Customer Discussions > Religion forum

"We do not know what God is. God...transcends being."


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 676-700 of 733 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on May 10, 2012 1:30:31 PM PDT
Leoncefalo says:
Does this suggest to you (as it does to me) that the operation of the quantum-scale world does not depend on the existence of a conscious observer?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
To probabilist, it is certain that all scales up to and including even cellular structures do not depend on the the existence of a conscious observer. This event only occurs provided that no other agent is introduced that effects the behavior of the cell, chemicals, molecules, atoms, sub-atomic structures down to the quantum level. By 'conscious' I assume you mean 'human' and not a machine.

kindly,
Leoncefalo

In reply to an earlier post on May 16, 2012 1:53:58 AM PDT
Conley Thorn says:
SS DOG: As a general question: How can one establish a correspondence between quantum and classical reality?'
doesn't that suggest that our understanding of QM is incomplete?

THORN: Indeed. So you've answered your own question. The cause-effect relationship will not be debauched. Einstein and I (and you?) will be vindicated. Quantum mystery is as yet little more than that, despite the predictive reliability of QM and QED. It is not a question awaiting some physical revelation. If the cause-effect relationship does not hold, then you and I are sleeping gods--or daemons of a sort--somehow stirred from our slumber to puzzle over an insoluble conundrum.

In reply to an earlier post on May 16, 2012 3:12:41 AM PDT
G. M. Seed says:
Typical example of the delusional aspect of the Dark Ages Lot. They attempt to explain the unknown with the even bigger unknown they call BigG.

In reply to an earlier post on May 16, 2012 10:54:27 AM PDT
Astrocat says:
I think Scotus was saying that "God" transcends mere physical being.

In reply to an earlier post on May 17, 2012 11:42:11 PM PDT
Conley Thorn says:
NANCY D.: I think Scotus was saying that "God" transcends mere physical being.

THORN: Yes; that's what he said. But is "physical" being somehow less than real or actual being? Is it possible that being can be quantized? Can a being barely be, and another fully be? Was Scotus--genius that he probably was--capable, considering the time of his thinking, able to ask himself such questions? And you, Nancy; have you wrestled successfully with the question of being, and concluded that it is possible to be without altogether being? If "God" somehow transcends being ("physical" or by any other modifier) does he be, or does he be not?

Posted on May 18, 2012 12:22:40 AM PDT
L. Turner says:
God is Spirit.

In reply to an earlier post on May 18, 2012 1:37:17 AM PDT
IFF - " The only meaningful knowledge of God is the mystical experience of Spirit. When the mind starts to interpret that experience, that's where the problems start. "

I suspect the same applies to Flegendorf. Who can say otherwise?

In reply to an earlier post on May 18, 2012 5:53:00 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 18, 2012 8:16:14 AM PDT
Astrocat says:
Conley, there is Spirit and there is Matter on the same continuum. You cannot have one without the other. So one cannot be only made of Matter without also being made of Spirit. Scotus may not have been aware of that, and was making a kind of separation, but I think he was also saying that God is more than Matter, which is, of course, correct.

In reply to an earlier post on May 18, 2012 6:55:47 AM PDT
D. S. Clark says:
Only those that can say. Apparently you can't. Thanks for your input.

In reply to an earlier post on May 18, 2012 8:25:04 AM PDT
Astrocat says:
Then there's synchronicity, which is always so delightful. I meditated this morning on sutra 4 of Book IV of Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. I apologize for the length, but this commentary says it much more clearly than I could. I've put in paragraph breaks to make it easier to read.

Sutra 4, Book IV: "The 'I am' consciousness is responsible for the creation of the organs through which the sense of individuality is enjoyed"

Commentary:
"Here we have the key to manifestation itself and the reason for all appearances. Just as long as the consciousness of any entity (solar, planetary or human) is outward going towards objects of desire, towards sentient existence, towards individual experience, and towards the life of sensuous perception and enjoyment, just so long will the vehicles or organs be created whereby desire can be satisfied, materialized existence can be enjoyed, and objects perceived.

This is the great illusion by which consciousness is glamoured, and as long as the glamour [illusion on the emotional plane] exerts any power, just so long will the Law of Rebirth bring the outward-going consciousness into manifestation upon the plane of materiality.

It is the will-to-be and desire for existence that swings outward into the light both the cosmic Christ, functioning on the material plane through the medium of the solar system, and the individual Christ, functioning through the medium of the human form.

In the early stages the 'I am' consciousness creates forms of matter inadequate for the full expression of the divine powers. As evolution proceeds these forms become increasingly suitable until the 'organs' created enable the spiritual man to enjoy the sense of individuality. When this stage is arrived at, there comes the great realization of illusion.

The consciousness awakes to the fact that in form and sense perception, and in the outward going tendency, lie no real joy or pleasure, and there starts a new effort which is characterized by a gradual withdrawal of the outward-going tendency and an abstraction of the spirit from out of the form."

Posted on Dec 30, 2012 11:29:14 AM PST
'probabilist says:
...

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 30, 2012 3:48:11 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 30, 2012 3:49:33 PM PST
L. Turner says:
The Bible says that God is Spirit. The Bible also says that we are to worship Him in spirit and truth. For those who are the elect of God, the Bible is the message by which the Holy Spirit typically convicts us of our sinful human nature. As a result we cry out to God to forgive us through Christ the Savior and Lord. Jesus said in John 3:3: You must be born again/from above.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 1:02:57 AM PST
Leoncefalo says:
@Nancy Davison. . .Well meditated and brings to mind the Old Testament decree of Yahweh as the "I AM who AM. "But as you mentioned, the FULLEST individuality must be reached BEFORE the
realization of Death approaching(the true life reached is consummated)and the Self returns inward to 'rebirth' or begin again the outward-going tendency. That returning inward is the spiritual expression of the Self as it 'reforms' 'rethinks' reposits' its new outward desires and goals.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 1:28:03 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 1:31:48 AM PST
Leoncefalo says:
@Thorn. . .. The Cause/Effect relationship is a classical physics concept and, as you noted, the C/E relationship does NOT hold in QM, and we ARE sleeping gods. You will remember that S.J. Gould saw the world of science and the world of religion as two sets of NON-intersecting magisteria, approaching each other asymptote to asymptote, but never fully touching.

The concept of Christ, in Christian theology says that the G-dman is the Mediator that UNITES these two bodies of knowledge. Christ comes into the exact spot where heaven(all quantum theories) and earth (the material world) meet. The human being is the 'correspondence' you seek between the quantum(heaven) and classical reality (established science). Christ is the perfection of that measuring process (Man(Christ) is the measure of all things) and makes the concept of G-d intelligible and comprehensible to humanity.

But in order to fully realize this 'correspondence' an ethical and moral factor is a part of this equation. Both the Old/New Testaments, and the other monotheistic faiths attest to this part of the equation. Not that evil is unable to enter the world by the same mechanism, but that Mankind is the only vessel that consciously prevents that from happening. It is this position that awards all whole persons the facility of free will. As for the issue of 'insoluble conundrum' the very act of 'awakening' from sleep is the ever-evolving solution. What we dream about today, we wake up to tomorrow.

kindly, Leoncefalo

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 5:38:39 AM PST
How does one go about determining if a particular bit of theology is actually true? Where is the objective reference point by which theology is measured, especially given that thousands of deities which humans have worshiped, and the hundreds (thousands?) of different religions / sects associated with those deities?

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 11:00:35 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 11:11:05 AM PST
Leoncefalo says:
@Michael Altarriba:. . . .the single characteristic that distinguishes Christian theology from all other bodies of beliefs is that it leaves ALL decisions up to the individual. That such a wholistic approach was envisioned by the coming of the Messiah in His perfection as Jesus Christ is the key to explaining why half the world's population has entrenched this model, GENETICALLY, into our Western culture.

Objectivity is the circumstantial world in which you live, and subjectivity is your very unique response to it. A particular bit of theology may NOT be true for you, but true for someone else. That is why Soren Kierkagaard wrote his famous piece, "The Crowd is UNTRUTH" the clarion warning that any established body of doctrine and dogma followed by the 'crowd' is, by definition, already the muzzle that stifles and kills the individual. Jesus said, "Without Me, you can do NOTHING." These are frightening words, which has been attested to by the thousands who have died for their faith and beliefs. ALL of theology is measured by the Individual person, and Jesus championed the individual always over the 'crowd.'

kindly, Leoncefalo

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 11:02:14 AM PST
Astrocat says:
Leon, that's a good way to put it. Soul, between lives, looks at what was accomplished, which goals were met, which qualities inculcated, and which still need to be developed. So, in the new incarnation, the most pressing of these goals are carried over, or, at least, the ones that can probably be met, given the world situation, the family, the body to be used during those years.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 12:51:07 PM PST
@Michael Altarriba:"

When responding to a particular post, if you click on the "Reply to this post" link found at the bottom of the post in question, your response will be marked as being a response to that post. This helps reduce confusion and misunderstanding.

". . . .the single characteristic that distinguishes Christian theology from all other bodies of beliefs is that it leaves ALL decisions up to the individual."

A. That's a rather sweeping statement. Have you or someone else completed a survey of every religion, every sect so as to determine if your claim is in fact true?

B. In my opinion, theism offers us choices in much the same way as someone who puts a loaded gun to one's temple and gives one the choice of "obey or die"... except that Christianity threatens us with eternal torture if we don't obey and believe.

"That such a wholistic approach was envisioned by the coming of the Messiah in His perfection as Jesus Christ is the key to explaining why half the world's population has entrenched this model, GENETICALLY, into our Western culture."

Is this actually what you meant to say?

First, the term you're looking for is "holistic". Second, the U.S. population is just 4.52 % of the world's population. Third, culture has genetics only in the loosest of metaphorical senses.

"Objectivity is the circumstantial world in which you live, and subjectivity is your very unique response to it."

I'd put it this way: We appear to cohabit a physical reality whose characteristics are not a function of what we know or believe. We each sense our reality via our limited, biased senses. We each have a subjective set of beliefs as to the nature of reality.

"A particular bit of theology may NOT be true for you, but true for someone else. That is why Soren Kierkagaard wrote his famous piece, "The Crowd is UNTRUTH" the clarion warning that any established body of doctrine and dogma followed by the 'crowd' is, by definition, already the muzzle that stifles and kills the individual."

Then what distinguishes theology from mere belief?

"Jesus said, "Without Me, you can do NOTHING." These are frightening words, which has been attested to by the thousands who have died for their faith and beliefs."

They may have believed it. Why should I?

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 1:33:34 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 1:40:37 PM PST
Leoncefalo says:
@Michael Altarriba. . . .the individual person ALWAYS remains with two choices - either YOU, the individual change the world, or the WORLD changes you. If there is no RISK involved, there is no choice to be made. No pain- no gain. Your analogy of the gun to the head and eternal fire are just different DEGREES of risk -BUT RISK nonetheless.

Michael, I am not just speaking of the US, which is only a small part of Western Culture. I am speaking of all Christian nations which comprise about HALF of the population of the world. You might just note, by coincidence, that democracies are much more prevalent in these nations, than in those intrinsically 'Eastern' or Oriental [with the singular exception of India, the largest democracy on the planet.]

Theology ['the logic of G-d] consists of countless suppositions about who and what the concept of G-d comprises. You as an individual believe any, all, some, part of these suppositions, and those choices, made freely by you constitute YOUR body of belief.

You said 'they believed it -why should I? The choice is ALWAYS yours - the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament marks out in exquisite detail what the benefits are in belief. it is YOU who must decide whether you will take the risk - the 'leap of faith' that CANNOT BE measured objectively. That is why science cannot account for beliefs.

I would say quite freely, openly and with a 99% degree of certitude that a set of beliefs that has been around for more than 5,000 years,(3,000 OT +2,000 NT) is GENETICALLY ENCODED in the DNA/RNA of BILLIONS of people. This should cause some secular scientists a great deal of anxiety about PROOF. I don't have to argue here that characteristics and behavior are genetically passed on to succeeding generations. This has been proven an infinite number of times in animals. The infant 'science' of genetics has yet to begin to identify certain genes that cause certain behaviors. BELIEFS constitute characteristics OF behavior, passed down from parents to their children and progeny. Otherwise Protestants would raise their children Jewish, Hindus would celebrate Mass, and Buddhists would accept Jesus as their Messiah.

I don't have to remind you here that KISMET, or PREDESTINATION plays a major role in the Eastern/Oriental religions - that a certain destiny is PREORDAINED for you, and you cannot change this. Not so in Christianity, which leaves your destiny up to the CHOICES you make, and for no other REASON or compulsion from the outside. With the discovery by scientists of quantum mechanics, we now have a profoundly deep look into the 'movement' of G-d - which, as we all know from Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, we CANNOT know simultaneously. That indeterminism has been enough to shatter all concepts of classical physics since Democritus admission that an 'atom' existed.[600B.C]
So you see that now that the individual has true access to the divine movement,[it was ALWAYS there- we just didn't call it atoms/particles/subatomic behavior/energy. . etc.. . .

kindly, Leoncefalo

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 1:47:35 PM PST
"@Michael Altarriba"

Seriously... "Reply to this post" is your friend and ours. I know of no good reason for not using it.

". . . .the individual person ALWAYS remains with two choices - either YOU, the individual change the world, or the WORLD changes you."

Also, "ALL CAPS" is considered to be the equivalent of shouting, and is not recommended.

Anyway...

Most people do some of each. There's no need to choose only one or the other.

"If there is no RISK involved, there is no choice to be made."

When I choose between chocolate and vanilla ice cream, both of which I like, what risk am I taking?

"No pain- no gain. Your analogy of the gun to the head and eternal fire are just different DEGREES of risk -BUT RISK nonetheless. "

Uh huh... Pardon me if I see a big difference between "Gun held to head" and "Oh know, this ice cream isn't *quite* as tasty as I expected."

"Michael, I am not just speaking of the US, which is only a small part of Western Culture. I am speaking of all Christian nations which comprise about HALF of the population of the world. You might just note, by coincidence, that democracies are much more prevalent in these nations, than in those intrinsically 'Eastern' or Oriental [with the singular exception of India, the largest democracy on the planet.]"

And the significance of what you yourself call a coincidence would be what, exactly?

"Theology ['the logic of G-d] consists of countless suppositions about who and what the concept of G-d comprises. You as an individual believe any, all, some, part of these suppositions, and those choices, made freely by you constitute YOUR body of belief. "

So, you're saying that theology is just arbitrary belief, then? If so, then that's a refreshing admission.

"You said 'they believed it -why should I? The choice is ALWAYS yours - the teachings of Jesus in the New Testament marks out in exquisite detail what the benefits are in belief."

And I should believe that these benefits actually exist because... why, exactly?

"it is YOU who must decide whether you will take the risk - the 'leap of faith' that CANNOT BE measured objectively. That is why science cannot account for beliefs. "

I hope you aren't implying some appeal to Pascal's Wager here... I really don't.

"I would say quite freely, openly and with a 99% degree of certitude that a set of beliefs that has been around for more than 5,000 years,(3,000 OT +2,000 NT) is GENETICALLY ENCODED in the DNA/RNA of BILLIONS of people."

No, it really isn't. Your understanding of how genetics, biological evolution or cultural evolution actually works is in error.

"This should cause some secular scientists a great deal of anxiety about PROOF."

Your understanding of science would appear to be flawed as well. Science operates on evidence, not proof.

"I don't have to argue here that characteristics and behavior are genetically assed on to succeeding generations. This has been proven an infinite number of times in animals."

Yeah, you really, *really* don't have an accurate understanding of how evolution works. You really don't.

I'm just going to stop here...

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 2:05:03 PM PST
Astrocat says:
Leon, there are, according to the surveys, about 2 billion Christians in the world today. That's not even a third of the world population. How do you figure that they constitute "half of the population of the world"?

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 2:17:11 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Dec 31, 2012 2:24:55 PM PST
Leoncefalo says:
I have read Darwin's "On the Origin of Species," [cover to cover] so I have a comprehensive idea how G-d's plan works through evolution.

By the way - evidence = proof, because again, DEGREES of evidence make proofs-the best evidence = the best proofs. .

I notice that you find errors everywhere, yet you fail to present theories or suppositions [established or hypothetical] that counter or disprove my statements. Your judgments lack substance because they appear as opinions, not as transmitters of valid facts. Your 'science' is in need of substantial 'evidence,' - by your own admission.

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 2:20:26 PM PST
Leoncefalo says:
NANCY, I stand corrected. . . .thank you for the correct number,.. .which still constitutes a major influence on the cultural, social, economic and 'aggressive' behaviors of millions and millions of persons.

Posted on Dec 31, 2012 2:34:16 PM PST
Leoncefalo says:
@Altarriba. . . .BELIEFS are NOT arbitrary. . . .they are the product of a reasoning process that arrives at a very specific SET OF BELIEFS because of a specific goal that the beliefs satisfy. There are actually CORE beliefs, which never change, and PERIPHERAL beliefs, circumstantial conditions that are mitigated or potentiated depending on the circumstances - but always referred to the CORE beliefs in any situation. Btw, I use capitalization as emphasis, much like underlining highlights specific ideas and concepts.

kindly, Leoncefalo

In reply to an earlier post on Dec 31, 2012 2:58:33 PM PST
"By the way - evidence = proof, because again, DEGREES of evidence make proofs-the best evidence = the best proofs."

The scientific method operates on the basis of evidence, not proof.

A proof is a logical structure which establishes a relationship between a particular set of axioms and a particular conclusion via a set of formal relations within a formal system. We have proofs in symbolic logic, geometry, etc., which are all formal systems with specific axioms and operations over those axioms.

No, varying degrees of evidence do not make proofs. That's simply untrue.

And, modern evolutionary theory (which has its roots in the idea of Charles Darwin... as formulated *150 years ago*, so we've learned a thing or two since then) neither indicates the presence or action of, nor does it require the presence or action of a deity or deities.

Finally, would it kill you to click the "Reply to this post" link when replying to a post, or do you have some reason for refusing to use that feature? Why make things harder for yourself and everyone else?
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Religion forum
Participants:  41
Total posts:  733
Initial post:  Apr 17, 2012
Latest post:  May 1, 2014

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

Search Customer Discussions