Hi everyone,
sorry about delays to my answers, I’ve just changed to linux and had to sort things out …
I’ll be with you soon
Shalom
Hi Gamer,
You might have mis-read me. It isn’t that life isn’t full of mystery, it is. Mystery, sponteniety and novelty, are the spark and energy of life. Life only becomes mysterious when we begin to ‘know’ and we realize that knowing has no end. But seeing mystery is that delicious constant surprise of each and every moment, and the constant play afforded us. Mysterious is always looking for ‘knowing’. and more… Being in the mystery is what we are truly about - but we must allow that.
Hey Scyth,
Well, I’m not sure I’m looking for God, even though it would be nice to be able to explain what that means… And perhaps you’re right, perhaps it is just an issue of faith…
JT
if you need any help give me a PM.
looking forward to you’re replies.
JT,
The stumbling traveler, often doesn’t know why he is traveling. Is it to leave his past? Is it to find his future?
More often than not, you’re traveling for the same reason we all do. For the experience.
it is an issue of faith, and I myself cannot grasp the reality of god. Of course, I often times feel that reality is grasping me, and would give anything for a dose of fantasy.
Hi scythe,
Well, if the traveler isn’t traveling to anywhere, then perhaps he understands.
It is when we stop grasping that reality appears, and surprise surprise, that which is appears as well…
JT
ok i read at some point god states the fact that he is “the word”
and by cubic intellect i have come to the conclusion same as gene ray has
said “if you place a child in a room with the influence of a word-god
the child will starve and feel severe loneliness”
and from that i noticed that to be influenced by a word-god and a person like me isnt easty to be convinced by faith or beliefs in a book with a room of brainwashed people.
"the infulence of being manipulated by
both wrong academic studies and
religous beliefs make you both
stupid and evil therfor humanity is
his own “god” and “satan” because
dreams are effected by bliefs therofr “heaven
and “hell” are mere in the very fabric of
the line called “fate” and to have immortality
anyone can get bored and leave for another
limited life”.
marc, Superchristianity predicts that the trinity is symbollic, rather than literal…it proposes that God is a nonembodied conscious mind that telekinetically controls the universe…and that Christ is a secondary nonembodied mind that primarily acts within the universe within human agents. …
It also proposes that Christ “took the sins of mankind unto himself” by experiencing a long hallucination or dream while dying on the cross within which he assumed all of our identities, suffering all of our moral inadequacies,victimizations, and aggressions, thereby “becoming sin for us” as the NT teaches.
But that wasn’t the end of it… SC also presupposes real human beings who are impervious to harm because they are partial clones of the mind of Jesus Christ…
phenomenal graffiti
Bob,
I’m persuaded to believe in the radical unity of all things - if I had to borrow (only for illustrative purposes though) a term from Aristotle, I’d say that all things have the “same substance”. So depending upon one’s perspective, I’m either a materialist or a pantheist; though I would say the latter fits better, only because I wouldn’t want my views to be confused with some sort of quaint “atomism” or anything like this.
With that said “holiness” as such would be a matter of rational distinction, not so much the intrusion of something substantially distinct from who we, and all things, in fact “are”, or at least a “part of.”
Thus, to my way of understanding, a “temple”, whether it be one built by hands or which one tries to cultivate in one’s interior life, is a place which underlines the singular being found under innumerable forms.
(Sorry for all of the quotes - terribly pretentious, but I feel the need to do so since I’m using alot of these terms in a very loose/analogical way, and not necessarily according to their normal meaning.)
Gamer,
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding you, but maybe I’m not. Maybe what I am writing now will have some value for you…or maybe not! 
Much of religion, IMHO, is a desire for wish-fulfillment. This to me, is juvenile*. I’m not saying this to be condescending or insulting, since it’s a very “natural” (or perhaps I should say, common) thing for people to want to see their own personal designs fulfilled - to have their will unfailingly projected outside of that which they can actually claim any measure of control (namely, themselves.)
This universe is both beautiful and cruel** - undeniably filled with intelligence, order, elegence; yet just as much as it builds up, it destroys… one giant recycling plant perhaps?
Our anguish with reality “as it is”, is the result of our wishes being dashed upon the stones of experience. Now, we can mourn this and be miserable on some level for the rest of our lives - or, we can accept how things are, and accept where we actually do have control over things and let our joy and displeasure reside here alone. After all, is there any point in being upset at how things actually are? Kind of like trying to argue with a brick wall, isn’t it?
(* note - btw. even with this said, I’m not “anti-religious”; far from it. Perhaps there are “gods” or beings somewhat like ourselves, but grander, who take some interest in our doings - and as such, can grant favours, etc. However I would judge such things to be a matter of inter-personal relations, and like those amongst human beings, an unsure thing, and really not to be judged the be-all and end-all of a man’s life… indeed, I’d go so far as to say that the “highest” form of religion, would be free from placing one’s bets on such uncertain things as the favour of either gods or men. I guess by “juvenille” I ultimatly mean, immature, or unfinished.)
(** note - of course, the “cruelty” part is a subjective appraisal in the extreme; one which takes for granted that we or anything/one else are entitled to something different at any given moment than what in fact is.)
Hey Peter!
Thanks for the good wishes.
How on earth did I manage to hurt you by my statement? Probably by using the word “stoic” as an adjective and consequently, to describe someone “not affected by passion; manifesting indifference to pleasure or pain; especially, bearing pain, suffering, or bad fortune without complaint”. Hence, a person not easily excited or an apathetic person. Please believe me, I didn’t mean to hurt you.
When I said that you were falling foul of the fundamentalist ideas, I meant that to regard the suffering of mankind as “part of god’s divine plan” would be to accept the idea of a lofty human kind of monarch, who had no passion for human life. This is something that I have come across all too often. It is generally an excuse to not get involved. If you follow the stance of Mysticism, you will find that social commitment is an important expression of love towards God.
Whereas I find that a certain degree of stoicism is important, allowing an emotional distance when having to cope with largely emotional issues, and to off balance empathy, I think it is a considerable problem if it does produce apathy. For me a balanced stoicism would be described with the idea of “being happy” or being in an equitable state of “well-being” despite the circumstances.
Ah, you see, that isn’t the implication for me. There are the spiritual and the actively spiritual. There are those who are caught up with their illusions who to some degree are those “dreaming”, whilst commonly it has been the visionary that has been said to be the dreamer. It is those who “reconnect” to the spiritual source of their sentience who are realistic and awake to their potential.
Here you display a great degree of passion, which makes me ask about your plea for the Stoics? I agree with you of course (being a Care Manager!!), but there are powers in this world that do not share this passion, in fact they tend to be very un-spiritual too. These dominions punish humanity and frailness with cold reason and callously manage to overlook the upheaval that their politics cause. They suggest that there is a higher cause for which certain human beings must suffer so that others profit.
I agree - I think a bit problem is that Christians misunderstand the “Word of God” as only being the “Word of God” when it is taken literally. That constitutes a form of idolatry for me. As well as that, there is a tendentious interpretation of scripture to underline nationalistic ideals and by doing that, pretending that what in actual fact is following national goals is fulfilling the “Realm of God.” The tendency to fall back into OT statements that the majority of Rabbi’s wouldn’t transcribe 1:1 in the modern day shows that these people have lost their spiritual basis.
Being “children of the divine nature” is my subject. The “enemies” are those who have lost the rhythm of communal life, or who live in protest of our lifestyle. We can learn to understand them by noticing how we too, become “enemies” of others often swelling to delusions of grandeur by some indignation that swells up inside of us. Strangely, the more we swell, the emptier we become.
People struggling with this need something substantial to prevent the “swelling” and to fill the emptiness that incurs. Love is a soothing warmth that can help, or a seed that can grow and fill up that emptiness. Therefore, love is the answer, but not as some kind of romantic idea or fuzzy feeling. To love someone doesn’t require us to “like” that person - that is: to applaud what he stands for. It requires us to find a means to warm or to feed our neighbour, to provide with spiritual sustenance and help him find the rhythm again.
Shalom
phenomenal_graffiti
Thank you for your intervention. That’s enlightening : I knew nothing about SC.
Marc
Hello Porch Guy,
What normally separates the Pantheists from the Mystics, despite a number of similarities, is the belief in a personal God. I believe in a personal God because I see us as a microcosm or even a microtheos, wherein the attributes of the Mystery are incarnate in us. Therefore, the existence of a cosmic “Mindedness” that possesses the characteristic properties of a person - such as having intentional states, and the associated capacities like the ability to make decisions - is seen in his “childrenâ€.
The Unity (Aramaic: Alaha) connects through our spirit, allowing us to reconnect to the comm-union we should be in with God and the whole of creation. The problem of sin is explained by Mankind’s tendency to see the superficial and overlook the inner way. Through not using his inherent spirituality, man is prone to missing the mark and not living up to his calling. But this is repairable, as long as I do not completely cut myself off.
Exactly, the Holy Spirit is the natural link to God, which is broken, but existent. It is the repair of a union, rather than the creation of something new that constitutes the turn to God. We are created to be a sanctuary of the living God in all diversity, but we lack something if we ignore sentience.
When David asked to build a temple for God, he is asked whether he has missed something. God doesn’t live in houses like men. Jesus pointed this out when his disciples showed how they revered the temple that Herod had built, saying, “You could tear it down and I would build a new temple within three days†- referring to the temple of the heart. God is the Unity who lives in the variety (Elohim) and calls on everyone to “come home†like the prodigal son.
Shalom
This is the most sane thing I have read on ILP in months. Kudos.
I couldn’t agree more. In my opinion the highest form of religion is autotheism.
WHY HAVE YOU SKIPPED MY FACTS
IS IT BECAUSE YOU DEBAT THEM AND IGNORE ME
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE TIMECUBE PRINCIPLES
GEEZ LIKE SERIOUSLY I COULD USE SOME RESPECT.
Dr.S wrote
Quote:
It strikes me as the essence of the Serenity Prayer:
Psychologically of course it is much easier said than done.
christianity is a poison forced upon children
nods his head knowing how right he is and will remain
“if you place a child in a room and in the hands of a word-god
,the child will suffer severe loneliness and will starve to DEATH”
belief in god equates death
you are all educated wrong by liars
and you are all taught from a liars book
whom you take question to because you are a timecube traveller
but you dont know it because you are stupid and evil.
timecube?! lol… seriously? Tell me your joking that you actually believe that crap… I’m sorry to go off topic with this thread but I couldn’t help myself… I was just thinking about how funny it would be if one of those Gene Ray Cultists came here and decided to post… Wow… Small world.
Continue.
Greetings Bob,
My hesitancy with such an idea are primarily rooted in my view of the human organism, in particular that phenomena we call the “human person”. I’m heavily inclined to think that the notion of “I” and all that goes with this, is just as much a function of language and culture as it is biological hardwiring. I also think that intelligence, and even purpose, are distinct from consciousness as we currently experience it as a species. In other words, I think there were at some point, physically modern human beings who were every bit as intelligent as we were, capable of cultural achievement even, but whose “mindspace” was arranged quite differently than our own. I guess you could say that I subscribe to many of the views of this guy.
Given this (and other considerations), I’m not convinced that the “supreme” or “ground of all being”, is necessarily “personal” in the way that you and I conceptualize ourselves as being such. Do I believe God/Nature/Logos is intelligent? I have no doubt of this. With some purpose? Perhaps, though I wouldn’t claim to know what this is, if there is a “purpose” as such (in terms of there being an “end goal” for all things.) OTOH, I definately believe everything has utility, and is intended to work as one part amongst many others and that there is an elegance in all of this.
However, it would not surprise me at all if it turned out that God was “personal” in a way analogous to us, that there was a cosmic consciousness - which would establish the sort of microcosm/macrocosm relationship between man and God that you speak of. The difficulty though is that I do not know this to be the case - and I’m also unsure how important it in fact is (functionally speaking) whether or not such were the case to begin with. After all, while I can know quite firmly about myself and my actual (not imagined, or overly speculated) place in relation to things around me, there is always room left for doubt when it comes to the experience of “personal revelation” from a “personal God”. In fact it’s a logical difficulty, to say with certainty that what one would encounter in such a situation in fact is “God” in the sense that the higher philosophy (whether it be found in Rome, Hellas, India, Egypt, Judea, etc.) means this (and not “gods”, which are really highly evolved beings, or beings of a higher order than ourselves - but still parts, and not the whole.) But then again, such uncertainty (if we scrutinize) can be established in any and all relationships we have with others…
…which brings me back to the begining - that the highest form of religion, and the greatest certainty, are to be found in the worship/service of the God which resides within. I do not mean this in any new-agey, egotistical, “pop-religion” sense - since there is a difference between such a recognition of “deity” within, and saying that we as individuals “are God” or put more basically, anything special in relation to anyone else.
Bob,
I’m sorry, I just realized that the latter part of the second last paragraph is a bit garbled. My point was basically this…
-
If one had a personal, private revelation (say like something one reads about in the Old Testament - sky opens up, cherubim come flying down hoisting up the “Ancient of Days” upon their shoulders, etc.) of a personal being claiming to be the “Supreme” or “God” in the sense that our culture understands that word (as opposed to “gods”, which fill a strata occupied by “angels” in the Judeo-Christian tradition), it would be very difficult to establish with certainty the truthfulness of such a claim. After all, what one could be experiencing is simply a far more sophisticated being than one’s self, capable of flashly special effects and spectacles which appear to us to be “miracles” and evidence of divinity.
-
IOW, how is one to know that what one is encountering in such an episode, is not in fact a “space alien” or a “lesser god” (though if one dwells upon it, is there really a difference?)
Nick,
Despite my stated pantheistic outlook, I do not frown on the practice of prayer - indeed, I practice it myself.
However, I think it is important to have a mature outlook on such things. Prayer is entirely for our benefit - and as such is a species of meditation.
God/Nature does not need an update from us - nor do our desires necessarily coincide with those of God. Thus while it is certainly cathartic to pour out our problems before the Almighty, the greatest value of such an excercise is for us to gain some perspective on them. In gaining such perspective, hopefully we’ll make rational, logical distinctions amongst them - discerning just what it is that is within our control, and what we must be in some wise resigned to.
Another important part of prayer, IMHO, is praise. Is this because the Logos needs our adoration? Of course not - just as we do not need the praise of others, since praise does nothing to change the value of anything. However, praise is good for the one who offers it, in so far (and to the degree) that it is merited. It is always good to properly evaluate things, and to know and acknowledge their excellence (or lack thereof). As such, IMHO there is nothing greater or more sublime than the totality of all things and the great Reason which is in all.
And of course, while I have my reservations about the notion of the Supreme/Nature/God being “personally conscious” as we are (though it is possible, and one could argue given the rise of self awareness in the human species, probable), it is eminantly human and perhaps in some wise unavoidable for us to anthropomorphize non-human entities. Thus, in matters of conversation I have no difficulty with calling God “He” or even “Lord”, since there is a utility and even correct analogy in doing such. And while this is going to sound terribly arrogant, perhaps for simpler folks who do not appreciate philosophy, this “exoteric” approach to Deity is more useful and really is all they need to reap the benefits of a well lived, ethical, pious life.
There is obviously so much more that could be said on the matter - as well as further speculation about things like meaning and purpose, and the notion of providence - all things which I accept, based on personal experience and which I’ve found are not at all contrary to reason.
With all of that said, I think the Serenity Prayer is probably one of the better ones.