How Does One "Make Themselves" Believe?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Yeah, but, sorry dearest, it still kinda sounds like you possibly see me as if I'm some kind of "innocent" or "ignoramous" in this. Like somehow you and Disraeli and Ketsuko and so on et al "get it", you are "seniors"......where I'm just sort of a middle-schooler, or an adult too thick to do so, who is simply ill equipped to think clearly about philosophical things.

On the contrary. It's the other way round.
God has deliberately selected us thick people in preference to the deep philosophers;
"Not many of you were wise according to worldly standards... but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise" (1 Corinthians ch1 vv26-27).

a reply to: DISRAELI

On the contrary. It's the other way round.
God has deliberately selected us thick people in preference to the deep philosophers;
"Not many of you were wise according to worldly standards... but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise" (1 Corinthians ch1 vv26-27).

So your response is to patronize me? To point at me as one who YOU believe 'thinks they are "wise" accordingly to worldly standards'?


At least I'm asking for feedback from others - which is sometimes not done in threads on this board.

I have no idea what your ever-so-subtle point is here.
But I know you came in mistrustful to begin with. So - lay it on me.

ETA: Yeah, so I just reread my whole post to which you responded.
so, you DO SEE ME as a hopelessly uninitiated unwelcome and condemned stupid person? Because, like I said, I'm not "chosen" to your club? To your team?
I flunked out and was expelled, too - because of my behavior?

Reminds me of high-school cliques.
No thanks.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs
Sorry, I don't understand how you got "patronise" out of that. Nothing of the kind was intended.
If anything, I was insulting myself by implicitly counting myself among the "foolish".

But I thought the point was straight-forward enough.
You were drawing the inference that you were being regarded as a middle-schooler or thick adult in comparison with us "wise" Christians.
So I was drawing attention to Paul's observation that God had deliberately gone for those who were weak or foolish, by worldly standards, as distinct from those who were powerful or wise by worldly standards.
In other words, as I thought, putting nobody down except myself.
Did I mention that I'm British? Self-deprecating humour is one of the things we do.

If you can find anything insulting in that, then your own mistrustful streak may be showing.

originally posted by: WarminIndy
I think though, to be fair, you are looking at it through a 21st Century viewfinder, shamanism is the oldest form of religious worship and shamanism didn't depend on religious texts, it was by direct experience with the divine. And these shamans didn't just experience it through mushrooms. That notion is dismissive of thousands of years of cultures and civilizations well before Remus and Romulus ever suckled the wolf mother.

I've never denied the possibility of something more. I do deny the existence of these very specific Gods and their very specific dogmas. People are passionate about sharing their faith in Jesus Christ (for example). They KNOW he existed, that he died for their sins. etc. They believe and accept the whole Christian narrative. While I will say they may be connecting to something, it is not, imo, Jesus or the Christian God.

It comes back to, how does one actually KNOW their God is the right, one true God. If the Christian God is real, than everyone else in other religions or positions of non-belief are going to be destroyed in Hell one day. Like I said in my previous post, the adherents of those other religions KNOW just as much that their God is the one true God(s) as you do.

So being objective about it, you can't actually say you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that your particular God and religious narrative are the truth. You may have had a remarkable experience and a "personal relationship" with yours that reenforce your beliefs. While powerful, and moving, to be sure.. Are you factoring into your considerations that just as you have those things, others in other faiths do to?

Let's go back to your UFO example. Jane Doe doesn't believe UFOs exist. Until one day she witnesses something that is most definitely a non conventional aircraft. She now has proof. Proof of something. BUT she would be remiss if she jumped to the conclusion extra terrestrial exist.

I feel the need to add that the strongest evidence religions have for theirs being the one truth, is entirely subjective. Holy texts don't stand up to scrutiny when it comes to science, history, divine inspiration etc. Everything points to them being the writings of men.

But, just to be clear. I do believe there is something more to our reality. I'm just not buying into any of these packaged and sold versions of what that is, because of reasons I have explained here and elsewhere.

a reply to: DISRAELI

You were drawing the inference that you were being regarded as a middle-schooler or thick adult in comparison with us "wise" Christians.

Yes. I wondered if that was your basic premise.

So I was drawing attention to Paul's observation that God had deliberately gone for those who were weak or foolish, by worldly standards, as distinct from those who were powerful or wise by worldly standards.

Ah. Okay, to me it sounded like an attack - that those who think they are "world-wise" are the idiots and rejected ones.....and somehow that was a verse you thought of to present my attitude, as a "worldly" fool.....But still - so, am I "in" or "out" of your saved club?

In other words, as I thought, putting nobody down except myself.
Did I mention that I'm British? Self-deprecating humour is one of the things we do.

That helps. I get British humor. Perhaps your presentation has eluded me.....because I had no idea which culture you were speaking from.

If you can find anything insulting in that, then your own mistrustful streak may be showing.

In that case, no, I don't find anything insulting in it. Hopefully, though, it can help you understand when people are defensive, when it feels they are put into a maze of stuff they can't possibly sort through.

Just like your first response here -- that you could take the OP question one of several ways.
We have to TALK to each other in order to understand each other. And if either party doesn't understand, they need to say so, and ask of the correspondent, "Is this what you mean?", and the other needs to try again to get the point across if the initial statement was not accurately taken or understood.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Ah. Okay, to me it sounded like an attack - but still - so, am I "in" or "out" of your saved club?

No idea. My point was simply to deny that the "saved club" were claiming to be wiser than you.

We have to TALK to each other in order to understand each other.

Yes, that's what I was trying to do.

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

It comes back to, how does one actually KNOW their God is the right, one true God. If the Christian God is real, than everyone else in other religions or positions of non-belief are going to be destroyed in Hell one day. Like I said in my previous post, the adherents of those other religions KNOW just as much that their God is the one true God(s) as you do.

So being objective about it, you can't actually say you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that your particular God and religious narrative are the truth.

Yes. That.

That is exactly the thing. We are all on our own paths, which are separate. When I went to see Judy Goodman, she talked about the death experience and near-death experiences, and how SO MANY NDErs have a different 'name' for what they call 'the Light'. Some say Jesus, others say God, others say The Source, others the Great Spirit or what have you...
so, I believe it all comes down to your own soul's belief system when you cross over. What you expect to see, you will recognize as what you see.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
Ah. Okay, to me it sounded like an attack - but still - so, am I "in" or "out" of your saved club?

No idea. My point was simply to deny that the "saved club" were claiming to be wiser than you.

We have to TALK to each other in order to understand each other.

Yes, that's what I was trying to do.

Perfect. We are finally on our way. I hope in future you won't reject any responses I make on your thread as "I don't want to talk about it" posts.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs
I don't quite see the connection.
I have to warn you that I will still refuse to talk about areas outside the defined topic of a thread.
That is the point of defining the topic- to keep the subject manageable.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

No, that's not it at all.

It's the same way you can't be expected to have any kind of loyalty or fidelity to a person you don't know. You may have had a Christian upbringing and so you may have all kinds of intellectual knowledge of God, but you maybe never actually met Him in any real way.

Think of yourself like someone being put into an arranged marriage by your parents. How can you be expected to have any real degree of loyalty or fidelity to your groom when you haven't met no matter how much about him your parents tell you? That's not about any kind of ignorance at all.

The way to believe is to experience or come to know God. You can't do that through simple intellectual knowing. Indeed, some people do not ever have that intellectual knowing and come to Him anyhow on their own. It's about your own seeking and openness and desire to have that experience and meeting.

I had my own experience when I was just a little kid and didn't have that intellectual knowledge.

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Why do you think we have souls?

What is the purpose of the soul?

I see it a bit differently. Our physical existance is made up of different layers, so to speak, or bodies. There is the gross physical, which we share with rocks, plants, animals and other humans. Then there is an etheric body that plants, animals and others possess as well. Then comes the astral which both animals and humans possess. Then human's have a soul or mental body. Underlying or enforming all those bodies is the Spirit with is a piece of the divine in all creation of all types. This is not my theory, it is an anthroposophical worldview that pulls from many traditions and direct experience.

All the bodies fall away at physical death, first the soul (with it the ego), then the astral (home of memories and sympathies/antipathies), then the etheric (basic survival) and finally the physical shell.

Now Anthropsophy posits a creator god and includes an type of esoteric Christianity which I don't require for belief in this worldview (and I have my reasons for this belief for this particular view which would take too long to go into) but it also presents higher beings with more complex non-physical existance and even more interpenatrating bodies. It's quite elegant.

So I find the question of just what is Soul incomplete without a discussion of the Spirit as well. I don't believe we carry Soul into eternity so the idea of 'me' being eternal is moot as 'me' is part of the soul.

Spirit on the other hand is indestructable and enternal and it is when we are aware of and in tune with Spirit that Faith happens.

a reply to: ketsuko

Think of yourself like someone being put into an arranged marriage by your parents. How can you be expected to have any real degree of loyalty or fidelity to your groom when you haven't met no matter how much about him your parents tell you? That's not about any kind of ignorance at all.

Quite. Thanks.

Yes. The things I do know, I trust.

It reminds of the "now I see in a glass darkly, but then I shall know" thing. Corinthians.
Yet some people claim or state that they already know. I do it, too - I think I know that angels and reincarnation are true, that the Earth is alive. That we are all connected. It is just as important to me as your friend Jesus - because it is what my heart has said to me, and I trust it.

I don't ever condemn people to hell - I believe we will all get there, regardless of creed or age or sacraments or religion or anything else.
That, to me, is the whole premise of "Namaste" -
the Divine in me recognizes the Divine in you - no matter who you are, where you are, what you are doing, etc.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: WarminIndy

Before you even get to faith, there has to be experience first. Call it gnosis if you like. Once you have gnosis, then the rest comes.

And I hope that all makes sense. BuzzyWigs cannot be forced to have fidelity toward a God that she doesn't know.

In a way, that's quite eloquent. I could take it as alleging "ignorance", but I know you well enough, I think, to determine that what you mean is that "my" path is okay, even if I don't believe the Bible stuff the others believe.

And, that doesn't make me "defective". It just puts me on another path.

That is the best answer I can give right now.

It's perfect, if I've interpreted it correctly. If not, please let me know.
Thanks

That is exactly what I am saying.

How would you be defective?
.

originally posted by: Involutionist
a reply to: WarminIndy

Before you even get to faith, there has to be experience first. Call it gnosis if you like. Once you have gnosis, then the rest comes.

Yes. I speak from Gnosis. How about you...?

Do you think I don't have it? What makes you think that way?

This is getting interesting now.

What is the criteria, according to your worldview, that qualifies someone as having gnosis?

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: ketsuko

Think of yourself like someone being put into an arranged marriage by your parents. How can you be expected to have any real degree of loyalty or fidelity to your groom when you haven't met no matter how much about him your parents tell you? That's not about any kind of ignorance at all.

Quite. Thanks.

Yes. The things I do know, I trust.

And there you are.

Go back the definitions WarminIndy posted again.

Belief is to come to know and hold dear while faith is to trust. You can't arrive at faith without first having belief.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: borntowatch

Don't tell me what I think. I'll tell YOU what I think, and yes, I AM curious.

Pardon me, but did you not just say that 'you' are able to tell what people are 'really' thinking and feeling because you are a 'highly sensitive person'?

Just how, by what mechanism are you 'knowing' what others think and feel.

Could not 'borntowatch' have the same abilities.

Or perhaps you are both just telling yourselves stories that make you feel: good; powerful; smart; special or any of another human needs.

I do not condem, only point out because I've had those "no you don't mean what you said; you mean what I think you mean" moments often in my life as well and it was very hard to see how I wasn't perceiving reality at all but a delusion.

Best bumper sticker I ever saw: "I don't have to believe everything I think"

a reply to: FyreByrd

Pardon me, but did you not just say that 'you' are able to tell what people are 'really' thinking and feeling because you are a 'highly sensitive person'?

It seems to me, yes.

Just how, by what mechanism are you 'knowing' what others think and feel.

Intuition, I guess. Along with reading body language, looking at expression, hearing voice tones and vocabulary, etc.

Could not 'borntowatch' have the same abilities.

Yep, he could.

But I am often told by those who love me that I "take those things too seriously." And I consider that, too - every time I feel overwhelmed by nuance, intention, body language, tone of voice, etc.

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Not looking forward to my death, in that case. I don't have any expectations so maybe I will end up in open empty black space. Thanks for that Buzzy.. Now that expectation has been planted into my mind!! Damn you for ruining my afterlife!



Seriously though, I honestly have no afterlife beliefs or expectations. There are plenty of things I ponder as possibilities, but in the end I just don't know. I'm not even sure I believe NDE are anything more than visions in a dying mind.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Sublimecraft


THAT is the kind of stuff that really makes my hair stand on end. And your mention of the Dalai Lama being identifiable - they show the new 'suspected' child several objects, some of which were favorites of the older Dalai Lama (who is at that point discarnate), and some of which are just random 'pretties' and baubles and such.

If the child selects the former Lama's possessions it seems to be the same soul returned again.

There are other signs and portents (to be poetic) to be reconciled as well. I would recommend "The Unmistaken Child" for an excellent documentary on the search for a new incarnation of a high Lama.

www.imdb.com...

a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Maybe you are a natural born cold reader