Jobar

David, I am glad you are not afraid to call yourself mystic- I too consider myself one, though I normally attempt to avoid speaking about things I know are at root beyond words. I find the concept of the union of opposites to be incredibly useful at all levels of thought- thesis, antithesis, synthesis- but when one reaches the ultimate level of being/nonbeing, words and thought must necessarily end. I try to make sure I stay below this level of abstraction; trying to use words to talk about ultimates is like trying to fly a plane in a vacuum.

So I must ask you a few questions about your concept of God- realizing we are attempting to fly far up in the abstract stratosphere here, I will not be trying to shoot you down if you choose to use a certain amount of poetry and metaphor. Still I must ask you for *reasons*. The main question I have must be- why do you believe in a God who is outside the universe?

I have quoted Meister Eckhart, a 13th century German mystic (who was executed by the Catholic Church)- "Even if I say, 'Thou! Oh, Thou!' I say too much." He realized that attempting to talk about God was an error- yet here you are, doing just that.

At one point you denied that God is the universe. Will you argue against my own particular mantra- "Thou Art That!"?

David Mathews

Hello 99percent,

David: Would you identify, describe and logically justify this "reality" which you hold in such high esteem?

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews

Hello Answerer,

David: You are correct in saying that it is a risky things for humans to seek out and find God, and it is even riskier to believe in and obey God. Only the bold are willing to take upon themselves this sort of challenge.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews

Hello Rainbow Walking,

David: I am not implying violence at all. The unpleasantness is meeting God is associated with the absolute and permanent destruction of human arrogance and presumption which follows from such contact. If you met God, you would know with certainty that you are nothing and that you know nothing. Such knowledge is not compatible with normal human life, anyone who becomes acquainted with God will see their concept of self evaporate.

Consider what Abram learned about God though His encounter with God was shrouded by the veil of sleep: "Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep feel upon Abrahm; and behold, horror and great darkness feel upon him." (Genesis 15:12). Contemplate the great burden which knowledge of God produced in the life of Jeremiah, "Then I said, 'I will not make mention of Him, nor will I speak anymore in His name.' But His word was in my heart like a burning fire shut up in my bones; I was weary of holding it back, and I could not." (Jeremiah 20:9).

You will learn that the experience of God had similar terrifying consequences among all those people who have encountered Him. I don't encourage you to seek such an encounter as I don't believe that you are able to handle it.

David: God is by no means hiding from you. If you want to meet God, you can. Just don't address that request to me as it is not within my power to grant it. You should address it to God directly. If you do so, God will fulfill the request, though certainly not in the manner which you would prefer.

David: Baal was not obligated to defend an altar made with hands, even if he had existed he still was not obligated to do so. Baal worship came to an end when the concept of Baal no longer fulfilled the spiritual needs of those people who had worshipped him. The descendents of those people are monotheists today, they did not abandon the concept of God when they abandoned the worship of Baal.

David: Perhaps so, but you don't really know this.

David: You are invited to do so, but I must tell you that my own individual success or failure does not constitute the success or failure of Theism. Four billion people believe in God and belief in God is still displaying potency and intellectual force in today's world.

David: Bold people are not intimidated by the thought of failure. The three children answered Nebuchadnezzar's threat: "O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If that is the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hands, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up." (Daniel 3:16-18).

Weak people fear failure, bold people will embrace both the risk and rewards associated with exploration of these profound themes of religion. For those people who are willing to die, there are no threats which would prevent them from thinking, speaking or behaving as they will.

David: Let me see if I understand you correctly: Is reality limited by human tools of perception and comprehension? There is no possibility whatsoever of any sort of reality outside of what humans know and can understand?

I think that your "reality" is subjective and imaginary. You are making reality a slave of your own intellect. I suspect that reality won't tolerate slavery to any human.

David: I don't know what you are talking abot. Genesis 1 & 2 was translated allegorically long before science began learning the history of the Universe, the Earth and life.

David: You might think that science is locked in some sort of life-and-death struggle with God but there are many scientists who do not share that opinion.

David: I hope that you appreciate the irony of your thoughts expressed above: The concept of city of man/city of God came from an eloquent theist. I suppose that your gates, your foundation, your city and even your own self are subsumed altogether within God. You cannot protect yourself from a perceived enemy outside when He is already inside of you. Your defense of reality is an futile exercise.

David: I can't help but admire your idealism.

David: I have no objection to preachers working. Work will give the preachers opportunity to put their religious ideals to practice.

David: That is a good question indeed.

David: If humans are born atheists and would remain atheists without a religious unbringing, I find it astonishing that the concept of God would have originated or become popular in the first place.

David: Atheists have mentioned these common attributes a number of times in several different threads. I believe that you are aware of them.

David: I believe that scentific rationality is only and exclusively an invention of the human imagination. I believe that atheistic naturalism is only and exclusively an invention of the human imagination. I believe that all philosophical concepts and speculations are only and exclusively an invention of the human imagination. What you are saying about God applies to everything else with equal force.

David: Theists have sinned and continue to sin. Religion has been aware of this from the beginning. Atheists also sin, and it has been reported that scientists sin.

David: All of these civilizations still are contributing to the growth and development of humankind. We may not agree with everything that these people commit, but it is just to say that those cultures also find many faults and sins in the Western cultures.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

David Mathews

Hello Jobar,

[Qquote]David, I am glad you are not afraid to call yourself mystic- I too consider myself one, though I normally attempt to avoid speaking about things I know are at root beyond words. I find the concept of the union of opposites to be incredibly useful at all levels of thought- thesis, antithesis, synthesis- but when one reaches the ultimate level of being/nonbeing, words and thought must necessarily end. I try to make sure I stay below this level of abstraction; trying to use words to talk about ultimates is like trying to fly a plane in a vacuum.

So I must ask you a few questions about your concept of God- realizing we are attempting to fly far up in the abstract stratosphere here, I will not be trying to shoot you down if you choose to use a certain amount of poetry and metaphor. Still I must ask you for *reasons*. The main question I have must be- why do you believe in a God who is outside the universe?

I have quoted Meister Eckhart, a 13th century German mystic (who was executed by the Catholic Church)- "Even if I say, 'Thou! Oh, Thou!' I say too much." He realized that attempting to talk about God was an error- yet here you are, doing just that.

At one point you denied that God is the universe. Will you argue against my own particular mantra- "Thou Art That!"?[/QUOTE]

David: I appreciate your comments very much and won't argue with the mantra, "Thou art That!" I believe that this most profound expression of Hinduism is relevant to Christians and therefore worthy of honor.

The Hindus were devoted to the concept of reality and as such they have a lot in common with Rainbow Walking, myself and many billions of religious and non-religious people of this world. No matter how confident a person might be in their own concept of reality, these people were more confident.

I suppose that the Hindus have as many good reasons to reject the atheistic naturalism of Rainbow Walking as he has to reject their own brand of mysticism. I suppose that all people are free to reject any concept of reality which does not appeal to them.

This freedom applies to myself as much as it applies to Rainbow Walking, even if that means that each of us rejects the other's concept of reality. Agreement is not necessary, agreement is only a luxury afforded to small minds. I can live in a world filled with religious and philosophical diversity. I will listen to all people, learn from all people and gather whatever value I can from belief systems which directly contradict my own.

Sincerely,

David Mathews

lpetrich

Enjoy your imaginary master.

Including setting the record straight about Itself to every human being who has ever lived, since the large majority of people who have ever lived have had very erroneous beliefs about It.

I'm not commanding anything. I'm simply commenting that an omnipotent being could easily make Itself known to me if It wants to.

But a Hades of a lot of heretics.

It would have been difficult to be an atheist in early modern times, when people could get in deep trouble if they expressed theological opinions officially considered heretical. Although Sir Isaac Newton was very interested in theological questions, he developed some very heretical opinions, like his rejection of the Trinity and his belief that the Son is subordinate to the Father.

The Greek ones had had more freedom of thought, and some of them were very skeptical of their society's religion. One common belief was that their society's religion is socially useful while being false, a "royal lie" view of religion, to use Plato's phrase. Another was euhemerism, the belief that the Gods had originally been human heroes; thus, Zeus could once have been a king who had had an eye for the ladies. And there was the nature-allegory view, that Zeus is the sky; he fertilizes the earth with rain -- something anthropomorphized into his numerous love affairs and illegitimate children.

As if they are all talking about the same being, even when they had worshipped several deities.

However, people have often worshipped a multitude of deities, and polytheism has been around for much longer than monotheism. And people have been known to invent numerous entities now usually considered imaginary, like ghosts and demons and elves and fairies and gnomes and trolls and goblins and jinn and satyrs and wood-nymphs and so forth.

Monotheism has also taken such forms as pantheism, using "God" to mean the soul of the Universe. This New-Agey view is a part of Stoicism and some varieties of Hinduism, but it has usually been considered heretical in the Abrahamic religions.

Some religions have even featured the absence or irrelevance of deities, like some forms of Buddhism and Taoism.

The same thing can be said about belief in elves and fairies and so forth.

Also, drug addiction, including alcohol and tobacco addiction, and war are common human features, but are they anything to be proud of?

Lots of reasons. A tendency to invent imaginary beings -- simply imagine some that are very powerful. Also, Christianity and Islam claim to be the only true religions, and they consider it important to convert people, by force if necessary. This is why those two have many more followers than their ancestor Judaism, which has never been big on seeking converts (there is even a Jewish tradition of discouraging converts).

Mystical experiences are completely real, but they are more likely some altered brain state rather than an extra sense, as has been found with the help of brain-scan studies. If one goes into a state of contemplation, one may lose track of both space and time, thus seemingly experiencing a unified reality that is outside of both.

That's certainly very interesting, but it does have some interesting consequences. Such as how Jesus Christ's recorded biography rather closely fits Lord Raglan's Mythic-Hero profile, which was deduced from the careers of several legendary figures. Thus, Jesus Christ being the son of a god and a virgin is much like Romulus and Remus being the sons of a god and a virgin.

We have lots of mental and behavioral features that are lacking from nearly all of the rest of animal kingdom, features which are likely a side effect of having very big brains. Even so, some have speculated that dogs worship their masters.

Synaesthesia

Simple, god memes have proliferated because people find them to be attractive ideas.

Similarly, we find that man has a inclined to contemplate drugs, that he is inclined to think about international affairs and inclined to think about santa claus. None of these are "inherent" in his nature, but an exadaptation of existing propensities.

You are being RATHER too quick to jump to what can and cannot be explained scientifically, especially considering that you don't explain them. You simply postulate God's qualities and unparsimonious deus ex machina takes over.

Jobar

David, I don't think you have answered my question- how do you explain your belief in a God outside of, and with power over, our universe of experience and observation?

I have labelled myself an atheist/pantheist. We have two distinct meanings of 'theos' here.

I am an atheist when we talk about the Christian concept of God- an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent Creator, who is above or outside the universe He creates.

But- the 'That' which is also 'Thou' I believe in. Oh, I think that the word 'Tao' is a better word for 'That', than God is. But if the word 'God' has any meaning at all, then I am God.

Is the universe (or the multiverse) infinite? The only honest answer is 'we don't know.' I personally *think* it is- and if it is, then the universe meets the main criterion for Godhood. And given that I spring forth from, live in, and dissolve into the universe, then I am one aspect, or facet, of infinity. Which is God enough for me.

You seem to deny our own intimate participation in the infinite. I agree with the Vedas and Upanishads- I say that my own thoughts are the thoughts of God. This very body is the body of God. If there is a God, then I am He. My everyday mind is the Buddha mind. Does your theology deny this?

Answerer

Well, you only point out half out of what I had said. Actually, I wanted to you that even if God exists(which is most likely not), He can't be trusted and there is a high possiblity that He will change his promises which he made to the christians as He once changed his promises made to the Jews. There is really no point in worshippping or having faith in such an unpredictable and unreasonable bastard.

wordsmyth

Whether or not the scriptures are “relevant to the xian” is irrelevant to our discussion, as the argument did not claim anything about their “relevancy” but instead their alleged “validity over texts of other religions”. This is an important distinction.

I do not argue the point that the scriptures are most relevant to xians. However, my question involved how you conclude that the xian texts are more <strong>valid</strong> in answering questions accurately about the nature of God(s) and origin of the universe than texts of other religions.

Although I can’t quote you word for word (so feel free to correct me where I’m mistaken) your answers to my previous questions show your argument thus far is as follows…

I’ve put in <strong>bold</strong> the truth of the conclusion that is assumed by the premise to help you understand why it is a circular argument. Again, relevancy is not in question here. What I’m trying to discover is how you conclude that the xian texts are more valid (i.e. truthful) than texts of other religions or if you are willing to admit that you are an xian solely because religious identity is a consequence of nationality and/or culture.

I was at first willing to believe this as true until I read the following quote by you…

I can only fathom three possibilities to reconcile your two above statements.

(1) You are purposefully being deceitful and have not in fact read the scriptures of all the world religions, as much as are available to you.
(2) You have read a few scriptures of other world religions and formed a general conclusion based on very little evidence.
(3) You are completely incapable of objective reasoning and your own personal bias clouds your understanding and inhibits your capacity for logical thought.

Or perhaps you would like to change the wording of your statement to… “Some attributes of the xian God are common to God(s) of some other religions.”

The dissimilarity between those different religious traditions is testimony against theism. How many differing sects are there within xianity alone… over 20,000 according the Encyclopedia Britannica, I believe. Each of those sects has differing beliefs and practices and that is just within a single religion that shares more similarities between sects than with any other non-xian religion. Each sect makes its claim to xianity through individual interpretations of the bible and many claim to be the only “true xians” (tm).

Your own personal beliefs, while they might share a considerable amount in common with other sects of xianity, place you deep in the minority of xians based on their differences. Your beliefs and claim to xianity have already been called in to question by other xians on this site alone. Your own beliefs, which appear to be a general departure from the majority of other xians beliefs and interpretations of the bible, is an obvious testament against theism.

Absolutely. There is no substantial evidence that God(s) (or the supernatural) exist and/or physically effect our environment or us in any way. There is strong evidence that God(s) (and the supernatural) are exclusively inventions of human imagination.

[ July 12, 2002: Message edited by: wordsmyth ]</p>