Talk:Nigh Omnipotence/@comment-184.91.97.175-20120526031241/@comment-184.91.97.175-20120526033137

Personally, I prefer the idea of "playing God" (which is arguably what humanity has always done to get to where we are today, like creating flying machines...if we were content with what we had, we'd still be in the jungle somewhere) rather then 'being' God...people may argue that it doesn't matter because God is God and he exists and it doesn't matter if you wanted to be like him or not...but here's the thing - if God is something to look to, to emulate and want to become....why would you? Why would somebody truly want to become this fixed static all-pervasive being? I can insteading "playing" God or emulating or trying to be more like the idea of him in our own way (which again, is basically what all human history has been in it's own way - breaking past our inherit limitations, like no wings, and making space shuttles)...but to truly be God? why?

Religious people may argue, again, that it's moot...but I think it's moot in it's own way because, It seems weird to believe in the idea of a God and then say that it's wrong to want to become like him...we can be as best we could, which is what humanity has always done...but to believe in a God, and then say that we should "know our place" and not cross that line...

I don't know, it seems weird to be to believe in something so fixed and almighty, yet at the same time, limit ourselves and say we should indeed try to be like Him yet make sure we don't actually take it literally and go too far...I don't know, it all just seems needlessly convuluted and ripe for semantics games and questioning.

I'm sorry...I truly don't wish to offend anybody with this - I honestly don't know where it all came from...what started as something about Nigh-Omnipotence turned into a philosophical rant >_<