Obedience

reply to post by AfterInfinity
I was simply pointing out the error with his or her sweeping statement that s/he obeys no one and nothing. Everyone obeys at least to some extent otherwise the jails would be even more crowded.

My earlier point to him is there is much we have no choice in, and therefore are submitting to physical laws of all kinds - natural, legal, etc.

I am not sure why you are taking issue with this, unless you are wanting to provoke side-taking?

reply to post by bb23108

I was simply pointing out the error with his or her sweeping statement that s/he obeys no one and nothing. Everyone obeys at least to some extent otherwise the jails would be even more crowded.

My earlier point to him is there is much we have no choice in, and therefore are submitting to physical laws of all kinds - natural, legal, etc.

I am not sure why you are taking issue with this, unless you are wanting to provoke side-taking?

Your point was made concerning laws of nature, not a sentient overlord bent on universal domination. There is a difference, and you know it.

reply to post by backcase


Everyone is obedient to someone/something.

reply to post by AfterInfinity
Yes, I just said that - physical laws, whether natural or legal. We are bound to them, we must submit to them, unless we want the consequences. Then s/he made the point about some of those laws being beyond his/her choice, so I made the point about obeying the rules of the forum, the legal laws, etc.

The point is, s/he does obey in some form.

Anyway, I am done with this discussion unless it actually pertains to the opening post relative to defining obedience further, etc.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by bb23108

 

That's where your obedience goes down the toilet, because in matters of personal preference, we prefer to exercise our liberties as living sentient creatures.

Is this not obedience to one's own personal preferences?

Our own tendencies, attachments, desires, and unconscious urges become our master.

reply to post by mysticnoon

Is this not obedience to one's own personal preferences?

Our own tendencies, attachments, desires, and unconscious urges become our master.

Are your tendencies, your attachments, your desires and unconscious urges not considered part of you? Are these not part of your essential being? I have no issue with being obedient to my own desires and attachments. Without them, I am not truly alive. Should they prove to be a weakness, they will still be completely worthwhile as long as they give me something to live for, something I can be happy with.

That's more than I can say for the god mentioned in the OP.

reply to post by bb23108

Yes, I just said that - physical laws, whether natural or legal. We are bound to them, we must submit to them, unless we want the consequences. Then s/he made the point about some of those laws being beyond his/her choice, so I made the point about obeying the rules of the forum, the legal laws, etc.

The point is, s/he does obey in some form.

Anyway, I am done with this discussion unless it actually pertains to the opening post relative to defining obedience further, etc.

You are the one who pushed it to this point, so don't talk to me about pertinence. And since you want to get back to discussing the actual OP, let's disregard all technicalities and put it plainly: between obedience to our happiness and obedience to a god's happiness, I gladly choose my own happiness. There's no point in being alive to make a god happy if I am not happy as well. Might as well call it hell.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by mysticnoon

 

Are your tendencies, your attachments, your desires and unconscious urges not considered part of you? Are these not part of your essential being?

Yes, they are a part of who I am as a person in this world at any given time, but I would not say that they represent my essential being.

Tendencies can be redirected, attachments may be loosened, desires can wither, and unconscious urges can be made conscious through self awareness. These are all things which can undergo change, but the essential being still remains.

I have no issue with being obedient to my own desires and attachments..

Well, then you do recognize that you are obdedient to something.

reply to post by mysticnoon

Well, then you do recognize that you are obdedient to something.

I can see that, somehow, I have not been clear. Allow me to rectify that.

Regardless of who or what I am obedient to at this point in time, while I still have the choice, I choose not to ally myself with the god mentioned in the OP. In fact, I choose not to ally myself with any force mentioned in either version of the Bible. So long as I am consciously aware of my decisions, the god of the OT and the NT is so far down on my list of priorities that he is practically nonexistent as far as I am concerned.

...If he were to exist, that is.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by bb23108

 

between obedience to our happiness and obedience to a god's happiness, I gladly choose my own happiness. There's no point in being alive to make a god happy if I am not happy as well. Might as well call it hell.

You do make a valid point, but I surmise that those who believe in God and seek to obey the particular precepts of their belief system, do so because they are convinced that God has a far wider field of vision than our own.

Those rules are intended to help bring us greater happiness in the long run. A child cannot see the sense in the many restrictions and rules which are placed upon it, and yet as adults we know that these are for the child's own future wellbeing, though the child may not see it at the time.

reply to post by mysticnoon

You do make a valid point, but I surmise that those who believe in God and seek to obey the particular precepts of their belief system, do so because they are convinced that God has a far wider field of vision than our own.

Convinced how?

Those rules are intended to help bring us greater happiness in the long run. A child cannot see the sense in the many restrictions and rules which are placed upon it, and yet as adults we know that these are for the child's own future wellbeing, though the child may not see it at the time.

And there is a large, swiftly growing party of fully functional adults who will all agree when I say that the Judaic god makes no sense at all. I may as well worship a paradox.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by mysticnoon

 

Regardless of who or what I am obedient to at this point in time, while I still have the choice, I choose not to ally myself with the god mentioned in the OP. In fact, I choose not to ally myself with any force mentioned in either version of the Bible. So long as I am consciously aware of my decisions, the god of the OT and the NT is so far down on my list of priorities that he is practically nonexistent as far as I am concerned.

OK, I understand this. I, too, could not obey the instructions of someone whom I believe does not exist. If you are convinced that you are the best person to judge what is in your highest interest, then that is the person to whom you will listen, and obey.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by mysticnoon

 

You do make a valid point, but I surmise that those who believe in God and seek to obey the particular precepts of their belief system, do so because they are convinced that God has a far wider field of vision than our own.

Convinced how?

Best to ask a Christian. I am sure they will be more than eager to supply you with ample reasons for their conviction.

I agree with the OP on this one.

Some people say that they would prefer to make their own happiness in this life rather than be obedient to God or a higher morality. Someone also said that they believe our natural instincts, desires, impulses, etc. are natural to us and a part of us and, for this reason, should be embraced. However, the apparent freedom in choosing this path is illusory. By choosing to seek out worldly desires, we are only making ourselves slaves to our own bodies, egos, and pride. By doing so, we also make ourselves slaves to death/time, for all the things of the world eventually fade... "dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return."

On the contrary, by choosing to be obedient to a higher power (God, morality, etc.)- we break free from the shackles of the world and are able to grasp our opportunity to be transcendent, creative, spiritual beings. Some people seem to have the wrong impression that by bowing to God we are making ourselves "slaves," when in fact we are freeing ourselves to higher potential. We are only obedient to God in the way a son is to a loving/appreciative father... not obedient to God in a forced way like a slave is to his master. It's not like God is telling us, "Be obedient to me because I said so," but rather he is saying "follow me for greater understanding."

It's all about recognizing that there is something greater than you in existence and dropping away our pride/ego in order to understand this greater thing. Now some may think, "but you can't prove God exists, so why should I believe you?" It does not matter- a healthier and happier life free from the illusion of the world will be gained by allowing yourself to know God (or at least acknowledging a higher power than yourself). Humility is surely the first step to learning.

**Also note that any belief in a "higher power" pretty much has to rely on faith. This includes everything from faith in God to faith in any intangible concept- any sense of morality, belief in the soul, etc. When you think you are in love you have to take it on faith that the other person is really in love with you. Any sense of purpose/meaning is taken on faith. Yet I hope you recognize that faith is not a weakness- it is an action necessary to transcending what would otherwise be a meaningless, material world. To quote Kierkegaard (the "father of existentialism"):

"God is not like a human being; it is not important for God to have visible evidence so that he can see if his cause has been victorious or not; he sees in secret just as well. Moreover, it is so far from being the case that you should help God to learn anew that it is rather he who will help you to learn anew, so that you are weaned from the worldly point of view that insists on visible evidence."
and
"doubt is conquered by faith, just as it is faith which has brought doubt into the world"

p.s. sorry for the length

reply to post by AfterInfinity

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
And since you want to get back to discussing the actual OP, let's disregard all technicalities and put it plainly: between obedience to our happiness and obedience to a god's happiness, I gladly choose my own happiness. There's no point in being alive to make a god happy if I am not happy as well. Might as well call it hell.

But you, as always, are assuming the conventional Creator-God notion as a separate tyrannical super-entity. A true God-lover is not assuming separation from God - but rather an ecstatic love relationship with the Divine. On the basis of this, there is spontaneous living rightly - i.e., obedience to the spiritual laws of love (of God and all others), and the laws of right life relative to one's body-mind (which further support the ecstatic relationship to the Divine).

I just stopped posting because I got confused.

I enjoy reading the posts though.

I find loving obedience to God simple although it is quite difficult.

reply to post by bb23108

But you, as always, are assuming the conventional Creator-God notion as a separate tyrannical super-entity. A true God-lover is not assuming separation from God - but rather an ecstatic love relationship with the Divine. On the basis of this, there is spontaneous living rightly - i.e., obedience to the spiritual laws of love (of God and all others), and the laws of right life relative to one's body-mind (which further support the ecstatic relationship to the Divine).

I'm not talking about your screw-ball interpretations. I'm talking about the doctrine of the Biblical god as presented in the Bible.

reply to post by backcase

I just stopped posting because I got confused.

I enjoy reading the posts though.

I find loving obedience to God simple although it is quite difficult.

That's usually the reason people never get smarter about it. They get confused, they stop paying attention, and they default.

reply to post by oak123

Someone also said that they believe our natural instincts, desires, impulses, etc. are natural to us and a part of us and, for this reason, should be embraced. However, the apparent freedom in choosing this path is illusory. By choosing to seek out worldly desires, we are only making ourselves slaves to our own bodies, egos, and pride.

My problem with this is that there is very little evidence to suggest that obedience to a higher power is rooted in anything other than a system fabricated by the very minds that were already in thrall to their own pride and egos. In short, your solution was produced by the problem it attempts to solve, and is therefore fallible by the circumstances of its conception. And really, I find it hilarious that you demonize ego and pride so much when the god you speak of is the very epitome of ego and pride. Why else would he demand worship? Why else would he forbid all other idols? Why else would he demand that a day be set aside to recognize him and him alone?

If that's not ego and pride, I don't know what is. Perhaps the biggest hypocrite of all is the Judaic god.

"God is not like a human being; it is not important for God to have visible evidence so that he can see if his cause has been victorious or not; he sees in secret just as well. Moreover, it is so far from being the case that you should help God to learn anew that it is rather he who will help you to learn anew, so that you are weaned from the worldly point of view that insists on visible evidence."
and
"doubt is conquered by faith, just as it is faith which has brought doubt into the world"

Believing in a concept because it cannot be disproven is an irrational method of deduction. When all evidence points to the contrary but you insist on believing in something because 1) it cannot be directly disproven, which leads to 2) it makes you feel secure about some aspect of your existence, it can be concluded that your opinion in the matter is unreliable as testimony.

It's what we call "bias". If you rely solely on faith to tell you that something is true, then you do not know for a fact. You have no evidence to declare that your belief is the only logical conclusion. And that renders your belief...irrational. If only were you to simply tone it down a notch, declare that you were fully willing to consider the possibility, and not go so far as to declare it fact...that comes much closer to logic.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
I'm talking about the doctrine of the Biblical god as presented in the Bible.

Of course you are talking in your usual terms relative to the Creator-God idea - as that is what you love to argue against. But I thought the thread was mainly concerning obedience to God - not so much about one's own understanding of the Divine Reality.

We can let backcase decide on what the limits of his thread are.