GOD is a Notion, Useful or Not? (163)
rasgumby: I don't agree with him.
good and bad are opposites...
just as day and night.
but you have both regardless.. but do we ever have both at the same time? can we not plainly see the difference between day and night?
and good and evil are not balanced..
you put no effort into producing evil, no real thought to do bad.
but good takes thought and intention.
good and bad are opposites...
just as day and night.
but you have both regardless.. but do we ever have both at the same time? can we not plainly see the difference between day and night?
and good and evil are not balanced..
you put no effort into producing evil, no real thought to do bad.
but good takes thought and intention.
Day and night are physical properties...... any idea or concept has a counterbalance, or it couldn't exist......
You would know good were it not for bad? Would you know winning without losing? Would you know joy without sadness?
How can one exist without the other? How would you know where to channel your intent were it not for the counterbalance as your guide?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Alfalfa: I say INCREDIBLY useful.
Someone introduced me to the concept(s) of metaphysics and books like "The Secret" have this belief more widely understood. Frankly, while parts of it make sense to me (ie. the placebo effect) I am not sure about most of it. Here's the rub, believing it or not, while I practice the principles and exercises I have read about, I am a MUCH more optimistic and inspired being.
Marx said something about religion being the opiate of the masses. I used that saying as a young person to stay in judgement of my parents/sisters and their faith. Meanwhile I was out drinking like a fish. What if religion really is just the opiate of the masses? Look how much good it has done with most of the heroes (missionaries and the like) unsung. And what about the great benefits of community and fellowship the belief in God creates.
Militant atheists crack me up. I always get this vision in my head of us being ants on the pavement and God being a guy in boots. The atheist on the sidewalk looking up shaking his hand at the guy in work books denying his existence. >SQUISH<
Someone introduced me to the concept(s) of metaphysics and books like "The Secret" have this belief more widely understood. Frankly, while parts of it make sense to me (ie. the placebo effect) I am not sure about most of it. Here's the rub, believing it or not, while I practice the principles and exercises I have read about, I am a MUCH more optimistic and inspired being.
Marx said something about religion being the opiate of the masses. I used that saying as a young person to stay in judgement of my parents/sisters and their faith. Meanwhile I was out drinking like a fish. What if religion really is just the opiate of the masses? Look how much good it has done with most of the heroes (missionaries and the like) unsung. And what about the great benefits of community and fellowship the belief in God creates.
Militant atheists crack me up. I always get this vision in my head of us being ants on the pavement and God being a guy in boots. The atheist on the sidewalk looking up shaking his hand at the guy in work books denying his existence. >SQUISH<
the ant thing is quite a notion; but is hardly optimistic for the squishee, though I suppose destruction has its own optimism.
------ This thread is Archived ------
letitroll: They are all inseperable..... to be sure....
But to address the the idea that we are part of the abstract notion of thought, rather than the more accepted idea that these thoughts are commanded by our own minds, leads me to think that perhaps we are, and it is, neither a part of each other, but rather, one and the same.....
But to address the the idea that we are part of the abstract notion of thought, rather than the more accepted idea that these thoughts are commanded by our own minds, leads me to think that perhaps we are, and it is, neither a part of each other, but rather, one and the same.....
------ This thread is Archived ------
BnaturAl: the ant thing is quite a notion; but is hardly optimistic for the squishee, though I suppose destruction has its own optimism.
it was not meant to imply destruction but go to the irrelevance of the atheist------ This thread is Archived ------
letitroll: They are all inseperable..... to be sure....
But to address the the idea that we are part of the abstract notion of thought, rather than the more accepted idea that these thoughts are commanded by our own minds, leads me to think that perhaps we are, and it is, neither a part of each other, but rather, one and the same.....
But to address the the idea that we are part of the abstract notion of thought, rather than the more accepted idea that these thoughts are commanded by our own minds, leads me to think that perhaps we are, and it is, neither a part of each other, but rather, one and the same.....
I've been thinking along these lines as well, in trying to point at a notion, a source etc.. (an archytypical leader if you will) but arrive as the same place you have. Being all part of the same; one concludes there is no good or bad, right or wrong (save relative perception) despite the notion or source's intent and then .... all that happens is only ..... what? progress?
------ This thread is Archived ------
Alfalfa: it was not meant to imply destruction but go to the irrelevance of the atheist
athiests are irrelevant? just asking.
------ This thread is Archived ------
letitroll: God.......... The universal consciousness of positive thought.... harnessed by anyone who wishes to, it is the power that brings change, or, even, for some, perform miracles...... hard to exist in this world without it....... we all tap it whether we know we do or we dont.... for religious purposes it is given a name......... God
as a concept 'it' is beyond reproach but as a very much misused tool of social control it is replete with avaricious intent.... without this intent, would we have been burdened with the concept in the first place?......
------ This thread is Archived ------
trish123: as a concept 'it' is beyond reproach but as a very much misused tool of social control it is replete with avaricious intent.... without this intent, would we have been burdened with the concept in the first place?......
Oh I think so trish ... man has always questioned why, who, where, and has always had some archetypical figure as a focus- and has always done it in groups. Did you see the recent Stone Henge documentary?
I think you're right though, that some see the benefits of these groups in twisting things to suit themselves, for reasons of gain or power. I dont think that muddies the icon or the concept as much as it muddies the people doing it, which is often the arguement against religions. We could point our anger at 'religion' all day when that is not the real problem . Now i am not defending religion persay, just that we give credit or discredit where properly due
------ This thread is Archived ------
BnaturAl: I've been thinking along these lines as well, in trying to point at a notion, a source etc.. (an archytypical leader if you will) but arrive as the same place you have. Being all part of the same; one concludes there is no good or bad, right or wrong (save relative perception) despite the notion or source's intent and then .... all that happens is only ..... what? progress?
This is where I depart from the conventional, because of my own personal perception of reality...... I cannot prove the existence of anyone elses reality, save my own..... therefore, my existence and interpretation of conciousness is based solely on the source which emminates from within me...... whether that source is to the betterment for humanity, or to the betterment of self, it is for us as a collective to try to elevate the source to a higher standard for which some measurement of "progress" can be attained......We will, however much we debate the issue, never be disclosed the true secret of universal consciousness, till we come face to face with our own mortality......
------ This thread is Archived ------
trish123: as a concept 'it' is beyond reproach but as a very much misused tool of social control it is replete with avaricious intent.... without this intent, would we have been burdened with the concept in the first place?......
Hi Trish!
Do you believe that people are inherently good, or is good a learned behavior? Social control had to begin somewhere..... Laws everywhere are based on a set of principles designed to permeate the consciouness on a personal level........ Developing a set of standards and doctrines for others to follow, and setting them into "lore" is as old as communication itself.... Once upon a time..........
------ This thread is Archived ------
letitroll: This is where I depart from the conventional, because of my own personal perception of reality...... I cannot prove the existence of anyone elses reality, save my own..... therefore, my existence and interpretation of conciousness is based solely on the source which emminates from within me...... whether that source is to the betterment for humanity, or to the betterment of self, it is for us as a collective to try to elevate the source to a higher standard for which some measurement of "progress" can be attained......We will, however much we debate the issue, never be disclosed the true secret of universal consciousness, till we come face to face with our own mortality......
does consciousness have a face?
I can't disagree, life is pretty much a self centered event.------ This thread is Archived ------
BnaturAl: Oh I think so trish ... man has always questioned why, who, where, and has always had some archetypical figure as a focus- and has always done it in groups. Did you see the recent Stone Henge documentary?
I think you're right though, that some see the benefits of these groups in twisting things to suit themselves, for reasons of gain or power. I dont think that muddies the icon or the concept as much as it muddies the people doing it, which is often the arguement against religions. We could point our anger at 'religion' all day when that is not the real problem . Now i am not defending religion persay, just that we give credit or discredit where properly due
I think you're right though, that some see the benefits of these groups in twisting things to suit themselves, for reasons of gain or power. I dont think that muddies the icon or the concept as much as it muddies the people doing it, which is often the arguement against religions. We could point our anger at 'religion' all day when that is not the real problem . Now i am not defending religion persay, just that we give credit or discredit where properly due
I dont come from a place of anger Al - unlike many of those who disagree with my Atheism - I actually come from a place of great compassion and sadness for mankind - sadness that ancient concepts cannot be brought up to date because of imposed divisions - without religions, these issues would have long since been resolved.......
We are all in this together and arguing about religions not only belittles us but also claims us as victims of those who would foster disunity.....
The subjugation of women for example - this is reinforced in many ways throughout organised religion, literature and art - just the common belief that a woman is incomplete without a mans guiding hand - poppycock. The Victorians and their devout adherence to gender roles is what has vastly influenced contemporary society's fears of the dissolution of male power over the female for without this basic adherrence to social conformity, religions lose their power to instill fear. The whole Adam and Eve conceptuality has been reinforced socially over all the ages and women made to feel inferior or to see their rights and desires as something 'base' and reprehensible - women like myself who choose to follow a different path are commonly anathematised or accursed, accused of 'loose behaviour' and any other means are also used to 'shame' us into submission - the veils are wearing thin though..........
------ This thread is Archived ------
letitroll: it is for us as a collective to try to elevate the source to a higher standard for which some measurement of "progress" can be attained.........
Exactly - and how can this be achieved in the face of archaic religious influences which set people against each other? We have to have unity in order to progress......
------ This thread is Archived ------
trish123: I dont come from a place of anger Al - unlike many of those who disagree with my Atheism - I actually come from a place of great compassion and sadness for mankind - sadness that ancient concepts cannot be brought up to date because of imposed divisions - without religions, these issues would have long since been resolved.......
We are all in this together and arguing about religions not only belittles us but also claims us as victims of those who would foster disunity.....
We are all in this together and arguing about religions not only belittles us but also claims us as victims of those who would foster disunity.....
I know
The subjugation of women for example - this is reinforced in many ways throughout organised religion, literature and art - just the common belief that a woman is incomplete without a mans guiding hand - poppycock. The Victorians and their devout adherence to gender roles is what has vastly influenced contemporary society's fears of the dissolution of male power over the female for without this basic adherrence to social conformity, religions lose their power to instill fear. The whole Adam and Eve conceptuality has been reinforced socially over all the ages and women made to feel inferior or to see their rights and desires as something 'base' and reprehensible - women like myself who choose to follow a different path are commonly anathematised or accursed, accused of 'loose behaviour' and any other means are also used to 'shame' us into submission - the veils are wearing thin though..........
The oldest known religions (as far as I know) praised women, in fact goddess was a more common notion than god. I guess when they stopped hunting, the cavemEn figured they had new prize to capture.
------ This thread is Archived ------
letitroll: Hi Trish!
Do you believe that people are inherently good, or is good a learned behavior? Social control had to begin somewhere..... Laws everywhere are based on a set of principles designed to permeate the consciouness on a personal level........ Developing a set of standards and doctrines for others to follow, and setting them into "lore" is as old as communication itself.... Once upon a time..........
Do you believe that people are inherently good, or is good a learned behavior? Social control had to begin somewhere..... Laws everywhere are based on a set of principles designed to permeate the consciouness on a personal level........ Developing a set of standards and doctrines for others to follow, and setting them into "lore" is as old as communication itself.... Once upon a time..........
Good question, I know that I am inherrently good despite eschewing the behaviour which the religion I was born into tried to impose - I loved the essence of Christianity as a child - I even went to mass before school for years and was well on my way to becoming a Nun.
I think possibly that laws tend to over-ride and derrogate instinct. Instinct I feel has the ability, when worked on and developed without the influences of fear, to transcend imposed concepts of right and wrong.
Whether or not goodness is inherrent in mankind is obscured by preset demands to follow whichever teachings are preferred by whichever society 'chance' saw them born into. I actually think, from my own observations, that mankind is inherrently selfish but I dont know how much this is fostered by political demand or societal manipulation........
Hi
------ This thread is Archived ------
"It is the final proof of God's omnipotence the He need not exist in order to save us."- The Mackeral.
I think God as a Notion, archetype, etc. is useful only in that it expands our notion of who WE are. We define ourselves via our relationships, and if you define yourself in relation to something invisible, unknowable, and profound, than in some ways you become aware of the fact that this begins to describe your own consciousness itself. If we cannot fully know ourselves, how, in any way, can we define truths about God?
"Know thyself, then, presume not God to scan, the proper study of Mankind is Man."-Alexander Pope, Epistle 3.
The trouble starts when people focus on the dude and not his mood. All prophets, buddhas and supposed saviors are enlightened to the same thing, and had the same moral truth to share. It is only at the point when people start saying their messenger is better than yours, when our egos become involved, that things start to break down. Lets not get mired in interpretation and stick to the basic tenet that exists behind all conceptualizations of God. Do unto others...
If you take the Bible out of the equation, I'm quite comfortable with the notion of God, because the very thought of something unknowable stretches my definition of what really actually IS knowable.
Thanks for the thread.
I think God as a Notion, archetype, etc. is useful only in that it expands our notion of who WE are. We define ourselves via our relationships, and if you define yourself in relation to something invisible, unknowable, and profound, than in some ways you become aware of the fact that this begins to describe your own consciousness itself. If we cannot fully know ourselves, how, in any way, can we define truths about God?
"Know thyself, then, presume not God to scan, the proper study of Mankind is Man."-Alexander Pope, Epistle 3.
The trouble starts when people focus on the dude and not his mood. All prophets, buddhas and supposed saviors are enlightened to the same thing, and had the same moral truth to share. It is only at the point when people start saying their messenger is better than yours, when our egos become involved, that things start to break down. Lets not get mired in interpretation and stick to the basic tenet that exists behind all conceptualizations of God. Do unto others...
If you take the Bible out of the equation, I'm quite comfortable with the notion of God, because the very thought of something unknowable stretches my definition of what really actually IS knowable.
Thanks for the thread.
------ This thread is Archived ------
BnaturAl: I know
The subjugation of women for example - this is reinforced in many ways throughout organised religion, literature and art - just the common belief that a woman is incomplete without a mans guiding hand - poppycock. The Victorians and their devout adherence to gender roles is what has vastly influenced contemporary society's fears of the dissolution of male power over the female for without this basic adherrence to social conformity, religions lose their power to instill fear. The whole Adam and Eve conceptuality has been reinforced socially over all the ages and women made to feel inferior or to see their rights and desires as something 'base' and reprehensible - women like myself who choose to follow a different path are commonly anathematised or accursed, accused of 'loose behaviour' and any other means are also used to 'shame' us into submission - the veils are wearing thin though..........
The subjugation of women for example - this is reinforced in many ways throughout organised religion, literature and art - just the common belief that a woman is incomplete without a mans guiding hand - poppycock. The Victorians and their devout adherence to gender roles is what has vastly influenced contemporary society's fears of the dissolution of male power over the female for without this basic adherrence to social conformity, religions lose their power to instill fear. The whole Adam and Eve conceptuality has been reinforced socially over all the ages and women made to feel inferior or to see their rights and desires as something 'base' and reprehensible - women like myself who choose to follow a different path are commonly anathematised or accursed, accused of 'loose behaviour' and any other means are also used to 'shame' us into submission - the veils are wearing thin though..........
The oldest known religions (as far as I know) praised women, in fact goddess was a more common notion than god. I guess when they stopped hunting, the cavemEn figured they had new prize to capture.
that was B.M. - before monotheism - I actually dont hold with pantheism either - why do we need to find 'supernatural' explanations for our behaviours at all - surely, psychology, flawed as it 'may' be, has carried us beyond this primitive need to attribute our behaviour to something 'beyond our comprhension'.............
------ This thread is Archived ------
trish123: Exactly - and how can this be achieved in the face of archaic religious influences which set people against each other? We have to have unity in order to progress......
A difficult process, getting everyone in the same boat ... personally I think this will never happen, simply because of the law of balance... not to mention physical laws of nature.
I think we progress as individuals and without the opposition we have no measure of our progression. Life is totally centered around our own view of reality, there may be unison in 'being' but not in intent.
------ This thread is Archived ------
Galactic_bodhi: "It is the final proof of God's omnipotence the He need not exist in order to save us."- The Mackeral.
I think God as a Notion, archetype, etc. is useful only in that it expands our notion of who WE are. We define ourselves via our relationships, and if you define yourself in relation to something invisible, unknowable, and profound, than in some ways you become aware of the fact that this begins to describe your own consciousness itself. If we cannot fully know ourselves, how, in any way, can we define truths about God?
"Know thyself, then, presume not God to scan, the proper study of Mankind is Man."-Alexander Pope, Epistle 3.
The trouble starts when people focus on the dude and not his mood. All prophets, buddhas and supposed saviors are enlightened to the same thing, and had the same moral truth to share. It is only at the point when people start saying their messenger is better than yours, when our egos become involved, that things start to break down. Lets not get mired in interpretation and stick to the basic tenet that exists behind all conceptualizations of God. Do unto others...
If you take the Bible out of the equation, I'm quite comfortable with the notion of God, because the very thought of something unknowable stretches my definition of what really actually IS knowable.
Thanks for the thread.
I think God as a Notion, archetype, etc. is useful only in that it expands our notion of who WE are. We define ourselves via our relationships, and if you define yourself in relation to something invisible, unknowable, and profound, than in some ways you become aware of the fact that this begins to describe your own consciousness itself. If we cannot fully know ourselves, how, in any way, can we define truths about God?
"Know thyself, then, presume not God to scan, the proper study of Mankind is Man."-Alexander Pope, Epistle 3.
The trouble starts when people focus on the dude and not his mood. All prophets, buddhas and supposed saviors are enlightened to the same thing, and had the same moral truth to share. It is only at the point when people start saying their messenger is better than yours, when our egos become involved, that things start to break down. Lets not get mired in interpretation and stick to the basic tenet that exists behind all conceptualizations of God. Do unto others...
If you take the Bible out of the equation, I'm quite comfortable with the notion of God, because the very thought of something unknowable stretches my definition of what really actually IS knowable.
Thanks for the thread.
Hopefully it sticks to the notion, concept, archetype aspects ... 
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
biggest lie
Ladies
Unions support Democrats!
Would you hire this guy - for any job?
Kultur-multur
The GOP Representatives owned by Vladimir Putin
s*xual skills
The Real Stormy Story
Karen McDougal - Playmate Model will testify in Hush Money Trial
One week of the most outrageous GOP leadership!
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
To me this suggests that you're saying, that we are part of that 'notion's' usefulness?
They are all inseperable..... to be sure....
But to address the the idea that we are part of the abstract notion of thought, rather than the more accepted idea that these thoughts are commanded by our own minds, leads me to think that perhaps we are, and it is, neither a part of each other, but rather, one and the same.....