Atheist Religion

[SarahM777]

If I may butt in here please... I'm reading now just TOO much about this VERY personalized God image... like the wise old man in a robe and a long beard.

Sorry all, but this is just so not my own understanding AT ALL.
It is a sort of childish image, it's why we use it for CHILDREN... it's NOT at ALL an image of a higher power that has an influence (or none if you wish) on our life.

This sort of image BTW is also the cause for SO MUCH misconstrued discussion... sounding like toddlers trying to figure out what e.g. 'the president of this country' could mean...

They will NEVER really get it - and in fashion it is also like a computer wanting to figure out who created the box it is running its operating system on... unless programmed to KNOW its Bill Gates or whoever... no answer, un-answer the question.

If the bible gives this impression to one - it is my contention that we misunderstand/misconstrue and simply misinterpret it. Amen

Sorry, I HAD to share this,
Axélle

Axelle,

If that is how I am coming across I do apologize,because God is so far beyond the image of a wise old man with a white beard and a long robe,He is also not a Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny.

He is also fearsome and terrible. He is beyond time,space,and dimensions. He has not nor ever will be subject to our judgements. He does not answer all of our questions nor is He required to. He is the Lord God above everything else seen and not seen. He made everything for His purposes and pleasure,and He has the absolute right to do with it as He pleases. Because He is sovereign.

[Annah]

I wouldn't call God terrible or fearsome.

The point of God is not to be terrible or fearsome. Sadly, some churches and radical sects of religion portrays this image, in my opinion, to control the masses.

I see God as benevolent, outside of our own impressions of expression, and a mother-like creator who loves us enough not to control us through fear...but to make our own decisions.

[peky]

Is God the cause of it or is it caused by man? Is it the direct result of disobedience and if so are they not the consequences? If God allowed man free will then would He not be overstepping that free will which He gave us? Maybe just maybe these things are allowed so we come to the end of our rope,the end of our human limitations and drive us into His arms,to end our running from Him.
Could that be possible?

Do I like it? No. Do I think that God could do it a different way? For sure. Do I understand it? Not a
chance.  Can I accept that His ways are so far beyond my comprehension? Very difficult but not impossible.  Can I accept that His wisdom is not on my level? Yes  Can I accept that these things are allowed for purposes and plans far beyond my own? Yes

All of this is very difficult to even begin to try grasp and my own limitations will prevent me from seeing the end results of what He is doing and how it will all work out. It all comes down to trust.

The hardest lesson of all to learn is the purpose of suffering,no one likes it,it doesn't seem to make sense unless when one is going through it to take this to heart

Romans 5:3-5

Not only so, but we[c] also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us.

The ultimate goal is to produce hope.  To our minds it seems backwards,but it's not our wisdom.

At the beginning a singularity was in equilibrium, and HaShem perturbed the singularity, and gave the nascent Universe all the rules and laws for its unfolding. This nonintervention post creation is in essence the "free will" of the Universe.

The evolution of the Universe, including that of Sentient beings, follows Quantum and Newtonian and Relativistic and Chaotic laws, with an innate element of randomness altering their course.

As man evolve, the need to explain his perceived universe, lead him to attributed phenomena not understood to divine forces, this is the genesis of theism, that while it serve its purpose by dictating morality and ethics to otherwise unruly superstitious mobs, but that IMHO has no value in modern times.

To control the mobs, books attributed to HaShem, were written and codified by different civilizations. Depending of your level of evolution, and your ability to belief what is so by its own merits and reproducibility, you may or may not need to have a book dictate your actions or lack off.

I respect those of my own kind, and other theistic persuasions for following the precepts of their holly books as long as they do not try to impose to their beliefs into other, or deprive me of my rights.

Personally, I belief in the existence of HaShem, and continuously seek to feel Her bliss.

[tekla]

I wouldn't call God terrible or fearsome.

Nor would I call god 'awesome' like god was a candy bar, some new shade of lipstick, or a pop song.  When people (like me) want to say that god is made in man's image and likeness it's that attribute of giving the creator of the entire universe some kind of all too human attributes.  At least when the Greeks did it, they had a style about it.

and, FTR, you (Sarah, not Annah) don't get to redefine words like 'science' to suit your convince. 

[SarahM777]

I wouldn't call God terrible or fearsome.

Nor would I call god 'awesome' like god was a candy bar, some new shade of lipstick, or a pop song.  When people (like me) want to say that god is made in man's image and likeness it's that attribute of giving the creator of the entire universe some kind of all too human attributes.  At least when the Greeks did it, they had a style about it.

Nor did I say He was,most English words do have multiple definitions.

Awesome

1: expressive of awe <awesome tribute>
2
a : inspiring awe <an awesome task>
b : terrific, extraordinary <had an awesome time>

Awe

1: an emotion variously combining dread, veneration, and wonder that is inspired by authority or by the sacred or sublime <stood in awe of the king> <regard nature's wonders with awe>
2
archaic
a : dread, terror
b : the power to inspire dread

Various

1 archaic : variable, inconstant
2
: varicolored <birds of various plumage>
3
a : of differing kinds : multifarious
b : dissimilar in nature or form : unlike
4
: having a number of different aspects or characteristics <a various place>
5
: of an indefinite number greater than one <stop at various towns>
6
: individual, separate <rate increases granted in the various states>

Terrible

a : exciting extreme alarm or intense fear : terrifying
b : formidable in nature : awesome <a terrible responsibility>
c : difficult <in a terrible bind>
2
: extreme, great <a terrible disappointment>
3
: extremely bad: as
a : strongly repulsive : obnoxious <a terrible smell>
b : notably unattractive or objectionable <terrible behavior>
c : of very poor quality <a terrible movie>

Fearsome

a : causing fear <a fearsome monster>
b : intense, extreme <fearsome determination>
2
: timid, timorous

Extreme

a : existing in a very high degree <extreme poverty>
b : going to great or exaggerated lengths : radical <went on an extreme diet>
c : exceeding the ordinary, usual, or expected <extreme weather conditions>
2
archaic : last
3
: situated at the farthest possible point from a center <the country's extreme north>
4
a : most advanced or thoroughgoing <the extreme political left>
b : maximum
5
a : of, relating to, or being an outdoor activity or a form of a sport (as skiing) that involves an unusually high degree of physical risk <extreme mountain biking down steep slopes>
b : involved in an extreme sport <an extreme snowboarder>

As one can see from the above there is multiple meanings for the same exact word. So if one is using a different meaning of the word,then someone else is using but yet still within the definition of the word,doesn't that lead to a bit of confusion? Does the word science have multiple meanings and what do you mean by it?

[Annah]

Sarah

When you use words like Terrible and Fearsome, the typical english speaking person on the streets (or in these forums) will not be thinking "good" attributes to that descriptor...they wont be thinking "oh..that's the fourth definition down on the word...not the first two...I understand"

In fact, it would only solidify a non christian's belief that Christianity is a tactic to tell people they must be a christian or go to hell because God is fearing and terrible...i.e., proselytizing and that Christianity is a method in which to control the masses through "fear and trembling."

[SarahM777]

Sarah

When you use words like Terrible and Fearsome, the typical english speaking person on the streets (or in these forums) will not be thinking "good" attributes to that descriptor...they wont be thinking "oh..that's the fourth definition down on the word...not the first two...I understand"

In fact, it would only solidify a non christian's belief that Christianity is a tactic to tell people they must be a christian or go to hell because God is fearing and terrible...i.e., proselytizing and that Christianity is a method in which to control the masses through "fear and trembling."

Annah,

Your right,and that's why it leads to too many understandings. We too often forget that. We say A and someone else hears B,but then we don't define it so that others can understand what we really mean. I am sorry that I didn't do that to begin with,it's my fault for not doing so.
I do apologize for it.

It's part of being an insider and forgetting that those outside haven't got a clue as to what we are saying. That is wholly on us.

[tekla]

It's part of being an insider and forgetting that those outside haven't got a clue as to what we are saying.

You're kidding, right?  Xianity has been the dominant majority religion in The West for what, a few millennia at least, and over 80% of the population of the US currently identify themselves as Xians, so stop with the 'help, help, we're being oppressed' and acting like no one really knows what it is.

Myself, agnostic to the core, got there by doing 12 years before the cross in Catholic School, the first 8 under the Franciscans, the last 4 under the Precious Blood and Jesuits.  And if you can't lean religion straight from god, the next best thing is to learn it from a Jesuit, just ask one.  I think Cindy had Jesuit instruction also, it's something that if you haven't done it, or been close to someone who has, is difficult to comprehend, suffice it to say that it's extremely - almost ridiculously - rigorous.  (at least until you go to college and find out that even in an elite private college you're about 1.5 to 2 years ahead of your non-Jesuit classmates)

Oh, and those old Franciscan nuns taught us evolution in biology class, and atomic theory too way back in grade school, they didn't seem to have any problem with it.  Of course at the heart of an order founded by St. Francis of Assisi is a very special relationship with animals, so teaching that we are part of the animals, and not all that different from them, and our superiority to them in both intelligence and god's love was overrated, well I can see where it meshed with their beliefs.

And they are not even the only order of Catholics that have some animal presence, the Dominicans have a huge dog thing going on, and it's not at all unusual to go into a Dominican church and see people there with their dogs.  Because St. Dominic founded the order based on a dream with a dog, and because going back to the middle ages (when people knew Latin) they were referred to in a play on words as Domini canes, the "dogs of the God" largely because of their role in The Inquisition.

[AbraCadabra]

Good post - "cleanup time"

It once again ever so brings to mind the line: "What we can't feel... we cannot understand...".

Thank you, I enjoyed reading it, quite interesting,
Axélle

[Annah]

The Jesuits are no joke.

[peky]

It's part of being an insider and forgetting that those outside haven't got a clue as to what we are saying.

You're kidding, right?  Xianity has been the dominant majority religion in The West for what, a few millennia at least, and over 80% of the population of the US currently identify themselves as Xians, so stop with the 'help, help, we're being oppressed' and acting like no one really knows what it is.

Myself, agnostic to the core, got there by doing 12 years before the cross in Catholic School, the first 8 under the Franciscans, the last 4 under the Precious Blood and Jesuits.  And if you can't lean religion straight from god, the next best thing is to learn it from a Jesuit, just ask one.  I think Cindy had Jesuit instruction also, it's something that if you haven't done it, or been close to someone who has, is difficult to comprehend, suffice it to say that it's extremely - almost ridiculously - rigorous.  (at least until you go to college and find out that even in an elite private college you're about 1.5 to 2 years ahead of your non-Jesuit classmates)

Oh, and those old Franciscan nuns taught us evolution in biology class, and atomic theory too way back in grade school, they didn't seem to have any problem with it.  Of course at the heart of an order founded by St. Francis of Assisi is a very special relationship with animals, so teaching that we are part of the animals, and not all that different from them, and our superiority to them in both intelligence and god's love was overrated, well I can see where it meshed with their beliefs.

And they are not even the only order of Catholics that have some animal presence, the Dominicans have a huge dog thing going on, and it's not at all unusual to go into a Dominican church and see people there with their dogs.  Because St. Dominic founded the order based on a dream with a dog, and because going back to the middle ages (when people knew Latin) they were referred to in a play on words as Domini canes, the "dogs of the God" largely because of their role in The Inquisition.

I went to jesuis collge, and like Tecla said; no problem teaching Evolution, and in relgion we discussed the "Cosmological G-d," as fete accomplished

[AbraCadabra]

The Jesuits are no joke.

Yet one collection of highly intelligent people...

Axélle

[Dhenric]

Absolute rejection of anything supernatural is my motto.

[LilDevilOfPrada]

I wouldn't call God terrible or fearsome.

The point of God is not to be terrible or fearsome. Sadly, some churches and radical sects of religion portrays this image, in my opinion, to control the masses.

I see God as benevolent, outside of our own impressions of expression, and a mother-like creator who loves us enough not to control us through fear...but to make our own decisions.

Long ago God was only seen as something to fear yet now why isnt he, I mean ever read revalations I am suprised christians dont fear ever trumpet they hear !

[hazel]

This seems to come up quite often, the idea that because god is unfalsifiable, non belief actually means the belief in gods non existence, and therefore is a matter of faith (and perhaps a religion). It's true that this could be the case, although the only famous atheist I can think of  that takes this position right now is Penn Jillette. But at least as far as I can see most tend to argue that non belief in an unproven claim is just the default position to start at.

That's true of me, so I think the closest fit i could find for myself is agnostic atheist. I've not heard or seen anything yet that's convinced me to believe, and I don't really expect to, but I'm still open to the possibility that it could.

[suzifrommd]

This seems to come up quite often, the idea that because god is unfalsifiable, non belief actually means the belief in gods non existence, and therefore is a matter of faith (and perhaps a religion). It's true that this could be the case, although the only famous atheist I can think of  that takes this position right now is Penn Jillette. But at least as far as I can see most tend to argue that non belief in an unproven claim is just the default position to start at.

That's true of me, so I think the closest fit i could find for myself is agnostic atheist. I've not heard or seen anything yet that's convinced me to believe, and I don't really expect to, but I'm still open to the possibility that it could.

Very interesting. I like that diagram.

I wonder where I fit. Not only do I believe that I don't know whether God exists, but I believe that God's existence is unknowable by humans. In short, "I don't know and you don't either..."

[LilDevilOfPrada]

All that diagram needs is a Antitheism cuz thats what I am

[hazel]

Very interesting. I like that diagram.

I wonder where I fit. Not only do I believe that I don't know whether God exists, but I believe that God's existence is unknowable by humans. In short, "I don't know and you don't either..."

Militant agnostic maybe? 

I think it helps to know what sort of god we're talking about. There's three I can think of right now, a deistic interpretation that probably really is unprovable either way, a personal god who could perhaps be proven/dis-proven depending on the validity of the scripture it's tied to. And then there's Einstiens/Spinosa's god which seems more like a metaphor for the sense of awe we get trying to make sense of the universe.

[Anatta]

Very interesting. I like that diagram.

I wonder where I fit. Not only do I believe that I don't know whether God exists, but I believe that God's existence is unknowable by humans. In short, "I don't know and you don't either..."

Kia Ora A,

So how do you 'know' that others don't know ? To know of what 6 billion odd people may or may not know , I would have thought too is 'unknowable' !

Metta Zenda

[suzifrommd]

Kia Ora A,

So how do you 'know' that others don't know ?

Didn't say I "know". Said I "believe". Two different things. "Know" is certainty. "Believe" is making your best judgment based what you do know.