Ontological Arguments (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Tuesday, September 28, 2010, 11:40 (5169 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

Ever since I was about 10, I have had a theory about 'God'. It didn't fit with religion, and I don't know how to prove it with science, but it is well and truly formed from a lifetime spent in studying many different disciplines. I will try and explain it, but as we have pointed out, sometimes words are just not adequate, and I am always leery of discussing it as people generally tend to be very judgmental in regards to topics of God.
> 
> The basic idea is simply and understatedly, God is energy. My theory is based off of a couple of things:
> 
> Energy and Mass are interchangeable. (I.e. if God is energy, creating mass is a non-issue)
> Energy/Mass can neither be created nor destroyed, it can only change forms, and therefore is eternal.
> Everything, in all places, is connected by energy. (interconnectedness of all things, including mankind's tenuous link to God)
> All of our thoughts and feelings are created by energy. Therefore, if god is energy he would be capable of thought, i.e. intelligence and emotion.
> 
> There are some other things that I am less sure of, though they would seem to fit.
> 
> A)Energy can be manipulated by intent.(implying some kind of link between human thought processes and manipulation of energy beyond their physical body.) 
> 
> B)If energy can be manipulated, then, as energy and mass are interchangeable, by association, mass must be able to be manipulated as well.-I actually agree with this. About the only thing shared throughout the entire universe is energy, even if there's more void than anything else. In your quest for defending the ancients you might also chalk one up for the oft-repeated phrase "God is Light," though I suspect that's more wordplay on my part. -At the same time, if God is energy, and energy and mass are (essentially) the same thing; how/where does the interface happen between God and universe? I'm into the 4th chapter of Martin's book, and though he hasn't gone into it, he resorts to extradimensionality as one argument. He appeals to this to describe what seems to be our unlimited memory capacity.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"