Everything is God. God is all there is.
As soon as I got to those words in a piece I came across, "Why Your Version of God is the Right One...for YOU," I knew that I'd disagree with the rest of the article.
Download Why Your Version of God is the Right One…for YOU – Fractal Enlightenment
It's meaningless to say God is everything. That's the same as saying God is nothing. If there is no way to distinguish something called "God" from everything else in existence, then God doesn't exist.
Just call everything by a more accurate name. Here's one good idea: everything. Or existence. Or reality.
There's no need to add an empty conceptual layer by callling everything, or all there is, by another name: God.
The author of the piece, Nikki Sapp, says:
Everything is God. God is all there is. Just let that sink in for a second. There is no other material or fabric to make anything in this universe out of other than the fabric of God. Every person, every leaf on a tree, every planet, it’s all God. Nothing can exist independently of God since it would be impossible for something to exist that is not made from the only material there is to make anything out of.
I have no idea what Sapp is talking about. But whatever it is, I'm sure it appeals to many New Age types who aren't bothered by empty ideas.
Let's substitute two of my suggested words for Sapp's "God." Nothing can exist independently of reality. Hard to argue with. Ditto for Nothing can exist independently of everything.
The bullshit arises when an extra extraneous word, "God," is introduced as a synonym for reality and everything.
Sapp's God has no attributes, because for her there is no difference between God and everything in existence. This allows her to argue that, since everybody looks upon the world in a unique way, there are 7 billion ways of looking upon God -- one for each person on Earth.
There is no “right” way or “wrong” way to experience God. Even if a person chooses to exist in a reality where God does not exist, such as an atheist, this is not wrong either. They are just choosing to experience God in a “non-God” way. Another person may choose to experience God in a way that their God punishes them for sinning and blesses them for resisting temptation, this is also not wrong.
,,,Since there are over 7 billion people living on the planet, there is 7 billion different ways to experience God. And even though there are groups of people that may experience or see their God in a similar fashion, no one person will experience God in the EXACT same way as the next person, because God is a completely personal experience.
Well, it is more accurate to say, Every person has personal experiences. Again, there's no need to bring a notion of God into it.
Strangely, Sapp contradicts what she said above just a few paragraphs further on. After telling us that there is no right or wrong way to experience God, she reverses course by describing some wrong ways.
It doesn’t really matter which spiritual teacher we choose but almost all say the same thing. God is within us. God is not separate from us. This isn’t something that we just can know and that’s it, but it is a level of consciousness that we must reach.
This is why so many of us can intellectually know this, but we still seem to get caught up in the trivialities of everyday life. We still get angry when someone cuts us off on the road, we still worry about getting our bills paid on time, and we still get slightly perturbed when someone tries to push their version of God on to us.
If we TRULY were existing at the level of consciousness that we KNEW we were God, things like traffic jams and bills and hearing other people’s views on religion probably wouldn’t have the power to upset us in the slightest way.
Hmmmm. If God is a completely personal experience, I should be able to experience God by getting pissed off by bad drivers, having to pay bills, and reading ridiculous stuff like Sapp's views about God.
How does Sapp know what truly knowing God is like? Didn't she just say that each of us was free to have our own unique way of knowing God, since God is everything?
Religions are ridiculous. New Age crap like this piece -- also ridiculous.
Typical, that! This lady's take on the universality of her own belief system is a typical amalgamation of religious nonsense, coupled with that very commonly encountered attitude of many religious types : You can follow what I do irrespective of your own religion. Quite overlooking that they are all belief systems, one and all.
Can one compress in one single word this commonly encountered position : That my belief is Truth, but your beliefs are superstitions?
The only thing that can make one particular belief system stand out is if it were true. Spiritual Truth : Which is what the optimistic (naively optimistic?) amongst us seek, and the cynical (realists?) amongst us reject an basically as oxymoron.
Posted by: Appreciative Reader | December 15, 2014 at 04:55 AM
It's meaningless to say God is everything. That's the same as saying God is nothing. If there is no way to distinguish something called "God" from everything else in existence, then God doesn't exist.
Someone should compile a list of the idiotic statements New Age nitwits reverently repeat. First on the list should be, "Nothing is impossible". When someone recited this one to me and I replied that if nothing is impossible, the word "possibility" has no meaning, his incomprehension demonstrated the impossibility of reasoning with him.
Posted by: x | December 15, 2014 at 08:51 AM
If god is everything then he is nothing. God exist in the nothing. They say his love is limitless. In this world there is no such thing as limetless.
But nothing eqals everything. God is nothing.Yet that nothing is a rare thing. You can not see it. You can not touch it. You can not smell it. Yet it exist in vocabulary. Yet it is an emtpty word. We need that nothing to understand logic. We need a statusquo to compare a posision. We can see that nothing in every language, math and sience. It is that nothing that can connect everything. Some people say that nothing exist because that gives them a feeling there connected. And some can find this conection in something else. And there are some who dont want to feel connected.
I pesonally call this nothing emptyness. It is nothing. But yet it is filled with all of us.
And when I die I hope there is nothing. So I can be everything.
Posted by: meyo | December 15, 2014 at 02:05 PM
"It's meaningless to say God is everything. That's the same as saying God is nothing. If there is no way to distinguish something called "God" from everything else in existence, then God doesn't exist."
--Maybe the problem here is the assumption that if there is God it must be some sort of thing that exists somewhere, an object to be known like a zebra racing across the plain. Ah, there goes God! I see It!
Maybe God is both everything and nothing...a functioning that transcends the polarity of relativistic perception and existence. Something that cannot be conceived (obviously, or it would have been done by now).
Just because we can't pin it down doesn't mean it isn't there doing and being life, intrinsic in the fabric of appearance...but as a form, or thing in itself, it isn't. Everybody is trying to conceive it which is the very thing that obfuscates it.
It's like a lake saying there is no water. "I don't see no f'ing water. There's just all these fish going around."
Or take an individual that thinks it exists because of all the ideas and memories going around. What remains when those cease? Where do we begin? Where do we end? What is the boundary between us and infinity? Is there one, or do we, by the way we think, create one that isn't there?
Posted by: tucson | December 15, 2014 at 03:39 PM
Thanks, meyo, for your parody of a New Age ninny.
Posted by: x | December 15, 2014 at 03:47 PM
She is everywhere
but depending on Love , . . . to grep
on a scale from 0,01 up to 100%
777
Posted by: 777 | December 16, 2014 at 01:29 AM
http://www.freeread.com
This Occultist Mystic,....i.e. John Joseph Dewey, is another interesting writer I hung out with on his yahoo forum a few months, util a couple of his Guard Gate Groupies threatened me becase I refused to chant the "Party Line", as is what ALWAYS happens to me (including here) when I "expose" my dirty diapers. ( those being what ever I happen to post disagreeing with the Alpha Maie/Female or their Groupies.) I was even treatened to receve a "fat lip" by the Chief Pit Bull Groupie. But, this site can be read with out joining, which I do by checking in occassionally, as I do here, to test if the scene has changed. JJ Dewey is around 70, and is an Ex-Mormon, who some believe is the reincarnation of Joseph Smith. JJ is a Theosophist, Alice Baily Devotee, who quotes Blavatski, Baily, anf their Channel,..."DK" in addition to his own Channel, which he insinuates is John The Baptist! A very interesting Poster with the Moniker of "yanniru" has been posting in JJ's "Keys of Knowledge" Yahoo Class Room" lately, who is a Physicist that is attempting to prove that JJ's Occult writings may be collaborated by Pysics, as per The String Theory, etc.etc. JJ has written that GOD in the Multiverse, so any Church of the Churchless members might find JJ's writings interesting. His free read site has a good search engine, so just type in "multiverse" and many of his postulations will come up regarding God is the Multiverse. Also, the Physicist, "yanniru" has a real name: it is Richard Ruquist, which my be Googled, and all his published paprers on String Theory, and Physics show up. Interesting man, he is, and he is in the process of reading all of JJ's books to prove JJ has written accurate Occult knowledge that may be proven by Physcs! ( This site is not for Neophite skeptics! )Tuscon might like some of JJ's speculstions, but be warned, ....JJ is a Bible Thumper, but not a Fundy.
Cheers,
Jim
Posted by: Jim Sutherland | December 16, 2014 at 04:19 AM
Maybe the problem here is the assumption that if there is God...
Yes, the problem is the assumption that God exists. A reasonable mind assumes no such thing.
Posted by: x | December 16, 2014 at 09:05 AM
I wish God would compel all these enlightened beings who post comments here to turn on their spell checkers.
And to explain to those for whom English is a second language that they have no excuse.
Posted by: Willie R | December 16, 2014 at 02:36 PM
"Yes, the problem is the assumption that God exists. A reasonable mind assumes no such thing."
--A reasonable mind might not 'assume' such a thing exists but it doesn't seem unreasonable to consider the possibility.
I mean, here we are, or so it appears. So, a mind doing its thing, reasoning, may think about some sort of creator or primal cause. Call it God or whatever. Not exactly a bat shit crazy thing to come up with given the wonders of nature both beautiful and brutal and incomprehensively vast.
Maybe such a notion, upon due reflection, may not appear to be supported by empirical evidence as conceived by the human mind, but still the possibility is there. It can't be categorically dismissed because such knowledge would, in itself, indicate an individual with Godlike perspicacity, or one who believes it does, therefore denying its own existence.
Posted by: tucson | December 16, 2014 at 02:41 PM
...a mind doing its thing, reasoning, may think about some sort of creator or primal cause. Call it God or whatever. Not exactly a bat shit crazy thing to come up with...
Not three hundred years ago, but today, yes, it is a batshit crazy thing to come up with.
Maybe such a notion, upon due reflection, may not appear to be supported by empirical evidence as conceived by the human mind...
Empirical evidence is not "conceived by the human mind"...it's acknowledged, examined, and taken on its own terms, regardless of myths and beliefs.
Posted by: x | December 16, 2014 at 04:18 PM
if we TRULY were existing at the level of consciousness that we KNEW we were God, things like traffic jams and bills and hearing other people’s views on religion probably wouldn’t have the power to upset
us in the slightest way.
Hmmmm. If God is a completely personal experience, I should be able to experience God by getting pissed off by bad drivers, having to pay bills, and reading ridiculous stuff like Sapp's views about God.
How does Sapp know what truly knowing God is like? Didn't she just say that each of us was free to have our own unique way of knowing God, since God is everything?
I think the point is the difference in consciousness. Get pissed off at the knuckle-headed driver ahead. You don't have to turn in your God-card. But if you're totally immersed in your rage at the SOB, you continue to live within the framework of the dream. Your limited awareness, like Zhuang Zhou dreaming he was a butterfly, will trap you. The butterfly now takes all he sees as real. His consciousness (or "knowing you're God" if you equate God with
consciousness) is diminished.
A more evolved observer would just see his rage as part of an unfolding dream. It's a shadow shape entering consciousness...an event which is no more substantive than his transient reactiveness. A character in one of Shakespeare's plays notes "Nothing's good or bad but thinking makes it so".
His emotions, his thoughts are real but he isn't circumscribed or enslaved by them. They don't shatter his equanimity. There's no helpless reactiveness or loss of control until "he's jumping out of his car to bang on the idiot's windshield". He doesn't "become his rage" instead of his consciousness of it. He's no longer an automaton constantly smiling, crying, reacting to the endless twists and turns of the dream. He's no longer tilting at windmills, sneering at others, railing at their stupidity, destroying strawmen in countless diatribes.
Posted by: Dungeness | December 17, 2014 at 11:01 AM
Yes, Dungeness, quite often, one can step back from one's knee-jerk response and take a more compassionate, comprehensive, view of the matter. But there are times when this luxury is not available, and the blow-up is all over before you know it, leaving you with nothing but damage control to attend to. What's your advice for those dealing with this state of affairs?
Posted by: x | December 17, 2014 at 03:18 PM
I'm not a particularly new age person myself but my understanding of the "God is Everything" idea is beyond just calling God everything. It includes the notion that everything is connected, part of the same organism sort of, like an ecology, such that something positive or negative happening to one part can affect another part. Just saying.
Posted by: Skeptic | December 18, 2014 at 03:06 PM
Is God just another 3letter word for Plotinus called the One?
Posted by: George Poergie puddin 'n pie | December 18, 2014 at 11:26 PM
Why the hell would anyone think I have advice? Or perhaps the conclusion was here's another loony New-Ager to bait :)
No, I thought this was about consciousness itself, not advice for a "cleanup on aisle 4". Maybe there are people though who have an elevated level of consciousness and do not exist in a dream world with "impulse and anger and stupidity and diminished consciousness". Perhaps they've spent a lifetime of discipline studying their thoughts and what's inside to awaken from the dream.
Cue the twilight zone...maybe there's green cheese too or Obama's an alien. Absurd! But surely a teeny doubt could arise. Why couldn't a more evolved consciousness be possible? If you're a materialist, you know the brain has unlimited potential. Remember the first time you heard: "there are more
things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy". Didn't it resonate just a little... This is not patronage. It still resonates with me and I love hearing it.
I know...some of you are probably feeling angst for a clever put-down now. What to do...how do I dispose of this loony-tuner so I we can move on and savage the next crackpot and feel important and brainy and watch 'em squirm in their "religious" muck.
If we can't come up with a brainy beat-down, then we need an emoticon for a virtual eye roll...we could save lots of these endless discussions. Yep, squashing bozo's online...it's the old school way of enjoying a violent video game. A catharsis for those still enjoying the dream.
Posted by: Dungeness | December 19, 2014 at 12:34 AM
It's rare in the universes, evolution provides the third eye tunnel
permitting to fool the rulers of the first six vertical 'heavens'
the connection through which one's origin can be experienced
not SEEN but experienced
It works by / with / through Love.
First just some compassion without agendas, next for an capable assistant
then for the real form which is purest vibration
and that ever grows
IQ has absolutely nothing to do here as some angels with giga IQ s have demonstrated
Trying to practize some Love in whatever form brings exponential benefits
Boasting on ones intellect the exponential opposite
777
Posted by: 777 | December 19, 2014 at 05:56 AM
No need to get so crabby, Dungeness, especially after having described a higher state of consciousness in which, "His emotions, his thoughts are real but he isn't circumscribed or enslaved by them. They don't shatter his equanimity. There's no helpless reactiveness or loss of control until "he's jumping out of his car to bang on the idiot's windshield". He doesn't "become his rage" instead of his consciousness of it."
I asked an honest question that I felt deserved a thoughtful response, but I seem to have pushed a button. Pardon me.
Posted by: x | December 19, 2014 at 09:00 AM
No, I wasn't be crabby. Sorry if I seemed so. Maybe I was profiling though. Saw what looked like a "churchless patrol car", rolling slowly for a "stop 'n frisk", and
clearly about to ask "whatcha doing in these here parts, boy".
Talking about an idealized state doesn't mean I can pontificate about it in any depth either. "No, officer, I'm just passing through dreaming about how nice it'd be to live like the enlightened folks do. Don't worry, I'll try not to "pound on any windshields".
Posted by: Dungeness | December 19, 2014 at 04:15 PM
Hey any rich cats out there with extra 50000€
to give to me moongoes but with no limit of giving them back..but if in the future i earn them I will. I calculated that this would give me really great life.tnx.moon
Posted by: moongoes | December 21, 2014 at 05:40 AM
Moongoes,
You need to think larger. 50K euros currently is only about $61-62000.
That amount will pay living expenses for maybe a couple of years for a single person unless they live in a carboard box or at their parents' house.
I think your life would be better improved if you asked for 8 million euros. Then you would be in the lower tier of those who are considered "wealthy" and you will not have to work unless you want to. You could fly to Jamaica on a whim and not even think about the cost.
Sorry, I don't have a spare 8 million euros, or any euros at all.
Posted by: tucson | December 21, 2014 at 02:30 PM
Yes my friend Tucson i know but i need only that much ...it is my 8 millions i would only pay credit and work ..or actually play my instrument further...thanks man I love you though
Posted by: moongoes | December 21, 2014 at 03:36 PM
well, I see your point.
But I still don't think that saying "God is reality" is necessarily all that empty a statement.
How do you know the full depth and reach of the entirety of reality? How do you know that reality is no more than some atoms and galaxies and suchlike? The entirety of reality might be grander than even you can know.
Perhaps we should rephrase this as, reality is greater and more amazing than you know. Or even, than you can know.
Posted by: TG | December 22, 2014 at 09:45 PM
I still don't think that saying "God is reality" is necessarily all that empty a statement.
No one said it was empty, TG. Brian declared it stupid.
Perhaps we should rephrase this as, reality is greater and more amazing than you know.
Yes. Empty of God, it's not so stupid.
Posted by: x | December 23, 2014 at 08:34 AM
"Yes. Empty of God, it's not so stupid."
--Empty of God? What is that? If we don't even know what God may be, how do we know reality is empty of it?
Posted by: tucson | December 23, 2014 at 01:24 PM
If we don't even know what God may be...
If you assume the existence of God, you may as well pretend to know "what God may be" because, having taken the leap of faith, you can't be taken any more seriously for making a mystery of God than for describing God.
Posted by: x | December 23, 2014 at 02:47 PM
From Swami Ji's Sar Bachan (Poetry):
"I live neither in the nether regions, nor in paradise,
nor in the world of mortals, nor in the regions of Maya
that Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva control.
I am not in the plane of Krishna or Rama,
not in heaven, not in the region of Brahm.
I do not live in the three worlds"
I think that's pretty conclusive answer to that question.
Posted by: BilboBagginses | January 03, 2015 at 03:56 PM
Enter Benzmueller, Mr Hines.
Computer Scientists 'Prove' God Exists
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/scientists-use-computer-to-mathematically-prove-goedel-god-theorem-a-928668.html
I bow to Godel's EXTREME Genius.
Enough said.. Time to rethink.
Posted by: Pythagoras | January 04, 2015 at 02:54 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sEcBzxoMB8
Posted by: x | January 07, 2015 at 12:42 PM