< 1 2 3 4 > 
 
   
 

A New Concept of God

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15614
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
22 August 2018 15:38
 
EN - 22 August 2018 02:10 PM

Getting back to the OP, this thread has made me think. Thanks for starting it. I’m just playing with ideas here, so don’t take me too seriously (not that anyone would). Thinking of God as Consciousness in some respect made me think about it in the context of Christian theology.  You can think of the Father as just pure consciousness. He gets lonely so he “begets” (not creates, but brings into existence as a differentiation of himself) a Son - self-consciousness.  This at least gives some feedback, some comfort. Then with his larger creation he becomes aware of others. So think of the Holy Spirit as “others-consciousness” (the Holy Spirit’s main function in the NT is to indwell believers).  The consciousness we have as creations is a part of God’s consciousness, so in a sense we are “gods”. (John 10:34).  God lets us experience some of his existential crisis.  In the end, he brings us all back to himself, so to speak, and God is “all in all.” (I Corinthians 15:28) The divine existential crisis is resolved by God giving and receiving love, as he is now “love” itself. (I John 4:8)

Yeah, kinda weird, but I had fun thinking about it.

We’ll make a good Neoplatonist of you yet, Bruce.

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  866
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
22 August 2018 16:18
 
EN - 22 August 2018 02:10 PM

Getting back to the OP, this thread has made me think. Thanks for starting it. I’m just playing with ideas here, so don’t take me too seriously (not that anyone would). Thinking of God as Consciousness in some respect made me think about it in the context of Christian theology.  You can think of the Father as just pure consciousness. He gets lonely so he “begets” (not creates, but brings into existence as a differentiation of himself) a Son - self-consciousness.  This at least gives some feedback, some comfort. Then with his larger creation he becomes aware of others. So think of the Holy Spirit as “others-consciousness” (the Holy Spirit’s main function in the NT is to indwell believers).  The consciousness we have as creations is a part of God’s consciousness, so in a sense we are “gods”. (John 10:34).  God lets us experience some of his existential crisis.  In the end, he brings us all back to himself, so to speak, and God is “all in all.” (I Corinthians 15:28) The divine existential crisis is resolved by God giving and receiving love, as he is now “love” itself. (I John 4:8)

Yeah, kinda weird, but I had fun thinking about it.

My overall experiences using various psychedelics (and my rudimentary knowledge of various religions) have led me to believe a few things in regards to what any “Almighty” entity must be. The most salient of the qualia which I would associate with any Universal being are consciousness, energy, gravity, and intention. That said, I think that consciousness is more appropriately seen as a sort of existential pilot light than any mystical facet of the human condition. I’m also aware of how little I can claim to know with certainty.

Either way, I’m pretty sure trying to live one’s live as a decent human being is tantamount to being “good with God.”

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21116
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
22 August 2018 16:27
 

“Intention” sort of implies intelligence.  A rudimentary form of intention is simply the will to live and to assert one’s existence. A baby tackles life and proclaims “I’m here, everyone.”  I see the statement “I am who I am” as a statement of both consciousness and intention, and therefore intelligence.

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  866
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
22 August 2018 16:42
 
EN - 22 August 2018 04:27 PM

“Intention” sort of implies intelligence.  A rudimentary form of intention is simply the will to live and to assert one’s existence. A baby tackles life and proclaims “I’m here, everyone.”  I see the statement “I am who I am” as a statement of both consciousness and intention, and therefore intelligence.

In English, sure, that argument holds up fine. I see it as being far too anthropocentric. Intentionality really only means that cause and effect exists, not that we know what the difference is, or that we’ll ever have the potential to.

 
 
Cheshire Cat
 
Avatar
 
 
Cheshire Cat
Total Posts:  1201
Joined  01-11-2014
 
 
 
22 August 2018 16:53
 
ubique13 - 22 August 2018 04:18 PM

My overall experiences using various psychedelics (and my rudimentary knowledge of various religions) have led me to believe a few things in regards to what any “Almighty” entity must be. The most salient of the qualia which I would associate with any Universal being are consciousness, energy, gravity, and intention. That said, I think that consciousness is more appropriately seen as a sort of existential pilot light than any mystical facet of the human condition. I’m also aware of how little I can claim to know with certainty.

Either way, I’m pretty sure trying to live one’s live as a decent human being is tantamount to being “good with God.”

Lately I’ve been checking out the ideas of David Chalmers and the notion of Panpsychism, (The doctrine or belief that everything material, however small, has an element of individual consciousness.) Even Max Tegmark, the physicist and cosmologist, is theorizing about it. What you wrote above reminded somewhat of panpsychism.

And you’re right about love. I’ve stolen Jan’s Carl Sagan quote here: For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around EN’s theory.

 
 
bbearren
 
Avatar
 
 
bbearren
Total Posts:  3624
Joined  20-11-2013
 
 
 
22 August 2018 17:12
 

First let me get the mathematical paradox out of the way.  It is not possible to divide to zero, just as it is not possible to count to infinity; if you’re still working on it, you’re not there yet.  Any “paradox” that relies on that is no paradox, just a play on words.  Doesn’t really matter how many people are confused by it.  All it takes to blow it up is to just run the experiment.  Put a turtle and a sprinter on the track, start the timers, let the turtle get a head start, then give the sprinter the signal to go.  Sprinter passes turtle, end of paradox.

Second, Job, David, Jesus and Paul all deny a separation of god from man.  “Who appointed him over the earth?  Who put him in charge of the whole world?  If it were his intention and he withdrew his spirit and breath, all humanity would perish together and mankind would return to the dust.”  Job 34:13-15 (NIV)

“You have searched me, Lord, and you know me.  You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar.  You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways.  Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely.  You hem me in behind and before, and you lay your hand upon me.  Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”  Psalm 139:1-6 (NIV)

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.  May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”  John 17:20-21 (NIV)

“God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.  ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’”  Acts 17:27-29 (NIV)

 
 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  866
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
22 August 2018 17:30
 
Cheshire Cat - 22 August 2018 04:53 PM
ubique13 - 22 August 2018 04:18 PM

My overall experiences using various psychedelics (and my rudimentary knowledge of various religions) have led me to believe a few things in regards to what any “Almighty” entity must be. The most salient of the qualia which I would associate with any Universal being are consciousness, energy, gravity, and intention. That said, I think that consciousness is more appropriately seen as a sort of existential pilot light than any mystical facet of the human condition. I’m also aware of how little I can claim to know with certainty.

Either way, I’m pretty sure trying to live one’s live as a decent human being is tantamount to being “good with God.”

Lately I’ve been checking out the ideas of David Chalmers and the notion of Panpsychism, (The doctrine or belief that everything material, however small, has an element of individual consciousness.) Even Max Tegmark, the physicist and cosmologist, is theorizing about it. What you wrote above reminded somewhat of panpsychism.

And you’re right about love. I’ve stolen Jan’s Carl Sagan quote here: For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.

I’m still trying to wrap my head around EN’s theory.

Try wrapping your head around this one (do pay attention to each numerical value assigned): Physicists create image of the square of a wave function of a hydrogen molecule

bbearren - 22 August 2018 05:12 PM

First let me get the mathematical paradox out of the way.  It is not possible to divide to zero, just as it is not possible to count to infinity; if you’re still working on it, you’re not there yet.  Any “paradox” that relies on that is no paradox, just a play on words.  Doesn’t really matter how many people are confused by it.  All it takes to blow it up is to just run the experiment.  Put a turtle and a sprinter on the track, start the timers, let the turtle get a head start, then give the sprinter the signal to go.  Sprinter passes turtle, end of paradox.

Second, Job, David, Jesus and Paul all deny a separation of god from man.  “Who appointed him over the earth?  Who put him in charge of the whole world?  If it were his intention and he withdrew his spirit and breath, all humanity would perish together and mankind would return to the dust.”  Job 34:13-15 (NIV)

“You have searched me, Lord, and you know me.  You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar.  You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways.  Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely.  You hem me in behind and before, and you lay your hand upon me.  Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”  Psalm 139:1-6 (NIV)

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.  May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”  John 17:20-21 (NIV)

“God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.  ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’”  Acts 17:27-29 (NIV)

Mathematics is man’s best attempt to emulate a naturally occurring pattern. It is an invention of man, hence: Arabic numerals. It’s not paradoxical as soon as you recognize that ‘zero’ and ‘infinity’ are two sides of the same coin.

 
 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15614
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
22 August 2018 18:03
 
ubique13 - 22 August 2018 04:18 PM
EN - 22 August 2018 02:10 PM

Getting back to the OP, this thread has made me think. Thanks for starting it. I’m just playing with ideas here, so don’t take me too seriously (not that anyone would). Thinking of God as Consciousness in some respect made me think about it in the context of Christian theology.  You can think of the Father as just pure consciousness. He gets lonely so he “begets” (not creates, but brings into existence as a differentiation of himself) a Son - self-consciousness.  This at least gives some feedback, some comfort. Then with his larger creation he becomes aware of others. So think of the Holy Spirit as “others-consciousness” (the Holy Spirit’s main function in the NT is to indwell believers).  The consciousness we have as creations is a part of God’s consciousness, so in a sense we are “gods”. (John 10:34).  God lets us experience some of his existential crisis.  In the end, he brings us all back to himself, so to speak, and God is “all in all.” (I Corinthians 15:28) The divine existential crisis is resolved by God giving and receiving love, as he is now “love” itself. (I John 4:8)

Yeah, kinda weird, but I had fun thinking about it.

My overall experiences using various psychedelics (and my rudimentary knowledge of various religions) have led me to believe a few things in regards to what any “Almighty” entity must be. The most salient of the qualia which I would associate with any Universal being are consciousness, energy, gravity, and intention. That said, I think that consciousness is more appropriately seen as a sort of existential pilot light than any mystical facet of the human condition. I’m also aware of how little I can claim to know with certainty.

Either way, I’m pretty sure trying to live one’s live as a decent human being is tantamount to being “good with God.”

Well, the old man with the long white beard might demonstrate gravitas. That’s sort of gravity.

 
burt
 
Avatar
 
 
burt
Total Posts:  15614
Joined  17-12-2006
 
 
 
22 August 2018 18:18
 
bbearren - 22 August 2018 05:12 PM

First let me get the mathematical paradox out of the way.  It is not possible to divide to zero, just as it is not possible to count to infinity; if you’re still working on it, you’re not there yet.  Any “paradox” that relies on that is no paradox, just a play on words.  Doesn’t really matter how many people are confused by it.  All it takes to blow it up is to just run the experiment.  Put a turtle and a sprinter on the track, start the timers, let the turtle get a head start, then give the sprinter the signal to go.  Sprinter passes turtle, end of paradox.

Second, Job, David, Jesus and Paul all deny a separation of god from man.  “Who appointed him over the earth?  Who put him in charge of the whole world?  If it were his intention and he withdrew his spirit and breath, all humanity would perish together and mankind would return to the dust.”  Job 34:13-15 (NIV)

“You have searched me, Lord, and you know me.  You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar.  You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways.  Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely.  You hem me in behind and before, and you lay your hand upon me.  Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”  Psalm 139:1-6 (NIV)

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.  May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”  John 17:20-21 (NIV)

“God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.  ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’”  Acts 17:27-29 (NIV)

The paradoxes are not meant to relate to what we know of physical reality. They refer to issues of how we can mathematically represent reality at the deepest level. How can our thought correspond to reality. From a practical point there is not issue, it’s a matter of how we think about the world (and is one of the fundamentals underling practical tools like calculus).

Regarding separation, the quotes given basically say that God is with us in all things. The question of separation is more subtle and goes to the difference between Christian (and to some extent Jewish) mysticism and all other forms of mysticism. In the latter, a person attains direct unity with the deity (this was a direct effect of the ancient mystery religions such as the Eleusinian Mysteries). The participant, if successful in the process, became identical with the deity worshipped (a god who had undergone the experience of torture, death, and rebirth). In Christianity, this isn’t possible because the deity isn’t a mythical spiritual creature but is Jesus, an actual historical being. So the direct identification isn’t possible, instead one can come into a relation of compassion, sympathy, fellowship. Or in other terms, you can’t become God, but if you get to the realization, you cannot not be with God.

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  866
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
22 August 2018 18:34
 
burt - 22 August 2018 06:18 PM
bbearren - 22 August 2018 05:12 PM

First let me get the mathematical paradox out of the way.  It is not possible to divide to zero, just as it is not possible to count to infinity; if you’re still working on it, you’re not there yet.  Any “paradox” that relies on that is no paradox, just a play on words.  Doesn’t really matter how many people are confused by it.  All it takes to blow it up is to just run the experiment.  Put a turtle and a sprinter on the track, start the timers, let the turtle get a head start, then give the sprinter the signal to go.  Sprinter passes turtle, end of paradox.

Second, Job, David, Jesus and Paul all deny a separation of god from man.  “Who appointed him over the earth?  Who put him in charge of the whole world?  If it were his intention and he withdrew his spirit and breath, all humanity would perish together and mankind would return to the dust.”  Job 34:13-15 (NIV)

“You have searched me, Lord, and you know me.  You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar.  You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways.  Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely.  You hem me in behind and before, and you lay your hand upon me.  Such knowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”  Psalm 139:1-6 (NIV)

“My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.  May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.”  John 17:20-21 (NIV)

“God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us.  ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’”  Acts 17:27-29 (NIV)

The paradoxes are not meant to relate to what we know of physical reality. They refer to issues of how we can mathematically represent reality at the deepest level. How can our thought correspond to reality. From a practical point there is not issue, it’s a matter of how we think about the world (and is one of the fundamentals underling practical tools like calculus).

Regarding separation, the quotes given basically say that God is with us in all things. The question of separation is more subtle and goes to the difference between Christian (and to some extent Jewish) mysticism and all other forms of mysticism. In the latter, a person attains direct unity with the deity (this was a direct effect of the ancient mystery religions such as the Eleusinian Mysteries). The participant, if successful in the process, became identical with the deity worshipped (a god who had undergone the experience of torture, death, and rebirth). In Christianity, this isn’t possible because the deity isn’t a mythical spiritual creature but is Jesus, an actual historical being. So the direct identification isn’t possible, instead one can come into a relation of compassion, sympathy, fellowship. Or in other terms, you can’t become God, but if you get to the realization, you cannot not be with God.

I will never cease to be amazed when I’m told how Judaism works. The Rabbi Moses ben Maimon (aka Maimonides), who was Grand Vizier to Saladin, was also the single most important contributor to contemporary Jewish Philosophy. Negative theology is the method he used to try and determine the characteristics that could be applied to whatever it is that may be divine.

Man is imperfect, therefore God must be perfect. Man is engendered, therefore God must be disengendered. Man is deceitful, therefore God must be truthful, etc.

I’m not going to even bother with the lack of historical evidence pertaining to the Nazarene, or why he may actually have been executed.

 
 
Chaz
 
Avatar
 
 
Chaz
Total Posts:  129
Joined  24-02-2018
 
 
 
23 August 2018 00:33
 

It went off the rails again. SO back to the OP, I like thinking of God as a pissed off child that’s been grounded to his room with no TV and we’re his only form of entertainment. It makes way more sense to imagine him as a sadistic kid with a magnifying glass at an anthill.

 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21116
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
23 August 2018 01:38
 
Chaz - 23 August 2018 12:33 AM

It went off the rails again. SO back to the OP, I like thinking of God as a pissed off child that’s been grounded to his room with no TV and we’re his only form of entertainment. It makes way more sense to imagine him as a sadistic kid with a magnifying glass at an anthill.

It all comes down to whether there is any actual point in all the crap we go through down here. Are we learning lessons or developing in some way that we can benefit from in the future? If so, then God is not a pissed off child but more like a very strict teacher.  If there is no second chance, so to speak, then the pissed off child analogy may be more accurate.

 
Chaz
 
Avatar
 
 
Chaz
Total Posts:  129
Joined  24-02-2018
 
 
 
23 August 2018 03:21
 
EN - 23 August 2018 01:38 AM

It all comes down to whether there is any actual point in all the crap we go through down here. Are we learning lessons or developing in some way that we can benefit from in the future? If so, then God is not a pissed off child but more like a very strict teacher.  If there is no second chance, so to speak, then the pissed off child analogy may be more accurate.

By second chance, do you mean the afterlife? I’ll share my idea of that with you. The only way eternal bliss makes sense to me is for consciousness to stop. It seems obvious to me that if heaven is real, the promise of eternal bliss isn’t a possibility. The only way it makes sense is if heaven means your death is the end, and hell means your death is just the beginning. Can you think of a worse punishment than to have to walk the earth as a ghost? Solitary confinement is the harshest punishment we have, now add the fact that you can see the ones you love, but no matter how hard you try, you’ll never reach them. That’s a sadistic twist

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  866
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
23 August 2018 05:20
 
EN - 23 August 2018 01:38 AM
Chaz - 23 August 2018 12:33 AM

It went off the rails again. SO back to the OP, I like thinking of God as a pissed off child that’s been grounded to his room with no TV and we’re his only form of entertainment. It makes way more sense to imagine him as a sadistic kid with a magnifying glass at an anthill.

It all comes down to whether there is any actual point in all the crap we go through down here. Are we learning lessons or developing in some way that we can benefit from in the future? If so, then God is not a pissed off child but more like a very strict teacher.  If there is no second chance, so to speak, then the pissed off child analogy may be more accurate.

Apologies for the slight derailing.

To my mind, the ‘Book of Job’ is one of the most telling in regards to determining the character traits of God, as is portrayed in scripture. In portraying God and Satan (The Sheitan) as what can basically be described as gambling buddies, whose collective interests are to discover just how much suffering that Job can endure before renouncing his faith, God can be seen as a rather masochistic entity that cares more about being worshipped than the well-being of “His” worshipers. And Job was a righteous man, so I’m not sure what that says for the rest of us.

 
 
EN
 
Avatar
 
 
EN
Total Posts:  21116
Joined  11-03-2007
 
 
 
23 August 2018 06:03
 
ubique13 - 23 August 2018 05:20 AM
EN - 23 August 2018 01:38 AM
Chaz - 23 August 2018 12:33 AM

It went off the rails again. SO back to the OP, I like thinking of God as a pissed off child that’s been grounded to his room with no TV and we’re his only form of entertainment. It makes way more sense to imagine him as a sadistic kid with a magnifying glass at an anthill.

It all comes down to whether there is any actual point in all the crap we go through down here. Are we learning lessons or developing in some way that we can benefit from in the future? If so, then God is not a pissed off child but more like a very strict teacher.  If there is no second chance, so to speak, then the pissed off child analogy may be more accurate.

Apologies for the slight derailing.

To my mind, the ‘Book of Job’ is one of the most telling in regards to determining the character traits of God, as is portrayed in scripture. In portraying God and Satan (The Sheitan) as what can basically be described as gambling buddies, whose collective interests are to discover just how much suffering that Job can endure before renouncing his faith, God can be seen as a rather masochistic entity that cares more about being worshipped than the well-being of “His” worshipers. And Job was a righteous man, so I’m not sure what that says for the rest of us.

For the rest of us it’s better to be a bit unrighteous so that you 1) stay off the radar; and 2) rely on grace rather that personal righteousness. Righteousness didn’t help Job.

 
 < 1 2 3 4 >