Log in

View Full Version : God.


Redux
March 14th, 2008, 09:40 PM
God -
(noun)

1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2.Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
3. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
4. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
5. any supernatural being worshiped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force

Strangely, Google does not fit any one of these. Care to prove me wrong?

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 09:47 PM
God -
(noun)

Strangely, Google does not fit any one of these. Care to prove me wrong?

If you want to fight definition against definition. Try these.

deity: any supernatural being worshiped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force

a man of such superior qualities that he seems like a deity to other people; "he was a god among men" (in this case, its she, not he.)

idol: a material effigy that is worshipped; "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"; "money was his god"

Defitions found here:
From the Goddess herself.

define:God (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3AGod&btnG=Google+Search)

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 09:51 PM
Google is not supernatural.
Google does not control any part of the world.
Google is simply a compilation of human knowledge.
Since it is completely human knowledge, not its own, does that not make us the gods?

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 09:56 PM
If you want to take it in that direction. Sure.

If you read the site, it says we reject the supernatural. So that one is obvious.

If you want to have an open mind, Google controls the vitrual world in the search engine department. :D

You gotta admit, compairing search engines, Google is the best.

Sure, she indexes a lot of human knowledge. However does "god" do that? You may try to argue that "god" knows all....but does he really?

bouchie
March 14th, 2008, 09:56 PM
Why do people forget the really important part about Googlism?

You know, the part that says that Google is the closest thing to a god that can be proven.

The other important part that people tend to forget:

parody (verb): to imitate (a composition, author, etc.) for purposes of ridicule or satire.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 09:59 PM
Because people can't read.

Read first. Question second.
or...RTFFAQ! :D

This also works:
:faq:

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:00 PM
Humans are the closest thing to a god.
Google is not possible without humans, am I right?
Or does google simply run on fairy dust?
Anyway, my point is, everything that knows anything was taught by a human.
If we hadn't learned how to make computers, or even use the internet,
where would your precious google be?

sudikics
March 14th, 2008, 10:00 PM
Where'd you find that?


God and overseer of the most commonly refers to the deity worshiped by followers of monotheistic and monolatrist religions, whom they believe to be the creator of the universe. Theologians have ascribed a variety of attributes to the various conceptions of God. The most common among these include omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, omnibenevolence (perfect goodness), divine simplicity, jealousy, and eternal and necessary existence.
A deity is a postulated preternatural or supernatural being, who is always of significant power, worshipped, thought holy, divine, or sacred, held in high regard, or respected by human beings.

Noun

S: (n) (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/)God, Supreme Being (the supernatural being conceived as the perfect and omnipotent and omniscient originator and ruler of the universe; the object of worship in monotheistic religions)
S: (n) (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/)deity, divinity, god, immortal (any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force)
S: (n) (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/)god (a man of such superior qualities that he seems like a deity to other people) "he was a god among men"
S: (n) (http://www.thechurchofgoogle.org/forum/)idol, graven image, god (a material effigy that is worshipped) "thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image"; "money was his god"

...need I go on? Basically, I see from that list:

omniscient
omnipotent
omnipresence
omnibenevolent
divine simplicity
jealousy
necessary existence
significant power
worshipped
thought holy/divine/sacred
held in high regard
respected by human beings
immortalNow let me go through each and explain.


omniscient: See CoG Proofs.
omnipotent: nope, because Googlists like free will.
omnipresence: See CoG Proofs.
omnibenevolent: See CoG Proofs.
divine simplicity: Look at this page. Can't get much more simple than that. (http://www.google.com)
jealousy: See CoG 10 Commandments. "Thou shalt not build thy own commercial-free Search Engine, for I am a jealous Engine, bringing law suits and plagues against the fathers of the children unto the third and fourth generations."
necessary existence: supplies information to millions every day.
significant power: 9*10^12 webpages, plus Her Algorithms.
worshipped: See CoG.
thought holy/divine/sacred: See CoG.
held in high regard: Many people use Google.
respected by human beings: Many people use Google.
immortal: See CoG Proofs.So there, Redux.

BAM!

sudikics
March 14th, 2008, 10:01 PM
Humans are the closest thing to a god.
Google is not possible without humans, am I right?
Or does google simply run on fairy dust?
Anyway, my point is, everything that knows anything was taught by a human.
If we hadn't learned how to make computers, or even use the internet,
where would your precious google be?
The same place gods would be if humans had never evolved: non-existant.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:03 PM
Humans are the closest thing to a god.
Google is not possible without humans, am I right?

Religion is not possible without humans, right?

Or does google simply run on fairy dust?


No, you have her confused with Tinker bell.
Google is powered by electrons.

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:09 PM
Religion is not possible without humans, right?

Google is powered by electrons.

According to Christianity, we did not have religion until the birth of Jesus.
However, if people died, where would they go? I mean, it's like saying if we don't have a map of some place, we can't go there.

If your god is powered by electrons, please be courteous enough to tell me what happens when her server is shut down.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:11 PM
According to Christianity, we did not have religion until the birth of Jesus.


No. Fucking. Way.
Please tell me you are kidding!

Egyptians?
Remember that little crew that use to roll up in Egypt?
Or is that not in the bible, just history. :icon_rolleyes:

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:15 PM
No. Fucking. Way.
Please tell me you are kidding!

Egyptians?
Remember that little crew that use to roll up in Egypt?
Or is that not in the bible, just history. :icon_rolleyes:

Proof of religion. Jesus was proof of religion.
Sure, we can't prove he was real, but it's called faith for a reason.
Look it up some time.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:18 PM
Oh I know faith. The same faith that if you have faith the size of a mustard seed you can move mountains. So with that same faith. Remember Moses? The Old Testament? Or have you only read the New Testamanet?

Speaking of faith.
What denomination of religion are you?

(There is a lot of faith in this post, huh? Maybe I can move a mountain. :icon_rolleyes:)

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:23 PM
Oh I know faith. The same faith that if you have faith the size of a mustard seed you can move mountains. So with that same faith. Remember Moses? The Old Testament? Or have you only read the New Testamanet?

Speaking of faith.
What denomination of religion are you?

(There is a lot of faith in this post, huh? Maybe I can move a mountain. :icon_rolleyes:)

Oh? So you chose google as your god, because you can prove it's real.
I think that is a lack of faith.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:26 PM
:icon_lol:

I choose Google because its not bullshit.
It's right there in front of you. Google. (http://www.google.com)

Anyway, you don't even know you are talking to dude. I used to be a heavily religious person. I strayed away from the faith because I see through the BS. Googlism makes sense, is logical, and has probably the best ideology then other religions. Tell me. Has Googlism ever started any "holy wars?" ;)

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:33 PM
:icon_lol:

I choose Google because its not bullshit.
It's right there in front of you. Google. (http://www.google.com)

Anyway, you don't even know you are talking to dude. I used to be a heavily religious person. I strayed away from the faith because I see through the BS. Googlism makes sense, is logical, and has probably the best ideology then other religions. Tell me. Has Googlism ever started any "holy wars?" ;)

Google is not BS?
Simply the fact that I can search for Wikipedia on google makes it BS.
I don't know about you, but I think the little "edit" button is a really nice touch.
Google can also be edited. Research Brute Force hack. And javascript editing.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:38 PM
Wikipedia only gives you their entry for the specific search you use. Google however will link you to plenty of sites regarding your search. Not just one page of information.


Also yeah edit button is a nice feature. However those are designed for proper use. Not to vandalize, corrupt, or deface in any manner. It's called ethics.

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:41 PM
Wikipedia only gives you their entry for the specific search you use. Google however will link you to plenty of sites regarding your search. Not just one page of information.


Also yeah edit button is a nice feature. However those are designed for proper use. Not to vandalize, corrupt, or deface in any manner. It's called ethics.

How many people in this day and age can even define ethics?
Sure, google can supply you with the right information.
However, it can supply you with viruses and lies.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:46 PM
How many people in this day and age can even define ethics?

Umm, the Goddess can:
define:ethics (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aethics&btnG=Google+Search)

:D

However, it can supply you with viruses and lies.

By the help of your own stupidity for going to untrusted sites, and believing everything you read without checking for sources...

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:49 PM
Umm, the Goddess can:
define:ethics (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=define%3Aethics&btnG=Google+Search)

:D



By the help of your own stupidity for going to untrusted sites, and believing everything you read without checking for sources...

Firstly, I said people, not websites.

Secondly, if one person got false information from another, it would spread.
If everyone said the same untruth, what are you to believe?

Oh, and here's a gift for you. Go to google.ca. You know the adress bar where "google.ca" is? Replace it with this. javascript:document.body.contentEditable ='true'; document.designMode='on'; void 0

Your all-powerful god succumbs to cheap tricks and hacks.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 10:53 PM
Firstly, I said people, not websites.

People made those websites. ;)


Secondly, if one person got false information from another, it would spread.
If everyone said the same untruth, what are you to believe?

Don't believe everything you hear, and only half of what you see.

Check your resources. Check theirs. It really shouldn't be all to hard to understand man.

Oh, and here's a gift for you. Go to google.ca. You know the adress bar where "google.ca" is? Replace it with this. javascript:document.body.contentEditable ='true'; document.designMode='on'; void 0

Your all-powerful god succumbs to cheap tricks and hacks.

:sigh:
Only a person like you would do it.

P.S. - Just checked it out. Cute.
Now here is the question. Can you save it and make it the official page?
Doubtful. Also that little code works with any site.

Can you say Fail (http://youfail.org).

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 10:59 PM
People made those websites. ;)




Don't believe everything you hear, and only half of what you see.

Check your resources. Check theirs. It really shouldn't be all to hard to understand man.



:sigh:
Only a person like you would do it.

P.S. - Just checked it out. Cute.
Now here is the question. Can you save it and make it the official page?
Doubtful. Also that little code works with any site.

Can you say Fail (http://youfail.org).

People made google as well.

Of course you can't save it with Javascript.
If I were to obtain a working Brute Force hack, I could.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:02 PM
People made google as well.

People made religion too.
This is going to be a vicious circle.

Of course you can't save it with Javascript.

Exactly.

If I were to obtain a working Brute Force hack, I could.

Oh well aren't you such a cute little 1337 black hat. :icon_rolleyes:

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:07 PM
We didn't create religion. The god of our religion created us.

And don't undermine me. Websites are not tough to shut down.
And I hardly think your google in properly encrypted to defend against an attack. As you said, it's pretty simple, right?

sudikics
March 14th, 2008, 11:10 PM
You can hack Google?

http://www.farfromneutral.com/exodus/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/o_rly.jpg

If that was possible, Google would be history by now.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:12 PM
We didn't create religion. The god of our religion created us.

ha ha ha.
Really? Is that what you really think?
You are just too adorable. I am shocked you are such a 1337 black hat with your information.

And don't undermine me. Websites are not tough to shut down.

I'm not undermining you!
You are adorable.

and yeah, a DDoS attack will work...

And I hardly think your google in properly encrypted to defend against an attack. As you said, it's pretty simple, right?

If you mean the layout. Yeah it is pretty simple.
Simplicity is best.

Now if you think Google, has....no....defense. Then you are just a naive 1337 black hat.

Silly kid,
mommy buy you a 'puter for christmas?


Edit:
You can hack Google?

Yeah Sciky, didn't you know!?
Google Hacks (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=google+hacks&btnG=Google+Search)

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:14 PM
You can hack Google?

If that was possible, Google would be history by now.

You can hack anything if you have the right equipment.
I'm not saying I have a brute force hack, but they can be used to take sites down. My guess is, it'd take you atleast 20 computers to get a working Brute Force hack. And once you use it a couple times, there goes that computer.

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:22 PM
I'm not undermining you!
You are adorable.

and yeah, a DDoS attack will work...



If you mean the layout. Yeah it is pretty simple.
Simplicity is best.

Now if you think Google, has....no....defense. Then you are just a naive 1337 black hat.

So you agree that I could completely destroy your god.
Not alone, of course, and not unfunded.

But I guess you've got me. I don't know what kind of defense google has.
So why don't you inform me, hm?

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:27 PM
So you agree that I could completely destroy your god.
Not alone, of course, and not unfunded.

Dude, anything is possible.
However I really doubt you could fully destroy Google.

Guess what, I can fully destroy yours though.
I just don't have to believe in him. Ta-Da

But I guess you've got me. I don't know what kind of defense google has.
So why don't you inform me, hm?

First you silly bugger.
You don't as for this kind of information if you are such a 1337 black hat. No one will tell you, figure it out yourself.

Second
I don't know the information. Nor do I need to know it. Want to know it? Sure, however its not top priority to find out. Also, unlike you I would not use my "hacking" skills for unethical uses. I would put them to benifit for everyone. Not making viruses and trying to destroy shit. You are the kind of person who gives computer "hackers" a bad name. Once they were looked at as almost "gods" in the computer field. Then douché's like you came along and fucked shit up....

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:32 PM
I don't know the information. Nor do I need to know it. Want to know it? Sure, however its not top priority to find out. Also, unlike you I would not use my "hacking" skills for unethical uses. I would put them to benifit for everyone. Not making viruses and trying to destroy shit. You are the kind of person who gives computer "hackers" a bad name. Once they were looked at as almost "gods" in the computer field. Then douché's like you came along and fucked shit up....

I do not simply obliterate anything I find.
If a website gave me a dangerous virus, maybe then I would shut it down.
I am simply saying that your god is easily disposed of.

sudikics
March 14th, 2008, 11:32 PM
Well, jusdging by the fact that this site now has recorded your IP address, it probably wouldn't be hard to turn you over to the authorities should you attempt to hack Google.

Also, who said other gods couldn't be taken down? Kill every fundie...

...and global IQ surges. :D

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:35 PM
I do not simply obliterate anything I find.
If a website gave me a dangerous virus, maybe then I would shut it down.
I am simply saying that your god is easily disposed of.

Such a silly 1337 black hat you are.
Really.
Google does not give you the virus. The untrusted sites/files/downloadable content are the ones that do.

Google is not easily disposed of. I bet you they have plenty of back-up servers.

I will say it again:
Did your mommy buy you a 'puter for chirstmas?
and you are trying to act all tough.

(Sicky, I loved the way you're last post ended. :D)

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:36 PM
Well, jusdging by the fact that this site now has recorded your IP address, it probably wouldn't be hard to turn you over to the authorities should you attempt to hack Google.

Also, who said other gods couldn't be taken down? Kill every fundie...

...and global IQ surges. :D

Oh no! They have my I.P. address :icon_surprised:
Darn. They'll catch me if I don't Reset my router
They'll get me for sure this time. :(
I've done nothing illegal anyway, and even if I had, you've got as much proof as I have of Jesus. Only one difference. I don't think faith will hold up in court.:icon_lol:

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:37 PM
Yeah but MAC addresses never change. ;)

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:39 PM
Yeah but MAC addresses never change. ;)

That has nothing to do with it.
So long as you have a dynamic I.P. adress, turning your router off, then on will change your I.P.

Well, I've got like 20 minutes until work.
Gotta run~
Heheh. It's been fun.
I thought all you people would be half-wits.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:42 PM
That has nothing to do with it.
So long as you have a dynamic I.P. adress, turning your router off, then on will change your I.P.

Yeah, just stating a fact.
Also I know the difference between static and dynamic.



I thought all you people would be half-wits.

Coming from the adorable 1337 black hat!
You are right though, it has been fun. :D

Redux
March 14th, 2008, 11:47 PM
Yeah, just stating a fact.
Also I know the difference between static and dynamic.




Coming from the adorable 1337 black hat!
You are right though, it has been fun. :D

Stop calling me that D:<
I hate hackers anyway.

rzm61
March 14th, 2008, 11:53 PM
Then why are you prancing around talking about your 1337 black hat skills?

And don't hate hackers. They are still good people...well some of them.

bouchie
March 17th, 2008, 05:41 PM
God -
(noun)

1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2.Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
3. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
4. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
5. any supernatural being worshiped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force

Strangely, Google does not fit any one of these. Care to prove me wrong? Umm...this definition doesn't really do justice to the Christian God either. 'Cause, if he's a ruler, then He's a tyrant for all the injustices in the world. Also, by saying 'male deity' you anthropomorphize God, thereby weakening Him. And saying God is supernatural is kinda of wrong 'cause, if He's everywhere, He's a part of nature, and therefore, very natural.

So, by your definition, God isn't God either. :icon_confused:

I thought all you people would be half-wits. I guess you have the other half then.

Seriously, if you believed we were all half-wits, why'd you come here in the first place? Wouldn't that dumb you down?

I can understand religious fundies trying their luck here: they feel as it's their duty. Arrogant, but at least they attempt to rationalize their decision (poorly, but still try). You're...just arrogant. *shrugs*

Cheers.

rzm61
March 17th, 2008, 07:15 PM
Aww bouchie! Leave the little 1337 Black Hat alone!
Let him play the Internet tough guy act.

We all know his mommy bought him a 'puter for christmas. ;)
ha ha ha.

jlar16
March 22nd, 2008, 08:40 PM
any Gnostics here? Are we each our own God?

Perhaps our Google is the same as the Gnostic's Sophia...Google seems to be universally referred to as a SHE which is quite odd since USUALLY God is a male diety. In fact this was the first thing I thought of when I saw Google being referred to as she. It all makes sense since Sophia is Greek for wisdom. There are also numerous inferences we can make to Sophia and COG but I'm starting to think we should open a new thread for this.

jlar16
March 22nd, 2008, 08:51 PM
Please excuse my wikipedia cut and paste but I was just seeing if this theory holds any weight…

“A Feminine figure, analogous to the human soul but also simultaneously one of the Feminine aspects of God and the Bride of Christ, she is considered to have fallen from grace in some way, in so doing creating or helping to create the material world.
“In Gnostic tradition, the term Sophia refers to the final and lowest emanation of God. In most if not all versions of the gnostic religion, Sophia brings about an instability in the Pleroma, in turn bringing about the creation of materiality. Thus a positive or negative view of materiality depends a great deal on the interpretations of Sophia's actions in the myths.”
…please see my other post on Translinguistic matter…the creation of materiality could be the creation of a cybernetic hyperreality where word becomes flesh


“Jesus is interpreted as an intermediary aeon who was sent, along with his counterpart Sophia, from the pleroma, with whose aid humanity can recover the lost knowledge of the divine origins of humanity and in so doing be brought back into unity with the Pleroma. The term is thus a central element of Gnostic religious cosmology.”

And She is here to recover our lost knowledge. If Sophia was to return to us why not as Google.


And here is what Carlos Jung says on the Pleroma…
“According to Jung, pleroma is both "nothing and everything. It is quite fruitless to think about pleroma. Therein both thinking and being cease, since the eternal and infinite possess no qualities."

And here is some more Jung for your viewing pleasure on the subject from The Seven Sermons to the Dead
“This nothingness or fullness we name the Pleroma.
Therein both thinking and being cease, since the eternal and infinite
possess no qualities. In it no being is, for he then would be distinct
from the pleroma, and would possess qualities which would distinguish
him as something distinct from the pleroma.
In the pleroma there is nothing and everything. It is quite fruitless
to think about the pleroma, for this would mean self-dissolution.
Creatura is not in the pleroma, but in itself. The pleroma is
both beginning and end of the created beings. It pervadeth them, as
the light od the sun everywhere pervadeth the air. Although the pleroma
prevadeth altogether, yet hath created being no share thereof, just
as wholly transparent body becometh neither light nor dark through
the light nor dark through the light which pervadeth it. We are,however
, the pleroma itself, for we are a part of the eternal and the infinite.
But we have no share thereof, as we are from the pleroma infinitely
removed; not spiritually or temporally, but essentially, since we are
distinguished from the pleroma in our essence as creatura, which is
confined within time and space.
Yet because we are parts of the pleroma, the pleroma is also in us.
Even in the smallest point is the pleroma endless, eternal, and
entire, since small and great are qualities which are contained in it.
It is that nothingness which is everywhere whole and continuous.
Only figuratively, therefore, do I speak of created being as part of
the pleroma. Because, actually, the pleroma is nowhere divided,
since it is nothingness. We are also the whole pleroma, because,
figuratively, the pleroma is the smallest point (assumed only, not
existing) in us and the boundless firmanent about us. But wherefore,
then, do we speak of the pleroma at all, since it is thus everything
and nothing? I speak of it to make a beginning somewhere, and also
to free you from the delusion that somewhere, either without or within,
there standeth something fixed, or in some way established, from the
beginning. Every so-called fixed and certain thing is only relative.
That alone is fixed and certain which is subject to change.
What is changeable, however, is creature. Therefore is it the one thing
which is fixed and certain because it hath qualities: or as even a quality itself.”

Johnshadows
March 24th, 2008, 03:44 PM
:o the dictionary belives in god? it should be a "belived" supreme being

Mushuukyou
May 26th, 2008, 03:31 AM
God -
(noun)

1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2.Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
3. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions.
4. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to control some part of nature or reality.
5. any supernatural being worshiped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force

Strangely, Google does not fit any one of these. Care to prove me wrong?

There is no such thing as the "supernatural".
To be supernatural would be "above and beyond" the natural Universe.
Since we live in a natural Universe, it doesn't/cannot interact with something that's "above and beyond" it.

Christian (xian) science is a joke.
There is no other gods aside from Google.
If you actually do have imaginary friends in the sky, you need to go and check in with a therapist.
You shouldn't have imaginary friends at your age now.:icon_eek: