What sort of "God" would you like ?

truth
If I worship anything it is Reality, whatever that may be. It is that "God" who says "There is only one Reality" and "Thou shall put no other Reality before Me". And my form of worship is inquiry, in its many forms.

0 Replies

Derevon, if God created this world with all of its misery and suffering and refuses to alleviate it, how can you possibly believe that he is wise and loving? If God knows our needs, how can he withhold rain from a drought-stricken area where thousands of children are starving to death?

Some people grow spiritually in response to hardship. Some become bitter and hateful, some lash out at others, some resign themselves to misery.

Would you break your child's arm so that the child would turn to you for love and comfort?

Why do you suppose that God created people such that they would be compelled (by "nature," biological urges, circumstances, or mental illness) to choose evil when given free will? Why do you suppose that he values the free will of evildoers over those whose free will they destroy?

What kind of parent would plague some of their children with disease, famine, parasites, and natural disasters, and choose for others to live in pleasure and plenty?

0 Replies

Seeker, yes, some disease is the result of pollution and malnutrition. But most diseases are caused by the bacteria, viruses, fungi, parasites, and genetic problems that can be traced directly to God.

Why do you suppose that God created disease organisms? Why do you suppose that children suffer and die from horrendous birth defects? Why do you suppose that God doesn't do anything to alleviate all of the suffering he caused?

0 Replies

JLN, how do you know what is "Reality" and what is illusion, delusion, hallucination, wishful thinking or social construction?

0 Replies

Terry wrote:

Derevon, if God created this world with all of its misery and suffering and refuses to alleviate it, how can you possibly believe that he is wise and loving? If God knows our needs, how can he withhold rain from a drought-stricken area where thousands of children are starving to death?

Some people grow spiritually in response to hardship. Some become bitter and hateful, some lash out at others, some resign themselves to misery.

Would you break your child's arm so that the child would turn to you for love and comfort?

Why do you suppose that God created people such that they would be compelled (by "nature," biological urges, circumstances, or mental illness) to choose evil when given free will? Why do you suppose that he values the free will of evildoers over those whose free will they destroy?

Free will can overcome most urges, although it may require a substantial effort. Not everything of evil we do is necessarily sin. Sin is deliberately doing that which we know is wrong. Sometimes we may give in to temptations, but that is wholly natural. The important thing is that we acknowledge that intentionally doing something that is evil is wrong and a sin towards God, do our best to avoid sin, and if we have commited such an act, sincerely repent it. If a mentally ill person commits an act of evil without knowing what he's doing, he doesn't have any sin in the eyes of God, for he is then not responsible for his own actions. God is just, and never demands of someone that which is impossible.

Terry wrote:

What kind of parent would plague some of their children with disease, famine, parasites, and natural disasters, and choose for others to live in pleasure and plenty?

Personally I don't believe God intervenes directly in such material matters. They are simply obstacles for us to overcome. A person who lives in poverty and hardships may very likely live a more spiritually edifying life than one who lives in comfort and luxury. I believe that it is by triumphing over hardships true spiritual growth is accomplished.

As for why some are born in poverty, whereas others live in affluence is probably impossible for us to know for now, but I'm sure there is a good reason for it. Sometimes we simply have to put our trust in God and accept that we don't know everything, and can't see everything from our very limited perspective. Most likely we will receive all the answers we want when our lives in the flesh are accomplished. As for now, we should do our best dealing with our afflictions and do as much good to others as we can. Simply put, making the best of our situations. Wallowing in our own miseries and misfortunes is not going to do anyone any good.

0 Replies

Deveron

There wouldn't be the "wallowing" if the misery wasn't there to start with...and this concept that "suffering is good for the soul" borders on masochism, and denigration of "this life".

In the words of that renowned philosopher Mae West "I've been rich and I've been poor....rich is better !"

No, considering this "God" has been around as a concept for a few thousand years his supposed methodology is pretty inefficient in raising the level of spirituality. I think a change of management is definitely indicated.

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Deveron

There wouldn't be the "wallowing" if the misery wasn't there to start with...and this concept that "suffering is good for the soul" borders on masochism, and denigration of "this life".

In the words of that renowned philosopher Mae West "I've been rich and I've been poor....rich is better !"

No, considering this "God" has been around as a concept for a few thousand years his supposed methodology is pretty inefficient in raising the level of spirituality. I think a change of management is definitely indicated.

I'm not saying that suffering itself is good. Merely that overcoming suffering may help us grow spiritually.

Being rich may seem better for a person than being poor. From a spiritual point of view it's most likely not, though, considering that money often has a tendency to make a person look more towards the material and less towards the spiritual.

0 Replies

Deveron,

Seriously though ( Smile

) don't you think that spirituality based on poverty etc is just a rationalisation... the ultimate "selflessness" freed from worldly attachments ?

The fact is that we are "thinking animals". Other animals seem to accept pecking orders without having to evoke some "divine plan" to explain it to themselves. If you believe humans "have been created differently" what is your evidence? Cognition alone will not suffice. All this seems to do is exacerbate the extremes of "animal behaviour". What perverse "God" would allow his creation the ability to amplify suffering.? ...ah yes ...you may reply...a God that moves in "mysterious ways"...the famous catch all zero explanation !

The point is "explanation" doesn't come into it. If it did we've got the wrong "God", but theists want it both ways to allay fears of their own cosmic insignificance!

0 Replies

fresco wrote:

Deveron,

Seriously though ( ) don't you think that spirituality based on poverty etc is just a rationalisation... the ultimate "selflessness" freed from worldly attachments ?

Well, I wouldn't use poverty and spirituality as synonyms to one another. I'm pretty sure it's perfectly possible to live a good spiritual life even for a wealthy person, even though it may complicate things.

Quote:

The fact is that we are "thinking animals". Other animals seem to accept pecking orders without having to evoke some "divine plan" to explain it to themselves. If you believe humans "have been created differently" what is your evidence? Cognition alone will not suffice. All this seems to do is exacerbate the extremes of "animal behaviour". What perverse "God" would allow his creation the ability to amplify suffering.? ...ah yes ...you may reply...a God that moves in "mysterious ways"...the famous catch all zero explanation !

The point is "explanation" doesn't come into it. If it did we've got the wrong "God", but theists want it both ways to allay fears of their own cosmic insignificance!

Yes, those are very difficult questions to answer indeed, especially given that I don't know the divine plan Wink

. Perhaps the ability to amplify other's suffering is an unavoidable consequence of divine law. Cause and effect, I believe, is universal.

I'm not following you as to why cognition alone shouldn't prove that humans and animals are different. I'm of the belief that our "true selves" are spirit, and that it's in this spirit we have our awareness and consciousness, and that this spirit is temporarily attached to/integrated with our physical bodies (released upon physical death). To me it seems contrary to all reason that matter would have come before thought. As I see it, everything must begin with a thought.

Anyway, I would recommend reading this article about reality and consciousness. I found it quite interesting: http://twm.co.nz/prussell.htm

0 Replies

Deveron,

Thanks for that article. It covers much of the ground twyvel, JL Nobody and I have covered here A2K philosophy threads, including Kuhn, Chalmers, and Buddhist references. The key issue is that "spirituality" does not need to evoke " a divine being" as the author here seems to assume. (Read for example Krishnamurti's criticisms of organized religion and his views on "thought") Nor does either physicality or consciousness need to be a priori in order to "explain reality". (See for example Capra's eplanation of the emergence of "structure" in "The Web of Life" 1995. This was in fact predated by Piagets genetic epistemology (1950's) which implied that "reality" lies at the interface between "inner" and "outer")

So as far as this thread goes the intention was merely to allow alternatives to usual "fairy tale" of a "benign divinity" given that the "logic" from whence the story came is pretty low level compared with the metalogic involved in competing epistemological systems.

0 Replies

Terry, what do I think is Reality? Remember I said "Reality, whatever that is." I like the definition advanced by Frank. I paraphrase: "Reality is whatever is the case". Delusion, illusion, etc. are more difficult and more subject to debate. We have been discussing our notions of what is and is not illusion in our many comments on dualism and non-dualism. Let's not go into that again.

0 Replies

"reality" may be an illusion, but it's the only "reality" we got.

0 Replies

The God coming out of my workshop would be less mysterious than the Gods we have endured so far. He (or She, or It, or They) would lay out the rules for all of humanity at once, rather than arising in many different guises in non-technological backwaters around the globe, allowing non-believers to suspect that He is nothing more than a sheepherder's childish fantasy, embroiling the world in endless, unresolvable religious wars. And He would stick around after making His Holy Pronouncements for questions, so that we could know we were still on the course. And He would unleash severe punishments on all the would-be "interpreters" who bollix up the mission statement. With flames and stuff. And if the universe he created was as cruel and indifferent to humanity as the real universe is, He would be big enough to admit that "sh*t happens", instead of trying to blame all of His shortcomings on us.