The Psychology Of A Theistic Mind

reply to post by awake_and_aware

I think you're mistaken and that God-realization will save the day, when our minds and hearts once again function as they were meant to, by design.

Unfortunately, you're not included in that new game, and I've been looking for every possible way to include you and your POV, with a very open and willing mind and heart on my part, wanting to be friends with the atheist.

I say you've dealt yourself out of the best game in town, which many of us are only just learning how to play.

Ironically, God-realization, while it doesn't replace God, it replaces the need to worship God in a formalized way, and will be responsible, eventually, for the dissolution of "religion" in the traditional sense the way we know it now.

But if you're not willing to do the work, and just want to sit back and argue against God and do away with all notions of God, then I'd say you're not helpful to the cause, and that atheist would seek to throw away mankind's rightful inheritence in eternity, as well as his origin, and destiny, by wishing to completely discard the ancient wisdom imbedded in the religions of the world, which are all masks to a greater truth and reality, of which the atheist appears to want no part at all, while offering nothing in its stead.

reply to post by NorEaster

But that's just the thing, it is completely shareable ....I myself traversed the maze of Philosophy, Dogma, Books spanning millennia, continents, creeds, race, etc and was able to eventually put 2 and 2 together which resulted in this Absolute truth experience.

I have also met others who have had this too, and have met others who haven't had this and after hours of careful explanation coupled with their own creative thinking, they too were able to come to this infinite experience result.

So there is tons that is shareable in can be learned from. Unfortunately, it seems that is comes at a price and the price is an unraveling of a persons own identity, bias, likes/dislikes, bubble ...etc ...Who really wants to give any of that up? Not many.

This version of experience is so nebulous as to only exist within the immediate perception of one individual, and if it does actually represent the true nature of the human being, then the human being has no true relationship with the reality that sits in front of everyone's face - including the face of the initiate during 99.99999999999% of their own lifetime.

Thats the thing ....everyone is operating out of subjectivism. Yet there seems to be this alive objectivity, all things at once, everyone's perspective at the same time deal/reality.

I understand what you're saying, but I can also assume you are saying that from your own subjective bubble and will have the rest of everyone else operating from here completely agree with you. Because from that perspective its true. But the thing is, some folks walk amongst us and have stripped themselves of all programming, subjectivism, cultural programming, and everything else and agree that from that state the perspective is pure unadulterated objectivity.

Were you to also go through this stripping oneself of all those things, and then to still have the same conclusion you supply here, then it would be a different story. But regardless, while I do not have all the concrete answers, I can say that it seems we come from this and are returning to this state. Its just too good, too perfect, and strips one of all subjectivity/bubbles/identities/imperfections (though it takes time).

Is hard to put into words...... it seems as though all things are in reality that One thing ...yet some of these "all things" dont see it, but where they to undergo a sort of self and philosophical inventory ...even basic logic and reason point to this Objective aliveness.

If you can't see the obvious problem with presenting this quick flash of altered perception as the true physical nature of humanity, then you simply have no capacity for perceiving the obvious.

Thats the conundrum ......it may seem like "quick flashes" or "altered perception" at first ...but upon further investigation, one finds that from the perspective of those things ...its the everyday nature of the majority of humanity that is permanently living in very dense and covered sort of perception: and all of our knowledge base from science, to religion, to everything else is literally steeped in the mechanics of this darkened and mired perception.

The point being that this perspective of yours can work both ways.

If something that is alleged to be fundamental - such as the true nature of the human being - is actually fundamental, then it must be overwhelmingly pervasive within the confines of its theater of influence.

Technically that fundamental is pervasive ...but somehow and somewhere "we" seemed to lose track of it and instead get wrapped up in the labels of the label maker, the outward pull of the senses, and wrapped up in world programming" from birth. The pervasiveness of that fundamental original nature is simply that upon applying some stripping away of and reconfiguration of our own being, and readjusting perspective, that this fundamental seems to be seen .....at first as glimpses, but later as obvious, and finally as the true nature.

The way we are programmed, and think, and perceive just completely misses the point and in fact covers up this true nature.

This whatever-it-is-that-you-guys-can't-even-describe doesn't really fill that requirement. Hell, you can't even describe it, and when I go searching for details on this whatever-it-is, I run into the same "you'll know it if you achieve it" copout, regardless of what expert I buy a book from.

well first we have to ask is it possible that there is some state that is beyond words/logic/reason .....and can be seen with some methodical reprogramming, meditations, or use of some techniques? No matter how you argue with this, you have to agree that at least there can be a possibility of it. From there the rest is up to you, and at least in my own regard, it had nothing to do with Faith or belief. It was simply going through the "notions" of these methods to see if there really is anything on the other side. What I found is much more real than had I not found out.

From there its up to you though. You can argue and come up with a million concepts and create all sorts of witty concoctions on how this is all nonsense and waste of time. Or you can check for yourself.

The beyond words bit is quite simple though. You can read a book about roller coasters and what they feel like, how they work, etc .....but to actual go on one and experience it directly, make reading about it kind of a waste of time. So this example is very similar, like when people say "Oh man you just had to be there. No matter how I explain it it won't do it justice." Or inside jokes, where those that were there get the complete intimacy and character of it all. Were they to explain or write about it, it becomes again lost in translation and not the same as the real thing.

Maybe if you folks got together and solidified what it is that you're talking about you might come to a conclusion concerning at least the overview. Then again, if this has been going on for 6,000+ years already, and you're still walking around and trying to describe the color of sound (essentially) then I'm not optimistic that this will ever happen.

Funny you should mention this because I actually have synesthesia, and have had it since I was a kid. When I hear music, noises, voices, etc they translate in my head as certain colors, shapes, sometimes vast fractal like landscapes, and so forth. Synesthesia is rare but does that discredit the color of sound? I have met others with synesthesia and actually literally sat there and discussed the color of sound.

So in that case who is right? IS it a disease/disorder or is everyone else lacking in that ability? Again its a case of perspective.

It seems we are all born into some kind of slumber and deep brainwashing. It is so heavy and well disguised that most dont even know about it let alone will they acknowledge such a thing, as it hurts the ego .....something that isn't even real ...an illusuory identity. I mean the overview is there already .....a methodology which brings about a stripping away of all programing, bubbles, biases, likes/dislikes, even thoughts about oneself ....brings one to an ever present and clear original knowledge that is unlike and completely beyond and ahead of everything else, as it transcends everything else. And yet there are ways to get there.

Different cultures call this different things: God, Vastness, The Now, Original State, Great Spirit, Infinity, Tao, etc ....and around that, all these wars of words and dogmas have been created all of which are so far away and lost from that originality that the core/heart of it all consists of. Wars of words resulting in wars of action, death, etc. All starting as ideas in the mind .......

I mean hey your right 6000+ years of trying to describe what is beyond words using words. Fortunately some have "figured it out" and thats my theory, that this figuring it out will increase more and more and will surpass any state previously known in terms of consciousness, technology, character, behavioral models, and so forth. It just may take another world war or two before we get there.....

But in the mean time the possibility is there for everyone to come to this living reality as a direct conscious experience that surpasses everything, which I can only describe as a sort of living, all knowing, intelligent Infinity that we all are actually a part of knowingly or not, and come from that, and to that will return.

Its really not as bleak as you made it all sound

At least the atheist WAS willing to question, and not accept on blind faith the doctrines and formulas of a fundamentalist mindset, that's admirable, up to the point that his mind became locked shut and frozen solid the moment he declared himself a firm Atheist (with a capital A).

Originally posted by dominicus
The big key came with studying Advaita Vedanta and seeing how that corresponds with the gnostic Gospel of Thomas. Basically the thought of a rock is not the same as an actual rock. The thought of something is not the actual something.

Which means that thoughts, ideas, beliefs, etc are all unreal. They are not reality the way reality without labels is pure and unadulterated.

Well, if the thought of something is not the actual something ....then who do you think you are ? Or who do I think I am? You see the paradox?

Okay Dom, I'm going to let you in on something that you missed as you ingested the thoughts and opinions of guys who you let do all the original thinking for you. We'll use the rock you featured above to illustrate a quick and simple reality. One that you can easily test out for yourself with simple primary logic.

A rock exists, but in what way does it exist? Obviously, as corporeal human beings, we experience the existence of this rock - especially if we trip over it, fall on it, or have it thrown at us. It must be acknowledged that none of us have the capacity to disavow this rock out of physical existence, regardless of how many teachers we study under. This truth can be immediately proven by throwing that rock at the head of any mahatma that truly believes that he can disavow the existence of that rock. The net effect of throwing that rock will quickly prove that the rock does, in fact, exist. Regardless of whether the target believes it does or not.

Now, we also know - being 21 century human beings with Internet access - that the rock itself is not as solid or "concrete" as to seems to be. In fact, that rock is made up of particles that are - in turn - made up of smaller particles, and whether you believe in orbiting electrons or not, there is space between those particles. Truth is, that most physicists believe that there is actually more space per measured amount of that rock than actual matter, and that all matter is composed primarily of particles that feature more distance between those particles than mass within those particles themselves. But there's something else to think about when looking at this rock, and that has to do with Time and the unit rate of change.

Within each space of Time, a specific amount of units of change will exist long enough to have existed before disappearing into what we call "the past". We know that these units of change (or event segments) exist, because change is organized for the most part, with progressive consistency - as well illustrated by the orbiting loop, one of the most primitive of organized change trajectories. In fact, when examining the redundant change event, the orbit is likely one of the most primitive. Extremely efficient and scalable, the orbit bases an impressive array of functional redundancies in both nature and human invention. For organization to occur, the unit must exist. This is simple and pervasive, and good luck debunking it as a requirement.

With each event segment's emergence, the physical nature of that rock is changed forever - never to return to what it was just the split instant before that change occurred. In essence, that rock is no more "concrete" than downtown traffic - even if we, as corporeal human beings, have no capacity to perceive that structural metamorphosis. The truth is that the rock is never a true or stable unit of any form whatsoever. It may appear stable and immutable, but only from the perspective of one who is also as inconsistent in physical form - you and me and everyone reading this sentence.

So, if this is true - and yes, it is true, by the way - then what is real? Or is anything real?

The good news is that "yes, there is something that exists as real and immutable." What is - at the indivisible unit level - absolutely real and immutable, is information. It emerges into physical existence as a direct result of each unit of change (event segment), and accurately (and completely) represents that change as that change occurs.

Example:

The rock drops off a shelf - this is the change suite that is configured into an organized chain of events....the rock drops from the shelf to the floor, including all changes in relative position involved in that entire chain of events

The fact that the rock drops off the shelf emerges as it drops off the shelf. this is reflected by the informational unit configuration that begins as "The rock is dropping off the shelf" reconfigures to "The rock dropped off the shelf" and then to "The rock has dropped off the shelf". as the ongoing change continuum adds contextual distance between "now" and the change suite that defined the event of that rock dropping off that shelf.

What is important to understand, is that the information concerning that change suite (the rock dropping off that shelf) will never cease to physically exist as real and potentially appreciable. The fact that the rock dropped off that shelf will always remain a fact, regardless of whether that fact is accessed or not. The unit configuration may be malleable, but the units themselves will always be what they were when they came into existence as that rock dropped off the shelf.

In truth, the information emerges as the only real and immutable aspect of that entire scenario, and when you begin to examine the nature of conscious perception and Intellect, the sophistication within each emergence (per event segment of impetus) is withering in its complexity and implication. Still, like all information forms, Intellect and consciousness is immutable at the indivisible unit level, with configuration the way it can be affected per ongoing circumstance.

So, in truth, your statement about that rock is true. The thought of that rock is not that rock. However, your ultimate assessment is 180 degrees spun around from the truth about the relationship to reality of what actually exists as concrete and immutable. It is the thought that persists as eternal. The rock never retains consistent form beyond the unit rate of change - within itself, or between itself as a unique whole and the contextual environment that hosts it as the ongoing event that it actually is.

Think about what I've just showed you. If you're honestly seeking to know what's real, you have my U2U inbox at your disposal.

Originally posted by dominicus
reply to post by NorEaster

 

But that's just the thing, it is completely shareable ....I myself traversed the maze of Philosophy, Dogma, Books spanning millennia, continents, creeds, race, etc and was able to eventually put 2 and 2 together which resulted in this Absolute truth experience.

I have also met others who have had this too, and have met others who haven't had this and after hours of careful explanation coupled with their own creative thinking, they too were able to come to this infinite experience result.

I'm referring to objective presence within all expressions of physical existence - regardless of gnosis. Not the kind of subjective experience that all that I've researched has alluded to. Reality is not something that one achieves through study. Reality is what lays the immediate foundation for all that emerges from within it. It can't be "missed" by the unitiated. That'd be like "missing" the ground as you walk. I don't know if you can appreciate just how uncomplicated reality actually is. Especially after being so thoroughly enlightened into these mystery philosophies.

But if you're not willing to do the work, and just want to sit back and argue against God and do away with all notions of God, then I'd say you're not helpful to the cause, and that atheist would seek to throw away mankind's rightful inheritence in eternity, as well as his origin, and destiny, by wishing to completely discard the ancient wisdom imbedded in the religions of the world, which are all masks to a greater truth and reality, of which the atheist appears to want no part at all, while offering nothing in its stead.

How very mistaken you are. We are not arguing the notion of God, i have no real concerns with the Deist or the Pantheist, my remarks and words would be few. This stance on "GOD" makes no extraordinary claims to morality, no dogmatic ritual commands, no telling people how to have sex and who with. No preaching what is a "sin" and what is not.

The theist goes further, claiming to KNOW for "TRUTH" what this "GOD's" desires are. This cannot be true, it's a logical flaw in science, they cannot claim to know this knowledge, they are agnostic, as were they agnostic to bacteria and gallaxies when they made the bible. Yet they threaten and use the concept of eternal torture and hellfire to persuade people into belief, this is philosophical propganda. It's a vile creation, a virus of control and fear, it insults a human at the most basic level, to say they couldn't be moral without God.

Thanks for reading and good night,

Peace.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware

But if you're not willing to do the work, and just want to sit back and argue against God and do away with all notions of God, then I'd say you're not helpful to the cause, and that atheist would seek to throw away mankind's rightful inheritence in eternity, as well as his origin, and destiny, by wishing to completely discard the ancient wisdom imbedded in the religions of the world, which are all masks to a greater truth and reality, of which the atheist appears to want no part at all, while offering nothing in its stead.

How very mistaken you are. We are not arguing the notion of God, i have no real concerns with the Deist or the Pantheist, my remarks and words would be few. This stance on "GOD" makes no extraordinary claims to morality, no dogmatic ritual commands, no telling people how to have sex and who with. No preaching what is a "sin" and what is not.

The theist goes further, claiming to KNOW for "TRUTH" what this "GOD's" desires are. This cannot be true, it's a logical flaw in science, they cannot claim to know this knowledge, they are agnostic, as were they agnostic to bacteria and gallaxies when they made the bible. Yet they threaten and use the concept of eternal torture and hellfire to persuade people into belief, this is philosophical propganda. It's a vile creation, a virus of control and fear, it insults a human at the most basic level, to say they couldn't be moral without God.

Thanks for reading and good night,

Good morning.

I agree, for the most part with that, even the agnostic part, to the degree that the human mind, while hard wired to SEEK God, can only find God in eternity, through some sort of realized experience, at best, and cannot fully understand God, only perhaps intuit that God must exist, even as the fully informed, self consciously aware akashic record of which we are an integral part, within the context of a non-local (Bell's Theorem) quantum holographic reality (of SOME kind) ie: a oneness of spirit as God consciousness through love (eternal love, as the "rock of ages"). And the experience of true life, creative life, joyful and humorous and liberated life (I came that you might have life to the full, even to overflowing), whereby God becomes, not as much an object of worship, except, as an expression of wonderment, awe and appreciation and gratitude - to what, or to who, we cannot say, except within a human relativistic framework, or a family of God, here on earth, and therefore - some sort of bhakti or a loving devotion in the space of nothing, or of absolute uncertainty, can be the only thing left, which motivates, as an appropriate, and enjoyable I might add, expression of that same eternal love, or the only formative catalyst to action in the limitless space of freedom, and eternity, even the present moment eternity within which we find ourselves emersed, even now.

Furthermore, if modern science is right, then all indication is that it is TRUE that we live in a non-local, holographic, Monistic Idealist (consciousness, not matter is primary) unitive, family of God framework, as children of one source, and of one spirit of truth, of life, and of love, and this is available to us, relative one to another, even between me, and you my dear atheist friend. It has to be, nothing else makes any sense, and in truth I could never deal you out of any game, and neither would I ever want to, that's not only impossible, but unloving.

So what I'm positing instead is a new twist on a very old idea, by pointing out that God is our condition already always as spiritual beings in creation, but only to the degree that we are courageous enough, to leave the temple while becoming the very thing that religion intended for us to become, and i just might need to go back there or maintain that frame of reference only to the degree that it informs me, my thinking and actions towards my fellow man, but at the same time, once you discover the sought pearl, you HAVE it, in your possession, and the mind, once it changes shape can never go back to its original configuration.

So it would seem that we're in agreement then, whereby, from my perspective, I've recognized the true message, as it was intended, and not based on what as added to it, or distored, and maybe back then they needed that kind of fear of God, but I am here to say that it's no longer needed or of value or even in accordance with it's most central tenet, and therefore must be ejected as baggage, the religious frame updated and brought fully into alignment with the modern science and understanding.

You see, from my frame, Jesus and the love of Jesus, is not unlike a newfound sprit of love escaping the stained glass bottle of the church, or uncorked wine you might say.. the best saved for last.

All the ancient traditions say in effect that the true nature of the human being, and the core of human personality, is "thou art that" or "made in the image of God", and what this points to, is consciousness, whereby man was made by a first/last cause, to find both God and himself in eternity, and get to be surprised when the circle is joined.

This is the Great Work of all Ages, and it also signifies both the end of the world, and of religion, as we know it.

It's an old frame of reference made new again and updated, and you my friend, your true self, at core, you too are the pearl of the ocean, the ocean pearl.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Carl Sagan defeats religion just with a little bit of common sense and logic.

Carl Sagan on Religion and "GOD"

reply to post by NorEaster

Well,
The way you put it, technically its all true, but only on the basis of what is known now, meaning its relative to the current knowledge base. You wouldn't have been able to state all that lets say 500 years ago, and 500 years from now, you'd be able to put in much more knowledgeable terms.

That's the primary point, that everything is relative. But this beyond state that I refer to as a living reality is not relative to anything, as it is, it is of an as itself. Even the stripping away of all things includes all things relative to get to this original state.
______

So technically, yeah, cool, I agree with your factual and scientific basis, albeit relative, to the explanation of the rock and its actions. But my secondary point was something else entirely. What I was saying is that the mind, while a necessary tool, beautiful, complex, and a part of who we are ....we are not our thoughts and thoughts aren't concrete real things that we can grab, smell, hold, etc.

Yeah sure you can insert neurological studies here, and explain the different areas of the brain that light up with different thoughts, etc etc ...but the point being that the thought of something is not the actual something ....point being reality is filtered through by our mind, which can focus only on one thought at a time, which leaves out all of the other things going on right then and there.

The mind thinks that it is you, but there is an awareness inside that is aware that the mind thinks, and has thoughts, and even that it thinks its you. So are you the mind or the awareness that is aware of thoughts. And if you're really that awareness (which by the way would be devoid of thoughts if it is aware of thoughts) then have you even begun to investigate this aspect of yourself? Where is this awareness or is awareness a thought?

You see the purpose of thoughts not being reality wasn't at all meant to try and take a stab at scientific facts, units of measurements, etc. It was meant to be taken in light as a filter, of which if seen through one can find many more aspects that make up humanity that are still mostly unexamined by the majority. Also, we have become hijacked by the mind and thus have created subjectivity, bubbles, biases, ....all of which is relative to the knowledge base of the day, culture, creed, gender, genes, I.Q.

The "Illusion" of things is the projector that projects thoughts, labels, biases, filters ....all relative and subjective. Hence the thought of a rock is not the actual rock, the thought of what it would be like to try my first ever scoop of ice cream will never be anywhere near to the reality of having a scoop of ice cream, the thought of losing my virginity completely paled in comparison to how it was when I did lose it .....

....and this is everyday life for most people (not the scientific explanation and units of measurements of things) but going to work, traffic, self esteem issues, depression, anger, hatred, addiction, desires, what to eat later, what to say, psychological habits, mental addictions, the mundane ritual of: (eat, work, traffic, sleep, repeat cycle)

It is in that everyday context that people create these lies, and filters, and see themselves certain was that they are not, and wars get started, and power hunger, and famines, and the plight of humanity. The same mind that can help a child, can also rape or kill one. This is the circumstances of a hijacked identity.

Now imagine everyone operating on the level of this Infinite awesomeness which strips away all those b.s. character flaws within humanity that are responsible for the disaster we see today that is this world. That was the point.

ANd even in science taking as an example Bose/Einstein condensate. As the atoms get closer and closer to absolute zero in a cup like vessel, they start acting rowdier and some cant take it so they jump out. The rest start to calm down and settle in. Then a stillness occurs. Then they transform into strings, then the strings are everywhere at once in a sort of loss of identity quantum objective state.

And the same things happen to people on the path to Absolute truth.
_____________________________________________

I'm referring to objective presence within all expressions of physical existence - regardless of gnosis. Not the kind of subjective experience that all that I've researched has alluded to.

without a mirror, I think we can both agree that an eye cannot see itself.

The thing is, it does not allude to a subjective experience ...it alludes to all of objectivity. You become completely freed from any sort of subjectivity what-so-ever and now are One with objectivity seeing all angles at once equally.

Now how does one who has no subjectivity show this to one operating subjectively, except to offer a road map so they can see for themselves?

Reality is not something that one achieves through study. Reality is what lays the immediate foundation for all that emerges from within it.

But do you see the problem here? Your mind has already put constraints, filters, labels, and a bias on what reality is and isn't. Reality is beyond words, just like before humans even inhabited earth, reality was and did perfectly fine without any labels and filters on it. And yet we arrive and look what has become of this place.

The other question being, have you diligently examined how exactly you are connected to and how you emerge from reality? Thats when you have to question everything, study everything that discusses reality and illusion, go to your very wits end to see whats true and whats not.

It can't be "missed" by the unitiated. That'd be like "missing" the ground as you walk.

But "it" is "missed" by people everyday ...in hurry to get to work not realizing the beauty of the sunrise, mad at traffic and as a result not able to appreciate the song on the radio, not happy with existence and missing the point entirely (that the mind has hijacked and created its own world). I can continue on with examples for thousands of pages using everyday interviews with people that will confess all day long missing aspects of the whole, let alone the whole which is entirely unfathomable by the mind (the mind being the main instrument the majority is operating through)

I don't know if you can appreciate just how uncomplicated reality actually is. Especially after being so thoroughly enlightened into these mystery philosophies.

Again you put a constraint on it. Yes sure it can be uncomplicated until a severe health problems strikes, or a billionaires business ventures are in flux, or you find yourself in the middle of an affair. or a robbery, or investigating the complexities within quantum physics.

You may take reality to be a certain way, but the way you took it when you were 5 was different than when you were 15, which was different than you were the age you are now, which is different than it will be when your old, which is completely different than if you were a quantum physicist or a doctor or a monk ....I think you get the point.

But this Objectivity ...that is pure Immutability, timeless, eternal, and yet since it includes everything within ...changes every second. Its paradoxical to the mind because the mind needs concreteness but within infinity all things are possible including seeming paradoxes.

I mean you want some sort of final thesis? Ok, we are all born with the absolute truth being covered up because of the brainwashing/programming of the mind, the loss of going within and tapping into functions such as intuition and stillness, and the ways of world as they are.

Everyone is free to strip away all this and get to the original truth of reality, which underlies all things and seems to be as if behind the curtain of everyday reality.

Why is this so, I don't know because I personally didn't cause this all to be this way but can say that this thesis is very much agreed upon by others operating from that mode of Objectivity. Although I will say that, while I do not look down upon or condone anyone, at least for myself this is the ideal mode for existence compared to when I labeled myself as a agnostic/atheist. It very much is like a waking up or graduating into something extremely real and alive so much so that it includes additional faculties such as transcendence, timelessness, a loss of worries, much more caring and loving of humanity, but at the same time very detached from the "world" and its ways, no fear of death what-so-ever, and it was this awakening that got me deeply involved in the study of quantum physics, mechanics, infinite math and other subjects which in my programmed state, I hate no interest in.

I can't praise the awesomeness of this mode enough, it is complete and absolute freedom and yet very childlike playfulness at times. This is where the beyond words theme comes in, yet entirely accessible to all people.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

Carl Sagan defeats religion just with a little bit of common sense and logic.

Carl Sagan on Religion and "GOD"

How kind of you!

I'll have to take a look at that, but my enthusiasm to rebut anything in this conversation, has now just died.

Catch you on the rebound.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


Catch you later, Thanks for the link to the music video their, nice guitaring.

Peace.

First, to avoid any confusion, I merely mentioned one of the possible answers if you ask "why?" - "comfort/ safety" - is something most people seek and they are even prepared to give away their liberties and rights, like we witnessed in more profane scenarios...

I am not a theist and I especially don't believe in Christian God, but respect all faiths as valid human expressions - as long as they are used for personal benefit, inspiration, consolation, etc. I believe that we can't say anything about that in finite words. We don't know what all that is, we have only some limited knowledge about the mechanisms of the Universe, but we really don't know where all that complexity that interacts so powerfully comes from and what is its purpose. To me it is more likely that the foundation is incredibly intelligent force, so alien to our understanding that all the fantastical allegories constructed as world's religions can't do it justice. The Universe is magnificent and we have NO CLUE about it really.

When they are used as instruments of oppression and manipulation - I am against the big and powerful Churches that corrode and parasite on human societies all around the world.

About the rest of your expose - I don't have those answers, I would only mention that you could stop asking only about your very specific simplistic view of a Deity, connected to a very specific religion and allow the diversity that really exists - the expression of sacred and ideas of different "Deities" or underlying agents of the Universe are very diverse - not just a fairy tale one you suggested - and even that one you mentioned can be understood as allegory and symbolic representation of some "Reality" we can't express in rational thought.

Well, one of the ideas is that people used "plant teachers" - and it is a fact that people get ideas that transcend their ordinary mind under such influence... Persons from the cultures that never saw and built palaces or used steel get visions of palaces and shiny metals, etc. - check some serious work on ayahuasca effects about that...

We also don't know really where do original ideations come from - when it seems they could not be "synthesis", but completely new and groundbreaking ideas - not only the ideas about the Divine...
We call it "intuition" or subconscious inspiration - but labeling it with such a name is not the same as explanation.

So, sorry to answer that with honesty - "I (we) don't know".

Originally posted by NorEaster

Originally posted by MrVortex
Comfort... some (many) people prefer to choose a safe anchor (i.e. religion) over a curious stare into the (frightening) abyss of uncertainty and utterly mysterious and alien Universe we find ourselves in; a bottomless pit, devoid of meaning (as we humans invented and understand the term) and all that.

Like I said - explain the initial notion of an invisible entity that can't be physically perceived in any manner whatsoever, created out of whole cloth by a corporeal being that lives in a physical realm that features absolutely no linkage at all with such a completely incompatible idea. If you can do this, then you can blithely suggest that "comfort" is what caused the first human mind to invent, and then psychologically embrace, such a concept as being comforting. Frankly, I've tried to resolve this obvious dilemma, and have tried to find anyone - including the heavily quoted theorists featured in this thread - who's even come close to resolving this mystery - and to date, it has not been resolved.

The question is simple.

If a human being invented the concept of a being that cannot be perceived in any manner whatsoever, then what was the intellectual linkage that existed (or still exists) to make that original invention possible? If you say that it was anything other than what we can easily perceive with our 5 corporeal senses, then you need to explain how it could be logically feasible for a mind that was never introduced to the concept of non-corporeal existence to suddenly invent the concept of non-corporeal existence. Then, you have to logically progress that notion to the point where the human mind could possibly conceive of that invisible intelligent being that it invented (that can never be perceived in any manner whatsoever) as being preeminent and possessing absolute dominion over all that the human being CAN perceive with its 5 corporeal senses.

Oh, and simply asserting that such an invention was originally the result of a person being crazy; think again. Insanity is not spectacularly creative - as anyone who's ever dealt with people suffering from schizophrenia will readily agree - and delusions are generally mundane copies or pedestrian elaborations of well-worn premises that have been kicking around for quite a while. In fact, it's often the case that you end up thinking the person is being purposely sophomoric in their delusional landscape. Insanity just isn't very inventive. The kind of spectacular leap of thought that resulted in the concept of non-corporeal intelligent existence - from an absolute void of any such possible notion within a perceivable realm that completely opposes any such notion as being create-able without extremely directive inspiration and/or guidance - is the kind of leap in thought that has never occurred again on this planet in association with any human advancement of any kind. Everything else that's been imagined has featured intellectual linkage to something else. Even huiman flight can be directly linked to the fact that other creatures fly. Not creative thought by any means, but simply an engineering puzzle to be worked out.

You can choose to ignore this one critical requirement, but if you do, then you've failed in your effort to prove or disprove the theistic notion. It's as simple as that.