Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The "Beyond God" questions

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Dianec
 

Thank you for those comments.
If we think of God as someone with whom we need to make contact, then that would be more the Biblical approach.
The Bible presents God as one who communicates with us.



And perhaps that is where the "God and I" become separated (God communicating with us through the bible). Things like "fear God" (as one example) always trip me up since different churches take it to mean different things, and its likely God (or those who were enlightened and wrote these words) did not intend it to be fear as we understand it. I don't know for sure of course but it would seem our frame of reference cannot match that of those who actually integrated with the spirit or higher self. Their understanding was expanded amd simplified all at once.

I believe you were right earlier in looking at what our minds interpret versus what the mind of ultimate wisdom would interpret. If you read the same versus in the bible over and over and discuss them with people it seems as if understanding shifts. So the creation of the world by a big booming voice and magic wave of the hand evolves to be more intimate and less magical (more about how we are a part of that rather than how we are separate from it).

Some adults haven't gotten past the origional understanding in its most basic and concrete form into an integrative and intimate understanding that was meant to change over time (become more clear and closer to the true meaning). To see God as an old wise man in the sky is to fail to ever know that larger than, and outside of self is a temporary understanding.




posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Dianec
 

We need to be careful not to throw out the baby with the bath-water.
We can discard the old man in the sky without discarding what one theologian has labelled the "Wholly Other".
We can discard the naive visualisations of the relation betwen God and the world without discarding the basic fact, that they are distinct.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Note;
The effect of my chosen line of argument would be to jettison most of our stock of elaborate “proofs” of God, as developed by Aquinas and others.
Would that be a loss?
I must admit that I never thought the “logical proofs” were very helpful, even to the extent that they were valid.
They do nothing to identify the God so proved with the God who communicates in the Bible.
In any case, I’m not sure that the logical approach to “proving God” sits well with the Faith basis of Christianity.
Is the quest for a logical “proof” that God exists, to satisfy the mind, really much better than the demand for a visible “sign”?
So the sacrifice of the “logical proofs” might be worthwhile, if it helps us to dispose of the perennial “Who made God?” question,



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
what exactly are you trying to say in 1 short sentense?



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by spartacus699
 

The question "Who made God?" is not a valid question.
The other sentences are there because a case needs to be explained and justified, not just stated baldly.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 06:24 PM
link   
there are many questions in the universe that should not be asked. And even if you think you're being brave for asking them you won't find the answers to them anyway, so don't waste your time.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by spartacus699
 

Yes, that was the essence of this thread, that the questions are unanswerable, because they have no meaning.
So what gave you the impression that I thought I was brave?
I take it that you have read the thread itself, and not just the title.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

The God who spoke in the Bible declared that God created the world.
The declaration that God created the world necessarily means a distinction between "God" and "the world".
Just as "i am talking to you" necessarily involves a distinction between "I" and "you".



god did not speak in the bible. you have claimed he/she did and based your thread on that premise. man wrote the bible, whether he was inspired or not, who knows. its all concepts in the mind. if you see a universe you need a creator. but if you wish to interpret the bible as you did in your opening post, there is naught to be gained by further thinking. rather its far better to follow another biblical injunction and

"be still, and know the truth"

only by stopping the mind with its endless monkey chatter, will the heart of the matter be revealed; or rather felt.
when one awakes, there is first the felt existence. i exist, is all that can be said and sure of. very pure, very still. then one gets immediately absorbed into the mind and identifies with it. my this, my that; forgetting the calm centre which observes all this.

heartfelt----------



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


But they aren't distinct. God created the world is what I hear you saying (and the bible states). What do you think of when you think of creation? I think of atoms splitting, and energy transforming at every level from microscopic on up to create - never dying but rather shifting into other forms. Where did that begin - who knows but that energy is what I think God may be.

When i think of creation i think of things that we contribute to that are distinct but not necesarily distant.
What does creation mean to God and what does it mean to you? I think of creating a child at first thought. I created them through energy (mind, body, soul) or can describe as (hormones, DNA, etc), with another so there is an ordered mix of chemistry that produces a result. So why can God not be the same thing - an energy that is a part of us all - not distinct and outside of us but an offshoot of the origional energy.

Maybe its an energy within the universe (basic building blocks to all) that is common to the universe (peace, tranquil, all good/positive, light), and that is what biblical authors were trying to portray as "up there" and "otherworldly". How would anyone know about this other form of energy - because it is within us all as it must exist for us to exist so its ancient deeply embedded wisdom that some tap into.

I am not trying to be all scientific. Rather trying to explore your question and integrate what we know about science with what we know about biblical teachings. If God is separate its only because we create that separateness. I know it is a taboo in Christianity to not think of God as a man, and what I'm saying in here is that He is both - He is us (if integration is achieved), and He is perfect energy. In teachings we learn He is always accessible and will always be there. Maybe I'm way off base because its been a long day but in trying to understand your question while exploring the topic it seems viable to me at this moment.

Thinking this way does not in anyway challenge my faith or belief but rather expands it. I think humans wrote it so humans could understand the concepts. God provided the wisdom and it is wisdom that continues to grow as you study it. If you read and discuss things within the bible you will build deeper understanding each time. It seems unlikely because it says what it says so what more wisdom can one gain. However I've done it and deeper meanings do emerge as time goes by.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
i believe the authors of the bible wrote as they did with the knowledge that finite minds could never comprehend the infinite. and we dont know what alterations have been made to it down through the years.
to properly understand the writings it is advantageous to study several philosophys/religions of the world to "grok" the golden thread running though all of them.i found eastern philosophy most helpful as it offered a way out of the dilemma.
even a western book by a medical doctor named richard bucke in the 1900's "cosmic consciousness" that leapt out of a city library shelf one day shed a lot of light on the subject for me. it was written by a medical doctor named richard bucke in the 1900's
it is available as a free download at

archive.org...



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Dianec
 

Your picture of Creation is not what i mean by Creation.
You talk of atoms moving around and splitting.
But if they're moving around and splitting, then they already exist.
That's a much later stage than what I'm talking about.
What I'm talking about is the "event" (using the term loosely) which brings the whole mass of space and time into existence in the first place.
I do n ot try to picture this, because I know that it would be unimaginable.

You suggest that God might be an "offshoot" of something else, that he might be "within" the universe.
But if he is an "offshoot", and "within", then he cannot be that which is ultimate.
I'm talking about that which is ultimate.
Take whatever you mean by "everything"- the whole universe, ourselves within it.
Now you need to look beyond that, because the Creator God is that which is "beyond" everything (in a metaphysical sense), which is distinct from that "everything", and brought the "everything" into existence in the first place.

One reason we know the Biblical God must be distinct from us is that the Bible presents him as communicating with us.
We not not communicate, in any real way, with portions of ourselves.
That is one way we know that God is distinct from "the whole world" and not a portion of it.





edit on 31-7-2013 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by orangutang
 

My opening post did not, in fact, make the claim that God wrote the Bible.
You won't have read it in anything else I've written, either, because I don't normally make the statement in those terms.
But let's deal with your point anyway.

Yes, I'm aware that men were holding the pens when the Bible was written.
But the idea that "God wrote the Bible" and the idea that "men wrote the Bible" don't exclude one another, you know.
They can both be true at the same time.
When a man dictates a letter and his secretary types it up, who's writing the letter?
(Though I should add that my theory of inspiration is not so crude as "dictation of the text". I'm just disposing of the idea that "men wrote the Bible" is a serious argument against what it says).



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

The God who spoke in the Bible declared that God created the world.
The declaration that God created the world necessarily means a distinction between "God" and "the world".



There is only what is happening and that is God.
The mind with it's stories make believe there is more than this moment and you live in that 'world'. The 'world' is the imagination of man.
This moment of presence is Gods image.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

In the Bible, God communicates with us.

The fact that he communicates is initself evidence that he is distinct from us.
Just as "I am talking to you" is evidence that "I" and "you" are two distinct people.

And part of that communcation is the claim to have created the world.
The act of creation is further evidence of distinction.
If X creates Y, then X and Y must be two different things.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

In the Bible, God communicates with us.

The fact that he communicates is initself evidence that he is distinct from us.
Just as "I am talking to you" is evidence that "I" and "you" are two distinct people.

And part of that communcation is the claim to have created the world.
The act of creation is further evidence of distinction.
If X creates Y, then X and Y must be two different things.


There is only God and he is playing hide and seek.
God deceived himself when he whispered the word 'become'. 'Become' is in time and time began when God left the presence and walked into 'past' and 'future' thoughts and God got lost in thought and in imagined time.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

That is a bare unsupported statement.
It indicates what you prefer to believe, nothing more.
Psychologically, I suspect that your preference stems from the fact that you would find a "Wholly Other" God deeply threatening.
Rightly so, of course, but it is a mistake to have an understanding of the world based on our preferences.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

That is a bare unsupported statement.
It indicates what you prefer to believe, nothing more.



Have you ever been out of presence? Or do you have thoughts that tell of 'past and future' always presently?
There is only presence and presence is God. Man does not see or hear presence because he is always thinking. Man cannot stop thinking and he thinks he is his thoughts. God thinks he is his thoughts - he is lost in the imagination.
Man denies this ever present happening in favour for other times and places (in mind). The mind is a construct which builds a 'world' in which most live.
This moment is God given and can only be seen and heard by God.
When God forgets he is God he thinks he is man and cannot see or hear because he is lost in time and space.
One has to return to presence the only time there ever was, is or will be.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

Again, bare unsupported statement.
This is what you feel most comfortable about believing.
Gets you off the hook, doesn't it?



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by Itisnowagain
 

Again, bare unsupported statement.
This is what you feel most comfortable about believing.
Gets you off the hook, doesn't it?



What hook? Are you afraid of God?
What I have written is not a belief.
Do you not want comfort?



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Disraeli

Does this philosophy, consider the difference between the creation of the Earth
and the creation of a world, to exist upon the created Earth ? I believe God created
a physical exisstence ( Earth ). But this present world system, is something God did not
intend for us and had to set himself apart from. Which if I'm not mistaken leads
straight to a junction en route to the same destination you arrived at any way.
edit on 31-7-2013 by randyvs because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join