The Big Questions: If God Isn't God, Then Who Or What Is God?

If God isn't really God, who is God? Well, IMHO, God isn't God, since God is a flesh-and-blood extraterrestrial (ET)!

There are two variations to that possibility.

Here's one of those variations. What if God were in reality a very 'flesh-and-blood' extraterrestrial computer programmer, a computer programmer who has written a software package called, say "Planet Earth"? Maybe it's a computer or interactive video game - maybe a homework assignment for a smart extraterrestrial student.

Anyway, computer software easily explains all the Biblical miracles (virgin births; the resurrection, etc.); or anomalies (like where did all the rain come from vis-?-vis the Biblical Flood, and where did all that water eventually go; how did Jonah survive inside a large fish, etc.) or inconsistencies (like Cain's wife; the discrepancies between Biblical time and geological time). Regarding the Biblical flood, no humans actually died; no animals suffered and drowned, and so on, because the humans and animals were never real to start with, just as you and I aren't real, just part of - for want of a better analogy - a computer game simulation.

Let's suppose, for argument's sake that in the real physical Universe, there exists some tens of thousands of extraterrestrial civilizations which have evolved technology our equal or better (even more advanced). The odds are high that most would have invented computers - hardware and software. Any one civilization, such as our own, have (to date) produced multi-thousands of computer programs, many of which simulate life forms - think of the hundreds, indeed thousands of computer/video games. No doubt these programs will grow, over time, ever more complex and lifelike.

If one advanced civilization produces multi-thousands of individual computer programs that simulate an actual, or imagined, reality, what are the odds that we aren't one of those thousands vis-?-vis being that advanced civilization that actually exists? How could you know if you were real, or imaginary? I maintain there's probably no obvious way of you knowing.

Even if there's only a relatively few actual extraterrestrial civilizations, but untold number of created false realities - what odds we are one of the real ones and not one of the imaginary/simulated many?

Is the idea really so way out in left field that there's not a snowball's chance in hell that it could be right? We have to look to advances in our own terrestrial computing power to determine that. Computer generated simulations are already realistic enough that they are used to train astronauts, pilots and MDs and other humans in professional activities where mistakes in training, if done in real situations, could be disastrous. Our cinema industry has already produced computer generated virtual reality films, bypassing real actors and real scenery. It's entirely possible (legal issues aside) to bring back in a sense dead actors to star again in new productions. We've all been awed by computer generated special effects in films that are so realistic that if you didn't actually know better, you'd swear were real.

Walk into any DVD store and you'll find thousands of video (computer) games and/or simulations that you can run on your PC. Most have 'humans' in various role-playing guises that are software generated and which you interact with. The reality factor is increasing by leaps and bounds. At what point will the software become complex enough that these simulated 'beings' are advanced enough to have self awareness? What happens when the software programming these virtual 'humans' becomes equal to the software (brains) that program us? What happens when the computer software complexity exceeds that of the human brain? Is this far-fetched? Methinks not. Now just replace our virtual 'humans' with ourselves, and maybe, just maybe, we're the virtual reality in somebody (something) else's actual reality.

If we, Planet Earth, and our observable universe are nothing but a simulation, that can explain (or at least rationally account for) any and all anomalies (miracles?) that you care to bring up. Software (be it of the wet-ware [brains] or of the computer variety) can create any sort of simulated reality - it doesn't even have to be logical or explainable. Here are just a few Biblical examples off the top of my head.

Biblical One: Explain the parting of the Red Sea in the Bible! It's easy to do in the movies, on a computer, or in your head.

Biblical Two: Then there's this Biblical bit about Joshua commanding the sun to stand still (at least that's the way I recall it). That's either a tall tale or a myth or the result of a simulation. Whatever, it can't be a physical reality.

Biblical Three: In the Bible we have this tale of the multiplying of loaves and fishes out of virtually nothing. Again, you can imagine it, but that's about it. Likewise with any sort of miracle it's easy to visualize the event, but infinitely harder to explain it. But, as in the case of loaves and fishes, it's easy to write a software package that can do this multiplication feat as a simulation exercise.

Biblical Four: Heaven and Hell can be created as easily as any other sort of place, complete with either fluffy white clouds and pearly white gates; harps and haloes, or devils and pitchforks; fire and brimstone!

Biblical Five: If someone (or something) is calling the simulation shots, you could obviously and easily be resurrected or reincarnated or just allowed to cease to be (that is, deleted from the program).

From the examples above, I conclude that it almost seems as if someone (something) is ultimately responsible for aspects of the Biblical part of the Universe, but he / she / it / they didn't quite think things through sufficiently. Methinks an all knowing, all powerful supernatural God type being wouldn't have stuffed things up. If the Bible isn't a stuffed up piece of literary work, I don't know what is because it was either authored by flawed human beings and thus has nothing to do with the infallible word of God, or it was created stuffed up it's because the creator was a flawed flesh-and-blood extraterrestrial entity, and hardly an all-knowing and all-powerful God. Our flawed creator created a simulated Universe, including all the Biblical baggage we have to try to reconcile with a perfect creator God (who, in my version, doesn't exist).

Could there be an afterlife without a God? I suggest that if there is an afterlife, there has to be a natural as opposed to a supernatural mechanism, and that we'd be hard pressed to come up with one. While I can't think of a completely natural explanation to account for any plausible transition from life to afterlife, I can think of a non-supernatural one, albeit it's not totally natural. Just as it's within the realm of possibility that we exist as software in a computer program called "Planet Earth", so too might there be another computer program with associated software called "The Spirit World" or "The Abode of the Afterlife". When you reach your termination as a simulated living being in "Planet Earth", you get resurrected in "The Spirit World". Of course in that sense there's still a god, but a 'god' who just happens to be an extraterrestrial computer programmer, who could be flesh and blood, or maybe an artificial intelligence in its own right. Either way, it's not 100% natural, but it's certainly not supernatural. Of course for all I know there maybe other software programs with names such as "Hell" and "Heaven" or "Valhalla" or maybe dozens, hundreds even thousands of others we've never even conceived or heard of. I mean the virtual beings in one of our terrestrial computer or video games wouldn't be aware that there was thousands of other computer or video games in existence with dozens more being produced and brought out each and every month.

It all makes a sort of sense albeit in a weird or strange sort of sci-fi way. I mean, to paraphrase a rather famous observation, "the universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it's stranger than we can imagine". If there's anyone who can give a definitive proof that we're not a creation of someone's (something's) virtual reality (computer simulation) then I'd like to hear it so I can cross the scenario off my list of things to have to worry about!

That specific aside, if there is any historical evidence for a god, gods or The God, then that evidence could just as easily be equally interpreted as evidence for the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence(s), whose purpose(s) or objective(s) may not be all that benign.

So my second and more likely possible answers to 'if God isn't God, then who is God?' are summed up by the well known phrase 'ancient astronauts'. God is, or was, an extraterrestrial, but not in this case the creator of a simulated universe. Rather, a being within a really real universe. Recall (the late) Arthur C. Clarke's third law, "any sufficiently advance technology is indistinguishable from magic", or in this context, an advanced extraterrestrial technology and alien being welding same is indistinguishable from the supernatural or a supernatural God.

If the above argument is valid, then I conclude that it's easy to explore the nooks and crannies of our galaxy, and seeing that we have no place to run and hide, that then we indeed have been discovered by extraterrestrials. Since one or more extraterrestrial technological civilizations have already done their boldly going exploring thing, it stands to reason that at various times in our geological and historical past we would have received visitors from the stars. If one or more such occurrences happened in our historical past, there might be some suggestive evidence of same; and thus the concept of the 'ancient astronaut' has come to pass.

Erich Von Daniken, including those of a similar point of view who came before and after him, collectively had the germ of a good idea, but he, and they, IMHO got rather carried away with the concept and started seeing ancient extraterrestrial astronauts behind every pyramid and megalith in existence. Now I don't believe for a moment that aliens, or humans assisted by aliens, built the pyramids or the statues at Easter Island or any other type of archaeological monument. Evidence suggestive of ancient astronauts will probably best be found in myths and legends, including the myths and legends central to our major religions, perhaps in advanced human knowledge of scientific concepts out of sync with that particular culture so hosting that knowledge, or in art works, or other archaeological works that are suggestive of an awareness of sky beings.

Firstly, nearly all cultures have stories and pictograms about or of sky beings, including the Australian aboriginals and American Indians. Myths and legends surrounding, say, the Greek / Roman / Norse gods can be interpreted in an ancient astronaut context (ditto for other religious beings or gods), or perhaps the Biblical 'Wheel of Ezekiel' is suggestive. While the etchings on the Plain of Nazca were certainly not runways, for flying saucers, they can easily be interpreted as mammoth human constructions designed to be viewed by sky beings. Why go to the trouble if sky beings weren't really around to appreciate your efforts?

Then there's a whole pot-full of mythological creatures - the Centaur, unicorns, the Sphinx, the Griffin, Pegasus, the Minotaur, mermaids, dragons, etc. which might be non-humanoid extraterrestrial life forms. Or, more realistically, perhaps in light of the UFO abduction and Roswell greys, are the myths and legends shared by many cultures dealing with elves, dwarfs, gnomes, the fairy-folk, the wee-people, and other smallish beings that aren't quite human. It strikes me as more logical that these 'wee folk' actually exist, and that's why all the references to, and belief in, them, exist. That is, they are really real vis-?-vis references to, and belief in them, because there is some psychological, sociological or cultural necessity to invent imaginary beings, calling it mythology (as opposed to literary fiction), or perhaps calling it religion.

In conclusion, the 'ancient astronaut' field is a subject ripe for detailed academic study, and the concept of the 'ancient astronaut' shouldn't be dismissed by scholars are readily as it has been. Unfortunately, it's unlikely any academic would put his or her career on the line by pursuing such a controversial, 'pseudo-scientific, topic because of the 'giggle' factor - Pity that.