A metaphysical question

[eugler]

[/size][/font]


Eugler,

Somehow I thought you would see things that way.

I guess we just have to respectfully agree to disagree. Thanks for all your input and feedback, though. It's nice to have civil discussions.

Dito Singpeace,

thanks for sharing your insights and views with me. I enjoyed reading and thinking about it. Have a nice day

 

[eugler]

For myself, I don't think there is anything that indicates that one could know anything about God's intentions, a priori, or empirically. I'm a bit skeptical that one can even know there is a God or gods, by either of these methods. To call us flies to the Einstein that is God, is to overstate our position rather dramatically, for the reasons you specify.

Agreed.

 

[drich0150]

So all religions are the same? Or some people are seen as true believers by god regardless of there religion?

I would say that God decides who does and does not meet the criteria of salvation, despite what we think of ourselves or how we label ourselves.
I have found When one asks which religion is correct, that person does not allow God the providence to make that decision from his own standard. As if somehow God was bound to the titles we have given ourselves.. That is why I (referenced scripture) when it says not all who call themselves Christian are indeed followers of Christ.

So faith is more important than moral?

yes

Even if Fundamentalism leads to intolerance and its other ugly implications?

Morality is the litmus test of faith. without morality true faith can not exist, but at the same time morality on it's own is meaningless.

Why only one third?

Because we were told a third of the angels followed Lucifer at the fall.

Far less than 1/3 of the people on this planet agree with your view of god. And even if it was only 1/3, no offense, but that doesn't seem to be good work on behalf of god.

We seem to be talking about two different things. When i said a race a beings created to exist with him in Heaven i was referring to angels... not more people. Sorry if I was unclear.

That reminds of a quote from a book. In it the father of a daughter was not sure whether he was the biological father so he was trying to look for differences and clues. It turned out it was his child long after he was convinced otherwise and left. When they meet 20 years later he says to her: "I couldn't stop looking for differences and as it turns out if you look for something long and hard enough, no matter what it is, you will eventually find it."

I have found that truth is universal, no matter where it comes from. Often times a solid truth can cut both ways.

 

[LWB]

A good argument, although it is pretty speculative there is not much to say against it that would be less speculative. So what you are saying is god doesn't have to be that complex himself since the physical reality could be less complex than it appears. Did I catch your drift?

Thanks. I guess I mean that all the complexity in the universe came from a singularity. Everything came from the one point and flows down from that, so everything is interconnected/related. For example, I can't know every person, but I know myself, so that gives me an insight into what all those others might be like.

I'm not sure what you mean by that, could you please clarify?

God can't be understood as He is. So in order to be intelligble to finite creatures such as ourselves, and even godlike angelic entities, God manifests as a particular person. To us, that person is Jesus Christ. To the angels, He is the enthroned majesty of Ezekiel 1:26-28 or Revelation 4:2-3. I was speculating that God may manifest Himself to infinite universes with infinite forms of sentient life.

I will have to ask the same that I asked drich0150. What about the others? Why is their perspective of the nature of god and existence itself so different from the Christian one then?

I haven't had time to read the other responses yet, but I guess you are referring to other religions?

I think the other great faiths and even philosophical systems like Stoicism have remarkable insights. But there is only one way to the Father:

John 10:1-6 “Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice. But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger’s voice.”

So it is like Jesus provides the offical method, while all others are bootleggers.

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I should also state that this is all just my opinion. I shouldn't really presume to know anything about metaphysical reality, but for the fun of it I go ahead anyway.

 

[Sketcher]

How on earth could anyone state that he or she understood what this being had in mind when it was creating this, let alone what it wants us to do? Is this not far more questionable than a fly claiming to understand what went through Einstein's mind when he was developing the theory of relativity?

I don't claim to fully know why God created us, and my faith doesn't presume to either. It's a mystery that we happily accept. I personally don't need to know all of the whys behind why God made us, and why he made us the way he did.

But fortunately, the Creator wants some sort of relationship with the created creatures called humans. And for that reason, he has left us markers that point to that which is in his will that he wants us to know. Nature points to him. True morality points to him*. And furthermore, divine revelations preserved through Scripture point us to him. Though he is at least as far above us intellectually as Einstein would be from a fly, he is a lot more attached to us and intentional with us than Einstein would be with said fly.

* By true morality, I mean examples such as the Seven Laws of Noah or the Ten Commandments. We instinctively know that these are intrinsically good laws. And of course, they point to him ("You shall have no other gods besides me" is pretty clear!).

 

[elopez]

Actually that's the whole point of the argument. If flies had the mental capabilties of humans it wouldn't make any sense, would it? I was trying to compare the attempt of a human being to grasp the motivation and nature of the supposed creator of the universe with the mental capabilities at his disposal with the attempt of a fly to follow Einstein's thoughts about relativity with the mental capability at its disposal. I guess you misunderstood me here, sorry if I didn't make it clearer.

I think you have misunderstood me. I get your comparison, what I am saying is that it is a false comparison. That is a big "if" you are working with there.

 

[chilehed]

How on earth could anyone state that he or she understood what this being had in mind when it was creating this, let alone what it wants us to do?...

When I want someone to know what's on my mind, I usually tell them.

 

[eugler]

I would say that God decides who does and does not meet the criteria of salvation, despite what we think of ourselves or how we label ourselves.
I have found When one asks which religion is correct, that person does not allow God the providence to make that decision from his own standard. As if somehow God was bound to the titles we have given ourselves.. That is why I (referenced scripture) when it says not all who call themselves Christian are indeed followers of Christ.

If that's the case, then it is entirely beyond me why you label yourselves at all. Where is the point in following a certain group of people and believe in their stories of god if god will decide about his true followers independent of their religion? It seems it would be enough to believe in god in your own individual way and try to act accordingly. Am I missing something here?

yes


Morality is the litmus test of faith. without morality true faith can not exist, but at the same time morality on it's own is meaningless.

We will probably get of topic if we follow this trail (that I admittedly started myself) since we would have to start defining morality to talk about it.

Because we were told a third of the angels followed Lucifer at the fall.


We seem to be talking about two different things. When i said a race a beings created to exist with him in Heaven i was referring to angels... not more people. Sorry if I was unclear.

Yep, looks like I completely misunderstood what you were saying, sorry.

I have found that truth is universal, no matter where it comes from. Often times a solid truth can cut both ways.

In my opinion there is a strong case to be made that truth itself is neither absolut nor universal but again that would lead this discussion astray.

 

[eugler]

Thanks. I guess I mean that all the complexity in the universe came from a singularity. Everything came from the one point and flows down from that, so everything is interconnected/related. For example, I can't know every person, but I know myself, so that gives me an insight into what all those others might be like.

While that is - from my pov - to a certain extend true, it neglects the matter of scale. Over time and especially over the last century we have had to realise that this only applies to things within the small speck of size, speed and time that we can directly observe. Beyond that - and I think the matter we are talking about is far beyond - it doesn't apply.

God can't be understood as He is. So in order to be intelligble to finite creatures such as ourselves, and even godlike angelic entities, God manifests as a particular person. To us, that person is Jesus Christ. To the angels, He is the enthroned majesty of Ezekiel 1:26-28 or Revelation 4:2-3. I was speculating that God may manifest Himself to infinite universes with infinite forms of sentient life.

An interessting idea, I find its open mindedness very appealing.

I haven't had time to read the other responses yet, but I guess you are referring to other religions?

Yep

I think the other great faiths and even philosophical systems like Stoicism have remarkable insights. But there is only one way to the Father:

So it is like Jesus provides the offical method, while all others are bootleggers.

I can't resist but have to mention that Christian philosophy incorporated Stoicism almost entirely, one could go as far as saying that it is a strongly modified version of Stoicism. I'm not sure but it seems that you are contradicting yourself here. If other systems have merit to an extend that we are nowhere near any consens which one is the right way then they can't be simply discarded as bootleggers, can they?.

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I should also state that this is all just my opinion. I shouldn't really presume to know anything about metaphysical reality, but for the fun of it I go ahead anyway.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I completely second your last paragraph . None of us has a clue about metaphysical reality we can all just speculate. In fact it seems to me that it doesn't exist at all but that again is just my opinion.

 

[eugler]

I think you have misunderstood me. I get your comparison, what I am saying is that it is a false comparison. That is a big "if" you are working with there.

I'm not getting why you think it is a false comparison.

 

[eugler]

When I want someone to know what's on my mind, I usually tell them.

You are missing the point. You wouldn't expect an Amoeba to understand when you explain the situation in the Middle East to it, would you?

 

[drich0150]

If that's the case, then it is entirely beyond me why you label yourselves at all.

So that like minded believers can find and worship as their beliefs dictate.

Where is the point in following a certain group of people and believe in their stories of god if god will decide about his true followers independent of their religion?

As I have mentioned earlier our greatest command is to Love God with all of our being. we are to align ourselves with the religious expression that best suits our gifts and abilities to fulfill that command. "Religion" is only the template in which one is directed, or molded so that one may eventually have a personal relationship with God. We are not to worship the religion itself or traditions contained in that particular religious expression.

This is the Judgment God will bestow. Did we live/love God? Did we live/love ourselves Or did we live/love our religion? That why it is not for us to label ourselves or to seek out a specific religious expression. We are simply to find a way through religion as a means to develop a relationship with God, that will allow us to love Him with all of our mind, Heart, spirit and strength. The Religion in of itself should not be our goal.

It seems it would be enough to believe in god in your own individual way and try to act accordingly. Am I missing something here?

Without the initial guidance religion offers, one is subject to his own brand of personal righteousness. As we have been shown in scripture over and over again, "Self righteousness" is not an excepted behavior.

We will probably get of topic if we follow this trail (that I admittedly started myself) since we would have to start defining morality to talk about it.

Maybe it would be a good subject for another post.

In my opinion there is a strong case to be made that truth itself is neither absolute nor universal but again that would lead this discussion astray.

maybe next time.

 

[salida]

Hi everybody,

I'm not at CF regularly but love to pop in from time to time to participate in some of the interessting discussions here. As you can see by the little sign above I'm an atheist but I must admit that I've been an Agnostic for the bigger part of my live since I've always rejected organised religion as a philosophy for myself (although going through the lot of the catholic initiation rites). I'm telling you this because I would be interessted in some religious views of one of the main reasons for my (then) Agnosticism which was (and still is) a paradox from my pov.

Let's assume there is a supernatural entity that we call god and that has created all of this, all that we can see and (according to most religious views) even more than that. The ingraspable vasteness of the whole universe was deliberately brought into existence by this entity which - in order to do this - has at least at some point understood the workings of his creation everywhere and at every scale. It follows logically that the intelligence of this being must be far beyond our human imagination. How on earth could anyone state that he or she understood what this being had in mind when it was creating this, let alone what it wants us to do? Is this not far more questionable than a fly claiming to understand what went through Einstein's mind when he was developing the theory of relativity?

Having stated this question I would like to ask you to answer without refering to your scripture or the revelation given to your specific religion and denomination. This is meant as a general question from a non-believer to a believer and I would be interessted in your personal thoughts, not the thoughts of your church. I'm not trying to convert anyone so please refrain from delivering sermons but see this as a discussion among equals who want to learn more about the way other people think. I'm looking forward to an interessting discussion.

As one looks at creation and/or intelligent design its obvious that God is very detailed and organized so he must have had an specific plan for mankind.

 

[eugler]

So that like minded believers can find and worship as their beliefs dictate.

As I have mentioned earlier our greatest command is to Love God with all of our being. we are to align ourselves with the religious expression that best suits our gifts and abilities to fulfill that command. "Religion" is only the template in which one is directed, or molded so that one may eventually have a personal relationship with God. We are not to worship the religion itself or traditions contained in that particular religious expression.

This is the Judgment God will bestow. Did we live/love God? Did we live/love ourselves Or did we live/love our religion? That why it is not for us to label ourselves or to seek out a specific religious expression. We are simply to find a way through religion as a means to develop a relationship with God, that will allow us to love Him with all of our mind, Heart, spirit and strength. The Religion in of itself should not be our goal.

Yet every particular Religion defines the goal (and there are quit a few entirely different goals defined) and tells the believer how to achieve it. The question wether we loved god or not hugely depends on what you see in god. I will venture the guess that for you god is in essence a person, an independent entity (consisting of 3 parts but independant of the world around it). For many Hindus the Trinity of the Hindu gods is just an expression of the Samsara that comes like everything else from the Brahman, the ultimate source. The believer himself is - like everything else - part of the Brahman as well and is therefore just like the gods but simply in a different form. The goal to him is not to get to heaven but to reach nirvana which also is something entirely different. He does not want to achieve a decent afterlife but tries to escape from the reincarnation cycle to a state of neither existence nor non-existence (Nirvana). Buddhists see this similarly, they say reaching nirvana is like blowing out a candle.
These views are utterly incompatible, generell statements about "loving god" or "having a personal relationship with god" don't apply because there is no consensus whatsoever on what that even means. I will have to ask again why we can basically make up whatever we want around worship, goal and identity of god? Where is the point of these rituals at all if they are of no importance from god's point of view?

Without the initial guidance religion offers, one is subject to his own brand of personal righteousness. As we have been shown in scripture over and over again, "Self righteousness" is not an excepted behavior.

I'm very tempted to comment on the "self rightoussness" of religion but it would be unfair since it wouldn't apply to you. After all you take the time to discuss with one of the fallen ones .

Maybe it would be a good subject for another post.
maybe next time.

I'll keep it in mind

 

[drich0150]

I will have to ask again why we can basically make up whatever we want around worship, goal and identity of god? Where is the point of these rituals at all if they are of no importance from god's point of view?

Again despite what is believed "these rituals" all focus new believers into a specific direction culminating in one ultimate choice. Do we use what we have learned and seek God, or do we simply continue on worshiping the religion itself. No matter what is believed their are thousands of years of spiritual knowledge one would not have enough time to discover on his own. Religion is important so that we do not spend life times discovering what has already been reveled.

Here in lies the opposite edge of the blade, religion (all religion) can become an institution or a deity in of itself trapping those who wish to worship at the alter built by the hand of man. That is why religion is defined as man's effort to implement the written or perceived will of God. Yielding an entire life time to religion and tradition is worse than not knowing God at all.

I'm very tempted to comment on the "self righteousness" of religion but it would be unfair since it wouldn't apply to you. After all you take the time to discuss with one of the fallen ones .

Not fallen. I would label your efforts as a seeker.

There is nothing out of bounds, if you wish to go down that path then proceed.

 

[eugler]

Again despite what is believed "these rituals" all focus new believers into a specific direction culminating in one ultimate choice. Do we use what we have learned and seek God, or do we simply continue on worshiping the religion itself. No matter what is believed their are thousands of years of spiritual knowledge one would not have enough time to discover on his own. Religion is important so that we do not spend life times discovering what has already been reveled.

I can't help but thinking that you are doging the question by playing with words. If the specific direction is irrelevant there is no sense in pointing someone in any. And if the aquired spiritual knowledge of these directions is so contradictory that it cancels itself out, then no knowledge was gained at all.

Not fallen. I would label your efforts as a seeker.

Don't get the wrong impression. I have found the answers to the questions I'm asking quite some time ago but only for myself. It's fascinating though that things that seem obvious to one person are seen entirely different by another. I'm interested in your answers because I'm interested in the way religious people think and why it is they think differently. I enjoy picking brains so to speak, the only thing I can offer you in return is that you can pick mine.

There is nothing out of bounds, if you wish to go down that path then proceed.

That probably wouldn't amount to anything except somebody taking offence. But thank you for your open-mindedness.

 

[drich0150]

I can't help but thinking that you are dodging the question by playing with words. If the specific direction is irrelevant there is no sense in pointing someone in any. And if the acquired spiritual knowledge of these directions is so contradictory that it cancels itself out, then no knowledge was gained at all.

What I am attempting to do here is to change the perspective in which you ask the original question. That fact that you ask and want or demand an answer that speaks to your specific understanding of the subject, tells me you believe your perspective is the only one.

I like to think that religion and tradition are like training wheels. Once you have learned to ride or you have found your balance do you keep the training wheels on the bike for your own sake? typically no, or the training wheels will quickly become a crutch, that will limit your ability to ride. What was originally used to offer you safety, protection, and security is now what is keeping you from completing the journey that placed you on the bike in the first place.

Because our purpose in this life is not about the bike, the training wheels or even so much about what you do on the journey itself. It all boils down to why you ride. Why do you seek a religion, why do you seek morality, why do you seek "enlightenment?" Why do you seek a higher plain of existence? Why do you seek a relationship with God? What did you do when presented with the opportunity to break from your "training wheels?" Did you take your opportunity? Why or why not? Where is your heart? Do you wish to worship for the sake of worship? Do you truly seek an understanding greater than what you have? Why do you worship what you worship? Will you change if confronted with an absolute truth? Can you even recognize an absolute truth? why or why not? Who stands to benefit most from your current "spiritual" philosophy?

These questions are not limited to the non christian. We are equally guilty of worshiping tradition and religion for all of the wrong reasons as well.. That is why a good number of us will be vomited from the mouth of Christ.

I am sorry if it still appears if I am dodging your question, know that i have limits, and as of yet I may not have found a way to communicate the answer you seek, in a manner to fit the question you have asked... If this does not help I will try again, or maybe you could rephrase.

Don't get the wrong impression. I have found the answers to the questions I'm asking quite some time ago but only for myself. It's fascinating though that things that seem obvious to one person are seen entirely different by another. I'm interested in your answers because I'm interested in the way religious people think and why it is they think differently.

We think, and speak in accordance to where we are Spiritually with God. This is very useful in an evangelic setting like this one simply because of many different levels of understanding that are represented here. There isn't a specific level we are commanded to reach or subscribe to. We must simply give all that we have to reach out to God.

I enjoy picking brains so to speak, the only thing I can offer you in return is that you can pick mine.

What were some the conclusions you found for yourself?
(that you spoke of earlier)

That probably wouldn't amount to anything except somebody taking offense. But thank you for your open-mindedness.

I have been doing this for a while. There probably isn't much I haven't already heard concerning self righteousness in the church. do not worry about me. That said if you wish to save this for another time then I will respect that decision.

 

[chilehed]

You are missing the point. You wouldn't expect an Amoeba to understand when you explain the situation in the Middle East to it, would you?

Who said anything about amoeba?

God is perfectly able to communicate with us, and we are perfectly able to understand that which he thinks we need to know.

I don't see that there's any reasonable problem here.

 

[eugler]

First of all sorry for being so late with my response, I was pretty busy the last two days.

What I am attempting to do here is to change the perspective in which you ask the original question. That fact that you ask and want or demand an answer that speaks to your specific understanding of the subject, tells me you believe your perspective is the only one.

Not really, of course it seems to be the most sensible one to me otherwise I wouldn't have adopted it. But we are probably all guilty of that. It is simply very hard to try and truly understand a point of view that is so different from one's own but that's what I'm here for.

I like to think that religion and tradition are like training wheels. Once you have learned to ride or you have found your balance do you keep the training wheels on the bike for your own sake? typically no, or the training wheels will quickly become a crutch, that will limit your ability to ride. What was originally used to offer you safety, protection, and security is now what is keeping you from completing the journey that placed you on the bike in the first place.

Because our purpose in this life is not about the bike, the training wheels or even so much about what you do on the journey itself. It all boils down to why you ride. Why do you seek a religion, why do you seek morality, why do you seek "enlightenment?" Why do you seek a higher plain of existence? Why do you seek a relationship with God? What did you do when presented with the opportunity to break from your "training wheels?" Did you take your opportunity? Why or why not? Where is your heart? Do you wish to worship for the sake of worship? Do you truly seek an understanding greater than what you have? Why do you worship what you worship? Will you change if confronted with an absolute truth? Can you even recognize an absolute truth? why or why not? Who stands to benefit most from your current "spiritual" philosophy?

These questions are not limited to the non christian. We are equally guilty of worshiping tradition and religion for all of the wrong reasons as well.. That is why a good number of us will be vomited from the mouth of Christ.

I am sorry if it still appears if I am dodging your question, know that i have limits, and as of yet I may not have found a way to communicate the answer you seek, in a manner to fit the question you have asked... If this does not help I will try again, or maybe you could rephrase.

No, I think I got what you're driving at. I very much appreciate your effort, as it is hard to understand a different perspective it is at least as hard to explain it in an understandable way.

We think, and speak in accordance to where we are Spiritually with God. This is very useful in an evangelic setting like this one simply because of many different levels of understanding that are represented here. There isn't a specific level we are commanded to reach or subscribe to. We must simply give all that we have to reach out to God.


What were some the conclusions you found for yourself?
(that you spoke of earlier)

In the context of my initial question I would say that it just isn't that easy. I find it understandable that when we are looking at the world and realise that we are not even close to being able to grasp the incredible vasteness of time, space and even of our own little speck of reality, it is tempting to relate it to a familiar character. Someone that is like us and thinks like us when we are at our best - I guess the term someone who created us in his image sums it up quite well. But in my opinion it doesn't do justice to what is going on (not that I have a clue what is going on). I can also understand that pondering about this place we all share creates an incredible sense of awe and fascination. I think that's what you would call spirituality (correct me if I'm wrong on this). I do feel this as well occasionally but I wouldn't give it that name. In essence it just doesn't seem to be that simple, whatever lead to us being here was very likely not something that we could even begin to understand. When I think about it and apply our human measurements to it, they just fail the minute I try. The idea that creation has to be something deliberate otherwise it would be somehow devalued for instance seems strange to me. Although I get that it is a very tempting thought at times that on a some level it all has to make sense, that just doesn't make it true. Purpose itself is a very human concept, noone else that we know of can assign it to anything so it is a strange thing to ask for the purpose of humanity. From my pov we give purpose to each other and there is no need for someone superior to do so. I find this thought very liberating, instead of having no purpose at all (which is often imputed to atheists) we can give our live whatever purpose we choose and at the same time receive it from and give it to others.
I guess I'm drifting here, to wrap it up what probably sets our perspectives apart at the deepest level is that I don't think that this is all about us. It doesn't have to be and it doesn't take away any of the beauty of existence even if it is just a coincidence (which is another human concept that probably doesn't apply).

I have been doing this for a while. There probably isn't much I haven't already heard concerning self righteousness in the church. do not worry about me. That said if you wish to save this for another time then I will respect that decision.

As I said earlier it would be stupid to attack something that could be said about many religious people while it couldn't be said about you. Thanks again for your time, I found you're answers very interesting. If you have any questions yourself, don't hesitate to ask.

 

[eugler]

Who said anything about amoeba?

God is perfectly able to communicate with us, and we are perfectly able to understand that which he thinks we need to know.

I don't see that there's any reasonable problem here.

Strange, some people like me can't hear him and he seems to tell the rest of the people entirely different things. About the Amoeba, I was taking it up a notch because as someone already pointed out, the initial comparison with a fly was dramatically understated (the one with the amoeba is of course as well).