If You Were God

[Guest Davka]

Heck, this revelation was from the Spirit.

How can you possibly be sure of that?

[chefranden]

... You know, something other than "gawd doesn't exist so it is all bs anyhow" Ahhhhhhhh, sorry, I am getting tired of that tired ole statement just typing it...

 

Yah, I know what you mean. I get tired of 2+2=4 too. But what's you gonna do?

 

Nevertheless, I was serious in my delightful tongue in cheek way.

 

What would this mate be? What would be it's purpose? Would the mate be equal to god? Seems it would have to be, or else it would be just some fancy blow up doll. Would god divide his male bits from his female bits? For what reason? The 2 are already one flesh so to speak. Eve was made as a helpmate, does god need a helpmate? Does god need to say, Hey, honey hand me that screw driver, would ya? Thanks! You're a dear, that's why I married you." No I don't think so. God just says, "Let there be a beer in my hand", and behold it is so.

 

Seriously it doesn't make a lick of sense for an all powerful perfect being to even have a creation, let alone a mate. What could be gained?

[dagnarus]

For one thing, that "bride of christ" thing is not a whole bible advent. It's easy to read the new testament and then inventively connect the old one to that concept.

 

Second, and I don't know if you go with the infallible, perfect god motif, but if god has any needs, for a mate or anything, then he's insufficient, which means he's imperfect.

 

Thirdly, since you referred to the BoC, which is a group of individuals, then my question is especially valid. That is, why would I create A mate?

 

Way to go Dhamp...could it be that God was in the process of forming a mate for himself through humanity? (I told you it was abstract). Would you not give that person/entity freedom and not make them mindless robots? And here we are...

 

Isn't that what we desire in a mate is freedom for them but friendship/faith to the highest degree?

 

Good job Dhamp...

 

And then when some of designated mate/mates don't choose us we sentence them to eternal hellfire to show our perfect love for them, and to keep the rest of the bitches in line. How romantic.

[Searska]

Disregarding the "why would the xian God make a mate?" question for a moment, suppose he/she/it did. Said mate would have to be made as perfect as God is. If it was, what are the odds that the mate wouldn't just run off and decide that it was better off on its own? It would be complete, perfectly capable of taking care of itself without the aid of another perfect being. And if the mate was made somehow flawed to make the it interesting, would it not live a life of shame, bound to a being it can never satisfy and standards that are impossible to reach? (Not to mention that as punishment for failing to reach those standards, the SO faces an eternity of agony and suffering.) It's an act of horrible sadism, to create a being under these circumstances. The options for the created creature become slim. By its imperfect creation, it cannot overcome its flaws and goes to hell. The depth of horror for a creature like this is virtually unfathomable. It's no small wonder that the xian God has no mate, as anyone would go stark raving mad from the pressure.

 

Now, if it were something powerful enough (but not perfect) that we could call it a deity, such as the Greek or Egyptian pantheon, making a mate is a much more pleasant thing. A mate compliments, completes, strengthens and nurtures. A mate aids the birth of a new generation. It wasn't always smooth, and many of the deities had epic arguments and break-ups, but it was never a dull thing. (I fear the deity with boredom on the brain) Many of the deities of these religions had mates, if not multiple partners. A perfect god has no need of these things, as it would be all things at once to itself.

[mwc]

Are we talking about Asherah?

 

YHWH ditched her since his little human friends didn't like her anymore. He killed his son because of his little human pals too. If you're a human you're not safe since he's going to do you in based on what some of the other little humans think. It's not good to be hooked up with YHWH.

 

mwc

[Guest end3]

... You know, something other than "gawd doesn't exist so it is all bs anyhow" Ahhhhhhhh, sorry, I am getting tired of that tired ole statement just typing it...

 

Yah, I know what you mean. I get tired of 2+2=4 too. But what's you gonna do?

 

Nevertheless, I was serious in my delightful tongue in cheek way.

 

What would this mate be? What would be it's purpose? Would the mate be equal to god? Seems it would have to be, or else it would be just some fancy blow up doll. Would god divide his male bits from his female bits? For what reason? The 2 are already one flesh so to speak. Eve was made as a helpmate, does god need a helpmate? Does god need to say, Hey, honey hand me that screw driver, would ya? Thanks! You're a dear, that's why I married you." No I don't think so. God just says, "Let there be a beer in my hand", and behold it is so.

 

Seriously it doesn't make a lick of sense for an all powerful perfect being to even have a creation, let alone a mate. What could be gained?

 

So why the bride scenerio...the church becoming the bride? Seriously, isn't that what you want from your wife, faith beyond reproach? And if you don't get it, then you will "discard" her.....to the trash so to speak....hell...make sense now????

[Guest end3]

For one thing, that "bride of christ" thing is not a whole bible advent. It's easy to read the new testament and then inventively connect the old one to that concept.

 

Second, and I don't know if you go with the infallible, perfect god motif, but if god has any needs, for a mate or anything, then he's insufficient, which means he's imperfect.

 

Thirdly, since you referred to the BoC, which is a group of individuals, then my question is especially valid. That is, why would I create A mate?

 

Way to go Dhamp...could it be that God was in the process of forming a mate for himself through humanity? (I told you it was abstract). Would you not give that person/entity freedom and not make them mindless robots? And here we are...

 

Isn't that what we desire in a mate is freedom for them but friendship/faith to the highest degree?

 

Good job Dhamp...

 

And then when some of designated mate/mates don't choose us we sentence them to eternal hellfire to show our perfect love for them, and to keep the rest of the bitches in line. How romantic.

 

You have heard of divorce Dag? If trust is broken to a degree, then we discard them? like trash, like hell....to keep the "bitches" inline....

[Guest end3]

Disregarding the "why would the xian God make a mate?" question for a moment, suppose he/she/it did. Said mate would have to be made as perfect as God is. If it was, what are the odds that the mate wouldn't just run off and decide that it was better off on its own? It would be complete, perfectly capable of taking care of itself without the aid of another perfect being. And if the mate was made somehow flawed to make the it interesting, would it not live a life of shame, bound to a being it can never satisfy and standards that are impossible to reach? (Not to mention that as punishment for failing to reach those standards, the SO faces an eternity of agony and suffering.) It's an act of horrible sadism, to create a being under these circumstances. The options for the created creature become slim. By its imperfect creation, it cannot overcome its flaws and goes to hell. The depth of horror for a creature like this is virtually unfathomable. It's no small wonder that the xian God has no mate, as anyone would go stark raving mad from the pressure.

 

And how does Christ not address the problems you pose?

 

]

[chefranden]

So why the bride scenerio...the church becoming the bride? Seriously, isn't that what you want from your wife, faith beyond reproach? And if you don't get it, then you will "discard" her.....to the trash so to speak....hell...make sense now????

 

Fuck, I hope she knows better than to believe in me by now.

 

Oh, you mean faithfulness? No I don't think I'd trash her for lack of that. Too much trouble being retrained at my age. But I'd sure as hell be surprised if it happened.

 

Are you trying to say that God did make a mate, the church? That's freaky since the Church is also the body of Christ. Oh boy, maybe God is a Republican after all.

[Guest Davka]

So why the bride scenerio...the church becoming the bride? Seriously, isn't that what you want from your wife, faith beyond reproach? And if you don't get it, then you will "discard" her.....to the trash so to speak....hell...make sense now????

I'm not clear on the question. Are you asking "why does the Bible call the church the bride of Christ"?

[dagnarus]

For one thing, that "bride of christ" thing is not a whole bible advent. It's easy to read the new testament and then inventively connect the old one to that concept.

 

Second, and I don't know if you go with the infallible, perfect god motif, but if god has any needs, for a mate or anything, then he's insufficient, which means he's imperfect.

 

Thirdly, since you referred to the BoC, which is a group of individuals, then my question is especially valid. That is, why would I create A mate?

 

Way to go Dhamp...could it be that God was in the process of forming a mate for himself through humanity? (I told you it was abstract). Would you not give that person/entity freedom and not make them mindless robots? And here we are...

 

Isn't that what we desire in a mate is freedom for them but friendship/faith to the highest degree?

 

Good job Dhamp...

 

And then when some of designated mate/mates don't choose us we sentence them to eternal hellfire to show our perfect love for them, and to keep the rest of the bitches in line. How romantic.

 

You have heard of divorce Dag? If trust is broken to a degree, then we discard them? like trash, like hell....to keep the "bitches" inline....

 

First off I can't see how you can compare divorce with hellfire. Second we haven't gotten to the divorce stage yet (well actually those on this board have but not most of humanity). If man was created with free-will then we have to say that he has the choice to choose god or not to choose god, I.E. choose to marry or choose not to marry. This is supported by the fact that when children are born they know nothing of god. Thus we would have to say that god is still in the courting phase. Now just to ask the question if you were to read/watch a romance in which one of the male leads was seeking to marry the female lead, but backed up his advances with the threat of ruining her if she didn't return his feelings would you be rooting for him to win?

[Dhampir]

You didn't answer my last question, but I'll charge on regardless... If you really want to think outside the box, you should consider that maybe a "mate" isn't what a god, much less your God, is after. Especially given my previous arguments, it could be that the idea of "mating" is so... rudimentary... as to be totally useless at the very least, and completely unthinkable otherwise.

 

That said, what would you really do if you were God?

[Weetie]

Everybody seems to be hung up on the word "mate". If you're thinking in terms of an opposite sex "spouse" for God, then yeah, it's kind of a silly question. But if you interpret it in the Australian/British usage, i.e. a good buddy, then it makes total sense. I think if I were God, I'd create a mate shortly after I created alcohol in all its manifestations. Come to think of it... I'd create a whole bunch of mates to be my posse, then we'd go party in Vegas, baby.

[Guest end3]

Everybody seems to be hung up on the word "mate". If you're thinking in terms of an opposite sex "spouse" for God, then yeah, it's kind of a silly question. But if you interpret it in the Australian/British usage, i.e. a good buddy, then it makes total sense. I think if I were God, I'd create a mate shortly after I created alcohol in all its manifestations. Come to think of it... I'd create a whole bunch of mates to be my posse, then we'd go party in Vegas, baby.

 

Damn it, score one for Weetie. I think I said a few posts back that a friend or companion was probably a better choice of words.

 

And the entire point is: God gave his created friend/companion free will instead ofthe alternative. He provided a place to hang out....garden a little in your spare time....and even provided a naked woman to boot.

 

Then, his friend turned on him, so he said go hang with the one you trust(insert Satan here).

 

Now, he has provided a way back by making the friendship voluntary through trust. You can hang with God or Satan, but it's your choice.

 

Thank you Weetie

 

And who wants a friend they can't trust?

[Dhampir]

Everybody seems to be hung up on the word "mate". If you're thinking in terms of an opposite sex "spouse" for God, then yeah, it's kind of a silly question. But if you interpret it in the Australian/British usage, i.e. a good buddy, then it makes total sense. I think if I were God, I'd create a mate shortly after I created alcohol in all its manifestations. Come to think of it... I'd create a whole bunch of mates to be my posse, then we'd go party in Vegas, baby.

 

Damn it, score one for Weetie. I think I said a few posts back that a friend or companion was probably a better choice of words.

 

And the entire point is: God gave his created friend/companion free will instead ofthe alternative. He provided a place to hang out....garden a little in your spare time....and even provided a naked woman to boot.

 

Then, his friend turned on him, so he said go hang with the one you trust(insert Satan here).

 

Now, he has provided a way back by making the friendship voluntary through trust. You can hang with God or Satan, but it's your choice.

 

Thank you Weetie

 

And who wants a friend they can't trust?

 

OR, God is and has always been the untrustworthy friend. You know, the whole, "I'm going to put this tree here, but don't touch it" and the "if you eat the fruit, you'll die" stuff. then the snake comes along (the snake, NOT Satan) and says that's not true, what will really happen is you'll gain god's knowledge. And upon eating the fruit, it turns out that the snake was telling the truth, and God was just joshin'. Not a good basis for a trust based "friendship", really.

 

That aside, what makes "friend" any better a term than "mate"? I mean, what would be so different in God's case having a friend over a romantic mate?

[Guest end3]

That aside, what makes "friend" any better a term than "mate"? I mean, what would be so different in God's case having a friend over a romantic mate?

 

I don't guess you have met my wife! No really, on a lighter note, and I mean maybe 30 lbs.....(a small tribute to Dangerfield)

 

Dhamp, if you find that friend like a beer drinking buddy that you can screw as well, then, you my friend are already in Heaven. But until then.....

[chefranden]

1. And the entire point is: God gave his created friend/companion free will instead ofthe alternative. He provided a place to hang out....garden a little in your spare time....and even provided a naked woman to boot.

 

2. Then, his friend turned on him, so he said go hang with the one you trust(insert Satan here).

 

3. Now, he has provided a way back by making the friendship voluntary through trust. You can hang with God or Satan, but it's your choice.

 

Thank you Weetie

 

And who wants a friend they can't trust?

 

1. "Say buddy, I gave you free will, but you'd better not use it, cause I will fuck you up if you do, but friendly like, if you take my meaning."

 

2. Jesus, if I were a friend of my friend, I wouldn't make him sit in the living room with my naked hot wife for extended periods of time and then send a snake in to say it's ok when he manages to ignore her for a time.

 

3. Voluntary? "Love me, or I will fuck you up -- no shit! I will! I'm not kidding here!"

 

Besides, what's God's bitch? He's got millions kissing his big toe. (He isn't so much looking for a fishing buddy as an ass licker.) How many friends does God need?

 

Besides, if I'm God's friend I have to tell him when he fucks up, or else I'm not his friend. "Look here old buddy, you are being a bit of an asshole. These here are just plain folks and you are a god for pete's sake. Lighten up a tad! Here have a bite of this fruit. It's pretty tasty."

[Guest end3]

Besides, if I'm God's friend I have to tell him when he fucks up, or else I'm not his friend. "Look here old buddy, you are being a bit of an asshole. These here are just plain folks and you are a god for pete's sake.

 

Oh, you mean like Moses

 

 

Hell, if Weetie can get it, I know you do too. (No offense Weetie)

[Ouroboros]

As God, would I need to have a mate?

He didn't think it was suitable for Adam, and Adam was created in His image. And the whole Bible seems to be the need of God to develop a suitable bride, no?

You have to admit though, that it's rather strange that God would have a gender of some kind. Perhaps "mate" should be seen rather as "friend"?But then again, if God is complete and doesn't need anything, why would he ever need a mate? Isn't "need" or "want" a question of something missing? How can someone who has everything be lacking something?

Yes, but not today....and Genesis 1:27 also makes me think that the God form has both male and female aspects.

What is a "male" vs "female" aspect, besides the physical differences? Does cooking food constitute a "female" aspect? And fixing cars a male aspect? I wonder what makes God male+female even. I think a proper view of God is that God is asexual, does not have a sex at all, and doesn't take side. Sex/Gender is only valid in human context, or the context of nature, but not in the divine.

Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

And metrosexual, homosexual, transgender, ...You know, some babies are born without sex organs, and some are born with both. Are they in God's image too?

[Dhampir]

That aside, what makes "friend" any better a term than "mate"? I mean, what would be so different in God's case having a friend over a romantic mate?

 

I don't guess you have met my wife! No really, on a lighter note, and I mean maybe 30 lbs.....(a small tribute to Dangerfield)

 

Dhamp, if you find that friend like a beer drinking buddy that you can screw as well, then, you my friend are already in Heaven. But until then.....

 

 

As God, would I need to have a mate?

He didn't think it was suitable for Adam, and Adam was created in His image. And the whole Bible seems to be the need of God to develop a suitable bride, no?

You have to admit though, that it's rather strange that God would have a gender of some kind. Perhaps "mate" should be seen rather as "friend"?But then again, if God is complete and doesn't need anything, why would he ever need a mate? Isn't "need" or "want" a question of something missing? How can someone who has everything be lacking something?

 

What Han here is saying is clearly what I meant when I asked " what would be so different in God's case having a friend over a romantic mate?" Note that I qualified my statement with the words "in God's case", now underlined-- I realize I should have done that first, woulda' made it harder to misinterpret what I was asking. For God, not Dhampir, what's so different between a mate and a buddy? Earlier, I expressed confusion at the prospect of what your god would do with a mate. I'm equally clueless about what he would do with a buddy, and I still don't know what the difference would be.

[Guest end3]

Perhaps "mate" should be seen rather as "friend"?But then again, if God is complete and doesn't need anything, why would he ever need a mate? Isn't "need" or "want" a question of something missing? How can someone who has everything be lacking something?[

 

Do you have a speculation of then why create anything?

[Guest end3]

That aside, what makes "friend" any better a term than "mate"? I mean, what would be so different in God's case having a friend over a romantic mate?

 

I don't guess you have met my wife! No really, on a lighter note, and I mean maybe 30 lbs.....(a small tribute to Dangerfield)

 

Dhamp, if you find that friend like a beer drinking buddy that you can screw as well, then, you my friend are already in Heaven. But until then.....

 

 

As God, would I need to have a mate?

He didn't think it was suitable for Adam, and Adam was created in His image. And the whole Bible seems to be the need of God to develop a suitable bride, no?

You have to admit though, that it's rather strange that God would have a gender of some kind. Perhaps "mate" should be seen rather as "friend"?But then again, if God is complete and doesn't need anything, why would he ever need a mate? Isn't "need" or "want" a question of something missing? How can someone who has everything be lacking something?

 

What Han here is saying is clearly what I meant when I asked " what would be so different in God's case having a friend over a romantic mate?" Note that I qualified my statement with the words "in God's case", now underlined-- I realize I should have done that first, woulda' made it harder to misinterpret what I was asking. For God, not Dhampir, what's so different between a mate and a buddy? Earlier, I expressed confusion at the prospect of what your god would do with a mate. I'm equally clueless about what he would do with a buddy, and I still don't know what the difference would be.

 

I think I understand better Dhamp. I think the answer still goes to our "shadow" is from the image of God, so all I can speculate is if I have these needs/qualities, then one would suppose God has/had the same enjoyment/frustrations.

 

That is about the best I can do....

[chefranden]

Besides, if I'm God's friend I have to tell him when he fucks up, or else I'm not his friend. "Look here old buddy, you are being a bit of an asshole. These here are just plain folks and you are a god for pete's sake.

 

Oh, you mean like Moses

 

 

Hell, if Weetie can get it, I know you do too. (No offense Weetie)

 

I'd hardly call Moses God's friend. All Moses got to see of God was his ass. That God mooned Moses doesn't strike me as a sign of friendship. No Moses was more of a butler, agent, or middle manager,not a friend.

 

So you think that god wants drinking buddies? God wants to get smashed and ogle some silicon enhanced tits at the Follies? This seem counter to the usual prudishness assigned to God. Sure Jesus hung out with whores and supplied the booze at parties, but nobody ever accuses him of sampling the goods. Jesus never got drunk, and he never gave any thought to fucking Mary, or Martha, because that would be sin. And Jesus just didn't sin. He never told an off color joke. If he told any jokes at all it would have been of the why did the chicken cross the road variety. Boring! But what's worse he expects you to be boring too. Why make drinking buddies and then disallow them to drink?

 

Why don't you ask these questions?

 

You get these ideas then expect us to what? Agree with them? And here I supposed that you wanted the ideas critiqued.

 

You tell me to put on my preacher hat. Well the idea is just as nuts from that perspective. If God wanted a mate, things made out of mud just wouldn't do.

[Dhampir]

Our needs for both mates and buddies are driven by our present evolution. If god has those needs, would that not mean that God is really just a *somewhat* more intelligent (hu)man? Also, if worship, supplication and entreaty are human needs, then to whom does God supplicate? Does that entity have the same needs? It looks like we've arrived at an infinite regression argument.

[Franko47]

Actually, it's an interesting concept; when you think about it.

 

 

There is already the idea that "God" is made up of three independant but confluent parts, in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The idea of merging "gods" to create a new one, or a revised one, is not really that new from a historical sense.

 

It may be that God is of an androgynous nature. I never believed that the "made in His image" had a whole lot to do with the physical/biological elements. I always thought that God was transcendant of biology, in every way, and that the "emulation" aspect of created humans had more to do with the individual as having a singular and unique mind, and existing as a seperate entity. I also perceived that the created human emulated God in it's ability to think, and therefore control it's circumstances, and to create, which unfortunately at some point is in conflict with the religious view that humans are a fallen, loathsome piece of crap, destined to be destroyed by a creator who will not plead guilty to faulty "software/hardware programming".

 

At any rate.... It's interesting to note the resistance that the traditional Churches, and even within the Abrahamic tradition, have toward the "feminine" principle. Yes, women !!! At every turn, the Abrahamic religions have attempted to deny an aspect of the feminine approach to spritualism, philosophy, theology, and even wish to claim that God is in fact a "male". This of course, amounts to intellectual and theological "homosexuality", which is ironic since this forms the basis of all historical theology, so shunned if practiced biologically, but so adored when practiced intellectually and even emotionally.

 

It could be that God embodies the complete masculine and feminine principal, in combination, at a psychological and intellectual level. The biological doesn't matter, since God is not a flesh and blood bio-creature, and the idea of that is essentially arcane, but typical of ancient thinkers projecting their "alpha male egocentric warrior/hunter meta-memes" upon the cosmos.

 

God is often thought as a complete entity. "I am Alpha and Omega" pretty well sums it up. IF God were to create a companion, and God may have done so, then it would be to fulfill a purpose that would likely reach far beyond what our monkey brains and biology can comprehend. The Greeks and Romans thought of Zeus and Hera as a couple; with Zeus being leader of the Gods and the most powerful and wise. Hera came in handy for persuading Zeus to practice mercy and reflect the traits of feminist thinking. Similarily, the Virgin Mary achieves this same function in historical Catholicism. Many great Catholic saints died with a picture of the blessed virgin on their bossoms; and it is typical to appeal to "mom" when dad seems to "harsh".

 

So, if I were that powerful an entity, I would likely create or develop a companion that would compliment attributes I might lack; or want for counsel, or just plain making existence more interesting. You have to feel sorry for an entity that is omnipotent, knows everything, and has no problems that it must confront. A meaningless existence in a way; like no more levels to go in a video game. You've seen it all, you know it all, and there is nowhere left to go in even the process of existence.

 

Then I'd create a partner, mate or companion. Something to offset such a hell; someone who could help me create new challenges, ideas, and bring back the joy of "imperfection".

 

By the way, I never believed that God was omnipotent in the first place. Such a state is not possible; it is a delusionary concept on the part of humans who have confused views about what "power" is.