim disrespect? Typical. If you want to know where I stand... start at the beginning of this section and read what I have said for 2 years. When you make broad sweeping statements like "Oh your arguments are only centered on this that and the third" then it is shown I have spoken otherwise, take that lump. When you state I haven't put forth where I stand and it is shown not only that I have BUT you are posting in the same damn thread like here >>> onolympus.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=relig&action=display&thread=7004&page=3 it shows your arguments lack merit.

You're trying to fish in an attempt to formulate a baseless argument. How can I take you serious when I have written on this very board where I stand but yet and still you say haven't. Where were you during the Where are the women in heaven thread? Where were you during the What do you think "God" looks like thread? How about Decoding the Bible: The hidden Serpent Goddess? How about the DNA Proves God thread? One thing is crystal clear here....either you haven't been reading or maybe you can't tackle the stance I have put forth. Even if you could you are not and have not been sincere with your dialogue thus far. Therefore I will continue to deal with you as such during the foreseeable future. Basically I see right through you.

It's called having an opinion and that's life. If you choose to engage me concerning MY opinions then that's on you. More times than none you engage me. You ask questions of me. If you don't like what I have to say or feel some way about it then as I said before skip on. It's very selfish self centered and sensitive to think your religion is beyond reproach when you offer commentary or ask questions of me in an attempt to rebuttal. Basically I see right through you..... anddddd you don't like it. Again you are being passive aggressive. Get on your magic

[DamieQue™]

*To original post and question*

I have re-read your posts and your summation (given in response to Ghost) and I think you're going to have to add me to the column of people that agree with denounced. Based on what I understand to be your context - IMO the question actually lacks a foundation to be asked... I'll explain

I believe you said:

We don't know just what this creator or all the things of that world can or CAN NOT do or have happen.

Well what do we know about Him and from where do we gain that knowledge. If you can know nothing about God, because knowing something about Him puts limits on Him, then there is no point to asking ANY question about God. If you could answer it, you would know, and your knowledge is limitation.

Now to be certain - this was not the original objection that I raised (which was a different logic problem altogether that I contend still exists) but maybe you have considered this and could explain that it's really not a conundrum at all. But as for now, IMO, I think your approach necessarily conflates limits of our understanding with corresponding limits of His existence. The proverbial Can God make a rock so big that even He can't lift it question.
That type of hang up, to my mind's eye, is a HUMAN limitation. It is a limitation of our imagination or perception or conceptualization or intellect, that doesn't mean that actually exists on Him.

Now... I know you stated that you didn't assume that everyone is coming from a biblical perspective. Fair enough. For those of us who do, who ventured to respond, the question is (with greatest respect) baseless because (even though you don't agree) there IS an idea embedded in the question and it is one that is diametrically opposed to what we believe our Creator has taught us. He HAS no creator. I can postulate with the best of them on how this might be visualized (I gave it a shot early on in the thread) but we don't have to imagine or make up anything regarding God's lack of a creator (for those of us attempting to answer from a Biblical perspective) - we just have to believe Him when He says as much.

Exodus 8:9 And Moses said unto Pharaoh, Glory over me: when shall I intreat for thee, and for thy servants, and for thy people, to destroy the frogs from thee and thy houses, that they may remain in the river only? And he said, To morrow. And he said, Be it according to thy word: that thou mayest know that there is none like unto the LORD our God.

Exodus 9:13 And the LORD said unto Moses, Rise up early in the morning, and stand before Pharaoh, and say unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me. For I will at this time send all my plagues upon thine heart, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people; that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth.

Deuteronomy 4:33 Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live? Or hath God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation, by temptations, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes? Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.

Deuteronomy 4:39 Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.

1 Samuel 2:2 There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.

1 Kings 8:59 And let these my words, wherewith I have made supplication before the LORD, be nigh unto the LORD our God day and night, that he maintain the cause of his servant, and the cause of his people Israel at all times, as the matter shall require: That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else.

1 Chronicles 17:20 O LORD, there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Psalms 86:8 Among the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works. All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord; and shall glorify thy name. For thou art great, and doest wondrous things: thou art God alone.

Isaiah 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them. Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Isaiah 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

Isaiah 45:14 Thus saith the LORD, The labour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia and of the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thine: they shall come after thee; in chains they shall come over, and they shall fall down unto thee, they shall make supplication unto thee, saying, Surely God is in thee; and there is none else, there is no God.

Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Isaiah 45:20 Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations: they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save. Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

Jeremiah 10:6 Forasmuch as there is none like unto thee, O LORD; thou art great, and thy name is great in might. Who would not fear thee, O King of nations? for to thee doth it appertain: forasmuch as among all the wise men of the nations, and in all their kingdoms, there is none like unto thee. But they are altogether brutish and foolish: the stock is a doctrine of vanities

Daniel 3:28 Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God. Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort.

Joel 2:27 And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.

Mark 12:28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:

1 Corinthians 8:4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Respectfully, for those of us with even a few of these verses sitting in the back of our minds, the question of "who created your creator" isn't unanswerable - it's irrelevant. The premise of the question is untrue - based on what I believe our Creator has said. If it was just found in one verse I'd see more leniency for interpretation, but when it's repeated across the Testaments, it's difficult (though not impossible) to discern other interpretations

[DamieQue™]

Mar 24, 2010 17:00:45 GMT -5 @nsync said:

The question was universal with no embedded idea except that people would answer according to their beliefs system----- which is something you have done. Thanks.

Respectfully disagree. Does your creator have a creator vs Who created your creator are similar questions but begin with 2 entirely different premises. I know you don't agree and that's fine, but I'm just stating my position for those who might come later when we have all long since left OO and they are examining the wreckage of the website to see how we lived 1000 years ago.

It would be like me asking, "why do women lie more"? It is a question with an idea embedded in it (that women do lie more) that you may not even accept as true. Why would you venture to answer the why if you don't even accept the premise? Again, I know you don't agree - but this post is really moreso for posterity not rebuttal.

[Vudu_Prince]

Mar 24, 2010 16:46:48 GMT -5 DamieQue™ said:

*To original post and question*

I have re-read your posts and your summation (given in response to Ghost) and I think you're going to have to add me to the column of people that agree with denounced. Based on what I understand to be your context - IMO the question actually lacks a foundation to be asked... I'll explain

I believe you said:

We don't know just what this creator or all the things of that world can or CAN NOT do or have happen.

Well what do we know about Him and from where do we gain that knowledge. If you can know nothing about God, because knowing something about Him puts limits on Him, then there is no point to asking ANY question about God. If you could answer it, you would know, and your knowledge is limitation.

Now to be certain - this was not the original objection that I raised (which was a different logic problem altogether that I contend still exists) but maybe you have considered this and could explain that it's really not a conundrum at all. But as for now, IMO, I think your approach necessarily conflates limits of our understanding with corresponding limits of His existence. The proverbial Can God make a rock so big that even He can't lift it question.
That type of hang up, to my mind's eye, is a HUMAN limitation. It is a limitation of our imagination or perception or conceptualization or intellect, that doesn't mean that actually exists on Him.

Now... I know you stated that you didn't assume that everyone is coming from a biblical perspective. Fair enough. For those of us who do, who ventured to respond, the question is (with greatest respect) baseless because (even though you don't agree) there IS an idea embedded in the question and it is one that is diametrically opposed to what we believe our Creator has taught us. He HAS no creator. I can postulate with the best of them on how this might be visualized (I gave it a shot early on in the thread) but we don't have to imagine or make up anything regarding God's lack of a creator (for those of us attempting to answer from a Biblical perspective) - we just have to believe Him when He says as much.

Exodus 8:9 And Moses said unto Pharaoh, Glory over me: when shall I intreat for thee, and for thy servants, and for thy people, to destroy the frogs from thee and thy houses, that they may remain in the river only? And he said, To morrow. And he said, Be it according to thy word: that thou mayest know that there is none like unto the LORD our God.

Exodus 9:13 And the LORD said unto Moses, Rise up early in the morning, and stand before Pharaoh, and say unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me. For I will at this time send all my plagues upon thine heart, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people; that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth.

Deuteronomy 4:33 Did ever people hear the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live? Or hath God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation, by temptations, by signs, and by wonders, and by war, and by a mighty hand, and by a stretched out arm, and by great terrors, according to all that the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes? Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him.

Deuteronomy 4:39 Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.

1 Samuel 2:2 There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.

1 Kings 8:59 And let these my words, wherewith I have made supplication before the LORD, be nigh unto the LORD our God day and night, that he maintain the cause of his servant, and the cause of his people Israel at all times, as the matter shall require: That all the people of the earth may know that the LORD is God, and that there is none else.

1 Chronicles 17:20 O LORD, there is none like thee, neither is there any God beside thee, according to all that we have heard with our ears.

Psalms 86:8 Among the gods there is none like unto thee, O Lord; neither are there any works like unto thy works. All nations whom thou hast made shall come and worship before thee, O Lord; and shall glorify thy name. For thou art great, and doest wondrous things: thou art God alone.

Isaiah 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour.

Isaiah 44:6 Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. And who, as I, shall call, and shall declare it, and set it in order for me, since I appointed the ancient people? and the things that are coming, and shall come, let them shew unto them. Fear ye not, neither be afraid: have not I told thee from that time, and have declared it? ye are even my witnesses. Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any.

Isaiah 45:5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else.

Isaiah 45:14 Thus saith the LORD, The labour of Egypt, and merchandise of Ethiopia and of the Sabeans, men of stature, shall come over unto thee, and they shall be thine: they shall come after thee; in chains they shall come over, and they shall fall down unto thee, they shall make supplication unto thee, saying, Surely God is in thee; and there is none else, there is no God.

Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

Isaiah 45:20 Assemble yourselves and come; draw near together, ye that are escaped of the nations: they have no knowledge that set up the wood of their graven image, and pray unto a god that cannot save. Tell ye, and bring them near; yea, let them take counsel together: who hath declared this from ancient time? who hath told it from that time? have not I the LORD? and there is no God else beside me; a just God and a Saviour; there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else.

Isaiah 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country: yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.

Jeremiah 10:6 Forasmuch as there is none like unto thee, O LORD; thou art great, and thy name is great in might. Who would not fear thee, O King of nations? for to thee doth it appertain: forasmuch as among all the wise men of the nations, and in all their kingdoms, there is none like unto thee. But they are altogether brutish and foolish: the stock is a doctrine of vanities

Daniel 3:28 Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God. Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort.

Joel 2:27 And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed.

Mark 12:28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he:

1 Corinthians 8:4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Respectfully, for those of us with even a few of these verses sitting in the back of our minds, the question of "who created your creator" isn't unanswerable - it's irrelevant. The premise of the question is untrue - based on what I believe our Creator has said. If it was just found in one verse I'd see more leniency for interpretation, but when it's repeated across the Testaments, it's difficult (though not impossible) to discern other interpretations

I'll add later but these verses' raise different points especially when it states no god was "formed" before me. Interesting....

[Gee-Are]

VP...

Who created Olodumare?

Who created Allah?

Who created Mawu or Nana Buluku?

[Vudu_Prince]

Apr 5, 2010 9:52:11 GMT -5 Gee-Are said:

VP...

Who created Olodumare?

Who created Allah?

Who created Mawu or Nana Buluku?

Well personally I feel "God" is Universal. More time than not Man has created God in an attempt to make sense of his ignorance as in concern to the origins of Life and Death. Now you have 2 paths that you see in these series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. One path is through erecting a benevolent body as submission to those who have created this world. Usually there is one or a successive priesthood of Leaders whom supposedly have been in contact with the "God" or "Gods". To prove themselves they bend and or break a few the laws(sometimes using trickery and are not breaking anything at all) man are bound to in this physical world. They sometimes use ritual sacrifices as offerings etc. Your stories are then passed on and a promise is given for all who have faith that they too will receive this "knowledge" When in reality the makers of this path are "hoping" the designers of this realm will reveal themselves. Over time the makers realize they can have power over the adherents just as the designers do over man and the path becomes one of domination over the people. Lastly to spread the path it is usually done with the sword. The path makers still hold out hope that the designers will reveal themselves but in the mean time they live as kings and queens with abundance of resources bestowed upon them by the people. They fear no reprisal of breaking any of the laws contained in the path as they are but mere submissive symbolism to get the designers to reveal themselves. You also see path makers within the path copy or sometimes destroy a path to make another.

The second and older less traveled path encompasses at one end none but at the other some if not all of the aforementioned but this path is more so a rebellion. You sometimes find traces of this in pockets of the first path as well. The makers of this path seek to bend and or break every law and rule of the physical realm. This is attempted so that the designers seeing disorder in what they have built manifest to patch the loopholes and reveal the truth. See when I look at Kemet and the Pyramids I see it as a fuck you gesture to the designers. It is a symbol of rebellion that we have a piece of your wisdom and here is the proof. We have done what you have in "heaven" and made it manifest on earth. fuck you. We speak to the dead with the Opening of the Mouth...again fuck You. IFA, Vudu, Obeah, Akan, Dogon all a big fuck you to the designers. We start watching and counting the stars the moon the sun we develop math from the heavens and the one amongst us whom is the female( which is why the female is seen as the sacred feminine her clock naturally in tune with various phenomenon of the cosmos so they in some circles are synonymous). So this path bends and breaks the laws but still has not the answer to the age old questions.. Why do these laws exist in the first place? Why are we here? Where are we going? Why are we going? Do we go at all? Are we here right now? Is this real? Can I trust the five senses I have to know what is real and what isn't? If I can then why can't my five senses "see" the designers?

Both paths Man will and has become beset with greed. Greed to the point that the path of his construction is the right and only path. Greed also by hiding the true nature and foundations in which the knowledge that he has comes from. This is not but an attempt to be the sole receiver of the truth when the designers reveal themselves. Just another form of control and practice emulating what the designers do to man, man then seeks to do to his fellow man as well. Use the unseen to keep the people ignorant.

So do I think "God" is universal... As per my above definition... Yes I do. Do I believe those who are amongst the designers have broken ranks at times to help man along with bits and pieces of info? Surely do. The cold vein is in the end the above questions and many more are not answered. The sciences that we have and coordinates are hypothesis and haven't been confirmed by the maker of this existence. We may know how to break and bend laws but we still don't know why they exist and from whence they have came. As long as this exists then we will continue to see man and his series of attempts to make sense of this ignorance. Which path will you decide to take? Will you submit or rebel?

I figure whats worse than conscious ignorance? Not even torture or death for infinity is worse. Therefore I choose to side in the rebellion. It is a better shot than submitting and using "faith" hoping that truth will be revealed. Vudu Prince April 1, 2009 - Is God Regional Thread

So in short... WE DID. Except for Allah. Allah is an off shoot of Judaism. I'm not a muslim

I would ask if you are seriously interested in understanding where I'm coming from.... go read in this section what I have put forth. Then you'll see it's not that Vudu doesn't put forth where he stands... in reality mofo can't wrap their mind around it. Can't formulate an argument against it. It would also be good if you really read up on Vudu and IFA... the Loa and Orisha's are only the tip of the iceberg. It is the darkness that holds the true power. That is if you are sincere. If not... then I think you know how this will end. Choice is yours

[Gee-Are]

Interesting theories...especially thoughts concerning the systems designed to rebel against the Creator.

I assume you mean this thread:

onolympus.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=relig&action=display&thread=6029

I'll check it out later.

So are you saying that you've resolved Truth will NEVER be revealed, therefore you won't hope that it will be?

What happens if and when Truth is revealed? Does that mean you're HOPING that it isn't?

[Vudu_Prince]

Apr 5, 2010 11:27:51 GMT -5 Gee-Are said:

Interesting theories...especially thoughts concerning the systems designed to rebel against the Creator.

I assume you mean this thread:

onolympus.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=relig&action=display&thread=6029

I'll check it out later.

So are you saying that you've resolved Truth will NEVER be revealed, therefore you won't hope that it will be?

What happens if and when Truth is revealed? Does that mean you're HOPING that it isn't?

I'm looking at your question and I'm not following your logic with that. Maybe you can explain more what you are trying to ask. Furthermore I think I have made it clear I side in the rebellion. It's kinda simple. Yup Power I Right 24 Blast type simple.

[Gee-Are]

Apr 5, 2010 13:08:00 GMT -5 Vudu_Prince said:

I'm looking at your question and I'm not following your logic with that. Maybe you can explain more what you are trying to ask. Furthermore I think I have made it clear I side in the rebellion. It's kinda simple. Yup Power I Right 24 Blast type simple.

You definitely made it clear that you side with the rebellion.

But, it also sounds like you're saying that neither those who submit, nor those who rebel know the Truth in total.

For you, the rebellion knows MORE Truth than the submitters by basically using their own means of ingenuity, because the designers did not share it with them.

That being the case, it appears that those who rebel bank on the idea that the Truth will never be revealed, at least not by the Creator or "designers" as you labeled them. Otherwise why not allow the designer or "seek" the designer to share it.

This is what led to my question of

"So are you saying that you've resolved Truth will NEVER be revealed?"

then I drew a conclusion of "therefore you won't hope that it will be..."

which led to the 2nd question, "What happens if and when Truth is revealed?"

Then I reinforced the conclusion, "Does that mean you're HOPING that it isn't?"

Clearer now?

I'm asking if your choice to rebel, implicates you in hiding or concealing truth, because allowing Truth to be revealed or discussed makes your choice to rebel without merit?

Do you believe those who choose to submit have any semblance of truth via knowledge imparted from the designers, or are you saying the only Truth they know was acquired through interaction with those who rebel?