How do we know that Christians are Delusional?

To be honest, I prefer to avoid the use of the word "God" because of all of the cultural and religious connotations the word brings. It is not necessary to use the word God in talking about spirituality. (Buddhism is a good example.) However, on a spirituality & religion forum where a lot of people are talking about God, it is impossible to avoid the word. Also, when I address another person, I try to talk in the language they are familiar with. If they use the word God, I will too.

That said, what do I believe in? I believe in the radical transformation of human consciousness. In Hinduism and Buddhism this is called enlightenment or liberation. In Christianity it is called salvation. What I am implying is that the historical originators of those teachings (Buddha, Krishna, Christ) actually had valuable insights. However, they had the difficulty of trying to communicate their insights to an unenlightened and largely uneducated populace. To varying degrees, but particularly so in the case of Christianity, those teachings were so altered and misunderstood over the years, that what is being practiced today is but a pale reflection of the original teachings. All sorts of wrong ideas have crept in. That's the problem with using the word God. It brings in all of the misunderstandings that have become part of modern religion.

What do I mean when I use the word God? I mean absolute eternal being or consciousness. It is impersonal. It is not a personal God who is your imaginary companion. Since your fundamental identity is consciousness, you are God, literally. God is found in you as you.

However, God, or the state of pure consciousness, has to be realized through the radical transformation of consciousness. This is the an evolutionary process that is the culmination of the evolution of biological life on this, and probably other, planets. Consciousness is the intelligence, the organizing principle behind the arising of form. Consciousness has been preparing from for millions of years so that it can express itself through those forms. The unmanifested consciousness flows into this world as awareness or inner Presence. It does this through the human form that becomes conscious and thus fulfills its destiny. The human form was created for this higher purpose.

Consciousness incarnates into the dimension of form. When it does so, it enters a dreamlike state. Intelligence remains, but consciousness becomes unconscious of itself.

It loses itself in form. It becomes identified with form. This is traditionally known as ignorance or ego. At this stage of evolution of the universe, consciousness is in a dreamlike state. Glimpses of awakening come at the moment of death. Then begins the next incarnation. When the lion tears apart the body of the zebra, the consciousness incarnated into the zebra body detaches itself from the dissolving form and for a brief moment awakens to its essential immortal nature as consciousness and then falls back into sleep and reincarnates as another form. The human ego represents the final stage of the identification of consciousness with form.

Through the human form, consciousness is able to know itself. This reaches its highest expression when the individual attains the state of enlightenment. That is the ultimate purpose of human existence and of the evolution of the universe.

God! I hate it when I'm rude to someone, and then they have the nerve to reply in a completely civil manner. That means I am then required (by my stupid conscience) to attempt some sort of apology, or something, before I can continue on with the conversation. At least it seems I did you no harm, so how 'bout no foul, eh? (I'm moody like my mother.) Anyway, you're one of my favorite posters right now... I usually feel like I get where you're coming from, but I also disagree with you, severely

Consciousness is barely even definable, let alone suitable to tie up every ontological loose end.

It may be a wonderfully attractive idea that biological evolution is motivated by some kind of great intelligence and that there is a higher purpose for human existence. But humans are not the pinnacle of evolution. Such ideas are destined to fall apart. Spirituality, in this sense, is only the latest improvement on the same basic model the religionists have been working on forever.

How can consciousness be conscious of itself? The object and the observer?

Joe,

I was careful to put "delusions" in inverted commas ! I suppose we need a redefinition in terms of "relative sociopathy". This relativity is well discussed in anthropology where an individual whom we might label "schizophrenic" might be elevated to the status of "medicine man" in other cultures. The problem now is that local solutions have given way to global communications such that "society" can no longer be thought of in parochial terms. As Harris points out, the stakes for conflicting "belief systems" have been raised or amplified via modern technology. It may no longer be be appropriate to be a "moderate" believer when some aspect of a belief system like "the afterlife" gives succour to fanatics intent on destroying "this life". In a way this is a problem similar to that of whether we legislate against "soft drugs" because for some they can lead to "hard drugs". All "freedoms" tend to come with a social price tag for which the only practical control is "education about potential dangers".

Consciousness is no more than a mental concept to the ego-based mind.

The transformation of consciousness begins with stillness. Thought is form. Being aware of stillness means to be still. To be still is to be conscious without thought. When you are still, you are who you were before you assumed your current physical and mental form, and who you will be when this form dissolves. When you are still, you are consciousness -- formless and eternal. If all this sounds like nonsense to you then you are probably not ready. It takes a certain maturity for the process of awakening to begin. One of the ways that awakening begins is the recognition of the conditioned mental processes that are traditionally called the ego. When you become aware of the unconsciousness in you, that recognition is the beginning of the transformation of consciousness.

How can consciousness which is formless and eternal be subject to transformation? The transformation of consciousness can be understood as the evolutionary development of the higher faculties of the human nervous system. It is a transformation that allows consciousness to flow into the world of form. So it is not pure consciousness that is transformed, but rather the human nervous system that is adapted to allow consciousness to enter, or be expressed in the physical dimension.

Nature is governed by intelligence. That's why there are laws of nature. The natural world is not chaotic or random. There is an intelligence to the natural world. That is what science is all about -- discovering those natural laws. I'm not talking about intelligent design where it is imagined that a supernatural force guides events. The laws of physics and biology coupled with natural selection are sufficient to allow the evolution of biological forms in favorable environments such as the earth.

How do you know that "humans are not the pinnacle of evolution"? When a human attains self-transcendence, then consciousness becomes conscious of itself. That great unmanifested, eternal "thing", consciousness, knows itself, knows its true nature. That is what spiritual seers of the past have proclaimed as the purpose of the universe. I know of no other one.

echi wrote:

How can consciousness be conscious of itself? The object and the observer?

That is the fundamental spiritual experience -- self-transcendence. Consciousness without an object -- pure consciousness. It occurs when there is stillness. For many that is during meditation, when thoughts are quieted. During meditation, thoughts are experienced in subtler and subtler forms until finally thought is transcended and there is only pure awareness, awareness without thought. Over time this experience matures and brings about a transformation of individual consciousness.

IFeelFree wrote:

However, these 2 guys seem to suggest that everyone who has some kind of spiritual view is irrational because some religious people are irrational.

I didn't don't think they are saying that at all. The video specifically targets the aspects of beliefs which are in direct conflict with fundamental human knowledge of nature and physics (magical events like prayer)..........

Joe,

The short answer is yes.

Joe,

The "glass guy" (wasn't it some historical figure ?)...

...is already statistically "delusional".

If he were say some relative of mine who caused me problems I would do something about it. Otherwise "so what".

IFF wrote:

echi wrote:

How can consciousness be conscious of itself? The object and the observer?

That is the fundamental spiritual experience -- self-transcendence. Consciousness without an object -- pure consciousness. It occurs when there is stillness. For many that is during meditation, when thoughts are quieted. During meditation, thoughts are experienced in subtler and subtler forms until finally thought is transcended and there is only pure awareness, awareness without thought. Over time this experience matures and brings about a transformation of individual consciousness.

of. Consciousness can no more be conscious of itself than an eye can look at itself. It is that simple.

IFF, just out of interest/clarification as a quick question, when you refer to "Consciousness", are you referring then to what I think you've also called the higher "Self" in the past, or Atman (capital A) of Hinduism? Also, when you say, "Consciousness becomes conscious of itself" are you referring to some non dualistic awareness or the realisation of Atman=Brahman, the cessation of division?

The video implies a denial of the existence of the supernatural, which is something that you have claimed in the past that you do not do.

Has your position changed? Do you now deny the existence of the supernatural?

The video also does more than just imply the denial of the supernatural. It demonstrates that even people who accept the supernatural of their own belief structure, scoff at the supernatural components of other belief structures. It demonstrates a clear hippocratic variability of perspectives. This variability is very strong evidence for delusion, don't you think?

All of which demonstrates that knowledge of the supernatural should not be based on unsupported belief.

neologist wrote:

Pure rationalization.

Nice demonstration of the delusion.

However, there are many of us who have had very clear experiences for which no readily available scientific explanation exists. I don't mean some murky vision in a dream or some flash of light during meditation, but rather clear spiritual experiences that suggest that either that the person is either hallucinating, or that there really does exist a supernatural dimension of some kind.

Let me ask you, what would you do if you had such experiences?

According to the video, God is pictured as performing miraculous healings and his power is questioned because he does not heal amputees. Since he does not perform miraculous healings, it is impossible for you to attack him for not healing amputees.