who is the creator of God? who is the creator of the creator of God?

>>18901249
men

me

>>18901249
God=creation

Learn the basics at least.

>>18901269
does that mean there's power and magick in the earth and in the cosmos to be obtained?

>>18901249
Exactly.
The Universe is literally a paradox. Every Physicist in the world gets to the point where they ask.. "If the chicken laid the egg, then where did the chicken come from?". This applies to energy, waves, particles, fields, matter, everything, Everything in the Universe has a source, the Big Bang, but what is the origin of the Big Bang? Even if we find an origin of the Big Bang, what created that? And so on, and so on. It's an infinite regression.

We simply don't know. People literally go insane thinking about it. It's profound. I don't believe in "God", and even if I did, who created God?

All I know is, WE exist.

>>18901253
/thread

>>18901253
This.

Men are Gods. Women are demons.

File: 1489356130906.jpg (84KB, 536x679px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 536x679px

>>18901249
So I believe it has something to do with matter & anti matter.
> combine both and they cancel each other out
> therfore in order to create something from nothing the sum of 2 parts must equal 0 in a numerical sense.
What we define as "God" is like a universal sentience that is created from the energetic and physical interactions of universe itself.
Humanity as a whole tends humanize an intangible thought.
> Theology was created by MAN.
Love is the only real thing, each moment is both an inevitably and a rarity, to exist is both insufferable and beautiful.
We won't exist for even a blip in the universal time scale yet we are allowed to rationalize that moment and realize some perspective of our vantage in existence.

>>18901249
If by "God" you mean the creator of this simulated universe and all things in it, then the creator of God would be the creator of that simulation, and their creator would the designer of their simulation, and so on.

"But what about the REAL, non-simulated reality at the top of it all that all the simulations are nested inside of. Who created that?" Doesn't exist. All beings exist in simulated realities. It's software designers all the way up.

>>18901349
So gay is okay?

File: tumblr_n74mq5gtEX1qfjfh5o1_500.jpg (93KB, 500x571px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 500x571px

>>18901780

Yep

God created himself.

>>18901815
But how? What were his materials? And is God a *he*, or an *it*?

>>18901249
Paper 1. The Universal Father


1:0.1.THE Universal Father is the God of all creation, the First Source and Center of all things and beings. First think of God as a creator, then as a controller, and lastly as an infinite upholder. The truth about the Universal Father had begun to dawn upon mankind when the prophet said: "You, God, are alone; there is none beside you. You have created the heaven and the heaven of heavens, with all their hosts; you preserve and control them. By the Sons of God were the universes made. The Creator covers himself with light as with a garment and stretches out the heavens as a curtain." Only the concept of the Universal Father—one God in the place of many gods—enabled mortal man to comprehend the Father as divine creator and infinite controller.
1:0.2.The myriads of planetary systems were all made to be eventually inhabited by many different types of intelligent creatures, beings who could know God, receive the divine affection, and love him in return. The universe of universes is the work of God and the dwelling place of his diverse creatures. "God created the heavens and formed the earth; he established the universe and created this world not in vain; he formed it to be inhabited."

>>18901249
God is the set of all creators which contains itself. This becomes a meta entity that can known solely as the Creator.

>>18901249
>eternity of nothing
>a single thought took shape
>start to think of something great, beautiful explosion of light occurs
>"this is the beginning of something great", visualise multiple instances for all thoughts to be conveyed
>when you dream, you see parts of those instances
>everything and everyone is connected as they are created by the same thought, infinite thought
>has a dream of yours become real?
>have you had deja vu?
>you don't have to believe
>just live your life

>>18901249
Ryan's mental health is deteriorating, kinda sad

>>18902161
sauce

>>18902241
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a7KHwJLxGE

God isn't a being, it's everything. Everything has existed forever. If not inside this universe, outside of it.

File: 1492186744335.jpg (1MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3264x2448px

If an error is big enough, it starts to appear elegant.

Asking the wrong question, ask why there is duality.

>>18902161
Who's Ryan

you

>God's dad
>God's granddad
protip: they both think God is wasting his time with our universe and should get a real job

Higgs boson

>>18901340
The egg came first. The animal that came from the egg was later called a chicken.

>>18901249
God is everything, so the question doesn't make sense.

>>18901413
/thread

File: kodode.png (29KB, 270x223px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 270x223px

>>18903016
Interesting.

>>18903206
What the hell are you talking about?

>>18903609
We stand around a punchbowl, came from the same punchbowl, and will return to that punch bowl in the end.

>>18901249
Ambiguous post with black guy. Hi /pol/. What's funny about being stupid all the time?

>>18903609
This shit is simple, nigger. The parents of the first chicken ever born were not quite chickens, as their DNA would've kept them from breeding with modern chickens. The first chicken born, as in the first creature to ever be classifiable as a chicken, started as an egg.

>but where do you draw the line between kind-of-chicken and chicken?
Doesn't fucking matter because all birds start from eggs so, no matter where the line was drawn that first chicken was an egg first.

>>18903625
It's just the same retarded meme.

File: avatar categories.gif (75KB, 1100x800px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1100x800px

>>18901249
Well, God is the answer to both, but if you'd like my sect offers specifics.

And technically, the only place "creation" happens are the temporary manifestations within the material energy. Everything else - you, me, God, the material energy itself - is eternal, having no beginning, no end.

>>18901340
Most people questioning an ultimate source will end on an arbitrary, irrational stopping point that I feel can be classified into three: conscious/personal/God, unconscious/impersonal/Energy, illusion/infinite regression/Void.

>>18903016
Well Nanda Maharaja often worries that God is too mischevious and tries to discipline Him, but it's entirely due to how much he loves his son God and knows he has to perform his proper duties as a parent.

Didn't find much on God's paternal grandfather, but here's a nice breakdown on a verse about him from the Vraja-vilasa.
http://news.vrindavantoday.org/2016/05/vraja-vilasa-13-krishnas-grandfather-parjanya/

I also found a nice photo tour along with some pasttimes of Krishna's neighborhood when God was a child.
http://www.vaisnava.cz/clanek_en.php3?no=187

>>18901249
God is the term we use to describe something bigger or better than ourselves.
People need God or Gods to hope for something better because people need something better than what we are experiencing while "alive". God or Gods, did not create religion. Religion was created by man to set a standard or morals to give people hope or purpose.

>>18901249
>who is the creator of God?
There is no creator of God for He is infinite, and eternal; He was always, and always will be.
Infinity:-
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1007.htm
Eternity:-http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1010.htm
>who is the creator of the creator of God?
N/A

>>18901283
It means you can create them.

>>18903628
There was no "first chicken", unless one believes in creationism. You are the same species as your parents, as your grandparents, and as your great-granparents, as your great-great-grandparents, and as your great-great-great-grandparents. However you are not the same species as your great(x1,000,000)-grandparents as it would impossible for you two to rear children, regardless of blood-relation. But the child of your great(x1,000,000)-grandparents could mate with your great(x1,000,000)-grandparents (ignoring incestral problems), and their children could rear children with them (again ignoring incestral problems) continuing.

>>18901249
we created Him for peace of mind about the afterlife.
Humans are just a lottery winner of existence, we are not building to last

>>18906034
But I take it this is not the same as God creating himself, correct?

>>18906076
Correct. He has simply existed for all time; he had no beginning, and no end.

the void created god
god created the void

File: 1461292736301.gif (1MB, 250x226px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 250x226px

>>18906054
not that anon, but how do you factor in random mutation? The first instance of the mutation that deviates enough from the parents of the chicken, makes it the chicken. Thats evolution nigga. Regardless, calling a thing by any particular name is a human concept. We categorize and hypothesize to make order in a chaotic world.

>>18901977
this still doesn't answer OP's question

>>18906054
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

Not all evolutionary theories hold that mutation is steady and gradual.

>>18906328
Read Darwin's Radio by Greg Bear.

>>18906328
If you were a different species from your parents your species would die out as soon as you died. This would be as you could not be able to read children with any other member, as you would be the only member of your entire species.

File: 1462202794825.gif (2MB, 300x161px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 300x161px

>>18906357
Looks like an interesting read, I've thought about that concept a few times. Seems plausible.

>>18906375
Rear* not "read".

>>18906375
Its not really a matter of one thing being called a chicken, its a list of attributes that one thing must have to be categorized into a particular subset of things. If it has enough attributes that we associate with it being a particular type of thing, or enough to elicit the creation of a new sub category. You could call each and every person a different species if you wanted to look finely enough, but we don't because we share so much in common. Does that make sense to you?

>>18906402
"...new sub category, [then that's what we do.]" dunno where my brain went there. My, b.

>>18906054
exactly, so if we say my ancestors from 1000000years ago are not human but my grandparents are, however you define "human" there has be a point where someone who is not human gave birth to someone who is "human".

The same is true of the chicken.

File: thumbs up.gif (1MB, 400x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 400x300px

>>18906420
I like your reasoning 420anon. Not just because it is somewhat in line with my own.

religion is such an incredibly arrogant concept

it's pathetic that despite all we've managed to observe about the universe over the last hundred, two hundred years, a significant portion of the population is still fervent in its belief that we, as humans on planet earth, are aware of let alone CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING the origins of the world we reside in

I'm all for science and getting to the bottom of things but some stuff is just beyond our scope of understanding as evidenced by our current means of explaining it which is so hilariously nonsensical. three hundred years ago we didn't even have electricity, I wonder if we'll have another big breakthrough like that a few hundred years from now that'll drastically change our day to day lives and the course of the future? and yet people still cling to some nonsense scribbled down two thousand odd years ago that was likely fabricated solely to unite people under one common banner despite potential differences in language, race, or stature in order to cultivate an insane amount of power and influence for those that were in control of its regulation

having a set of rules and ethics to steer people from doing bad shit is wonderful and if everyone was ascetic, pure, and honest in their interactions with others we'd surely get a lot more accomplished but it's just baffling that people are blowing each other up because they think their idea of how we as humans came to be is more legitimate than the other team's even though they do silly things that make zero sense logistically like refrain from eating pork or from using certain words outside of a specific context

shit's weird, man. humans are just the darnedest things, a joke that got REALLY out of hand.

>>18906402
Yes, and that's actually what i'm trying to state; a creature has, nearly, the exact same attributes as its parents. Which is why they're the same species, but these attributes are stacked upon every subsequent generation. This means that you will be the same species as your parent, as your attributes are almost identical to them, but you aren't the same species as your ancestor from millions of years ago as your's, and their attributes are vastly different.
>>18906420
>How do you define "Human"
>There has be a point where someone who is not human gave birth to someone who is "human".
There isn't; it's simply a way to categorise something. Technically all the is the exact same "species".
I explain it more indepth above, and this* explains better than I can anyway:
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdWLhXi24Mo&ab_channel=It%27sOkayToBeSmart

>>18906565
>Technically all the is
Technically all life is*

>>18906565
So you agree with me in saying that something only becomes a chicken if we decide to name it one, correct? Implicit in that is the fact that there is a first thing to be called a chicken, which is born from the egg, while still not being born from chickens. This is all irrelevant because of that fact, the very idea of categorizing is a human construct.

God created himself

File: sss.png (9KB, 714x441px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 714x441px

>>18906588
>So you agree with me in saying that something only becomes a chicken if we decide to name it one, correct?
Yes, I do. I'm just stating that even with this categorisation there was no "first" chicken. Since a species cannot suddenly change into another.

I sure am.

>>18906469
>a significant portion of the population is still fervent in its belief that we, as humans on planet earth, are aware of let alone CAPABLE OF UNDERSTANDING the origins of the world we reside in

Why do you accuse religion of this? Most religions are revelatory. They say exactly what you did - we are incapable of comprehending by ourselves, but this info is given directly by a being that can. Like a child repeating the words of a nuclear physicist - they don't need understanding to have the answer right.

And since you're on about arrogance, your entire post reeks of "I know what's REALLY going on" as you try to make the point that humans aren't capable of understanding what's going on. Hypocrisy is never fun, but when you're being hypocritical in regards to others' hypocrisy...that's just sad.

File: Hominin_evolution.jpg (85KB, 1280x881px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1280x881px

>>18906705
>Since a species cannot suddenly change into another.

But that's exactly what the fossil record shows.

>The fossil record of an evolutionary progression typically consists of species that suddenly appear, and ultimately disappear hundreds of thousands or millions of years later, without any change in external appearance.[15][16][17] Graphically, these fossil species are represented by horizontal lines, whose lengths depict how long each of them existed. The horizontality of the lines illustrates the unchanging appearance of each of the fossil species depicted on the graph. During each species' existence new species appear at random intervals, each also lasting many hundreds of thousands of years before disappearing without a change in appearance. The degree of relatedness and the lines of descent of these concurrent species is generally impossible to determine. This is illustrated in the following diagram depicting the evolution of modern humans from the time that the Hominins separated from the line that led to the evolution of our closest living primate relatives, the chimpanzees.

>>18901249
>why is it hard for me to understand a being that was never created?

File: 1492465511393.jpg (30KB, 734x587px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 734x587px

>>18901249
They know..

>>18901253
We always claim we did at least.

>>18901249
and thats why I think the universe always exsited. with out nothing comes nothing

>>18901249
First, are you talking about the Christian god? If you're just talking about God as a concept (no religion involved) then God created us.

With God being a clusterfuck of too many things we don't understand, but definitely not a conscience (or at least not a conscience with human psyche like religion gods)

File: 43729.gif (2MB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 200x200px

>>18901417

>>18907008
We're obviously arguing for/over two different evolutionary theories, and we aren't going to convince each other over to any of each others sides; plus I can't be bothered arguing anymore. So let's just call this a stalemate, kek.

>>18901249
>>18901249
>who is the creator of God?
God.
>who is the creator of the creator of God?
Also God.

God created himself. Duh.

>>18901249
Supergod
Supersupergod

>>18901269
>God=creation
That's called pantheism.

Nothing "basic" about that. Different religions teach different things about the nature of god(s). That's just one interpretation of it.

>>18901249

GOD IS UNCREATED.

>>18901269
>God=creation

NO.

>>18901249
the events that lead to gods existence are set into motion by god himself thats to a temporal paradox . its like "the chicken or the egg" if the chicken went back in time got banged by another chicken and shit out a egg that it hatched from

moving through time freely allows one to set things up that allow you to exist in the first place

>>18911020

NO; GOD IS BEYOND SPACETIME.

GOD WAS NOT CREATED, NOR CONCEIVED, NOR BORN; GOD HAS ALWAYS BEEN, AND ALWAYS WILL BE.

>>18901249
god is not real, everything is made out of atoms including you anon. Lets be real, religion doesn't evolve it just expand and limit others. Be real men be real.

God is existence you fools.
Now Repent or Die.

>>18901249
There is no god or creator of anything.

NOGOD IS BEYOND SPACETIME.

GOD WAS NOT CREATED, NOR CONCEIVED, NOR BORN; GOD HAS NEVER BEEN, AND NEVER WILL BE.

>>18911039
Fake. Existence is existence. Got you.

>>18901249
thought x was well read in lovecraftian cosmology

File: Chart_97_rgb_500pxlH.jpg (74KB, 283x500px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 283x500px

>>18901249

>>18901340
This is the best post in this thread because the poster isn't pretending to know stuff he knows nothing about.

It's also something incredibly profound most people sometimes but most of the time do not pay attention to.

>>18901934

Your mistake is thinking that it has to be logical. The nature of existance is probably utterly incomprehensible. If one expects that existence is going to Ben a logically idea then he's a fool.

>>18901249
Man.

God.