God botherers - are you insane?

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]I can get this without recourse to a higher being.

Yes.

The fact that people 'experience' different appearing deities is more due to the fact that culturally they have been indoctrinated with different ideas of God. Their mystical 'experiences' are of course nothing more than delusions based upon expectations.

“Different appearing ...[text shortened]...

EDIT: I don't believe in the supernatural, Howard. It's not how I use any of these terms.[/b]

Yes, not the Zen Buddhists.

As I understand it, they meditate to reach a state of nothingness, where their minds are encluttered by concepts; a state of being and not being.

Quite what mystical experience is ever had in this state, is hard to comprehend :-)

Originally posted by howardgee
Yes, not the Zen Buddhists.

As I understand it, they meditate to reach a state of nothingness, where their minds are encluttered by concepts; a state of being and not being.

Quite what mystical experience is ever had in this state, is hard to comprehend :-)

Ya. I personally have always had problems with the Zen talk (that is, the talk of some Zennists) of “beyond being and not-being…” Too metaphysically complicated… I just think of it as “clear mind.”

Quite what mystical experience is ever had in this state, is hard to comprehend :-)

LOL! Absolutely. That’s why I use that terrible word “ineffable!” But I am becoming more Zen all the time.

I have a hypothesis that, in any such experience, the brain immediately is trying to “translate” the ineffable into effable categories (hence, images, auditions, etc.), and that the subsequent descriptions reflect this translation. Hence I am rejecting the idea of a (divine?) revelation that is simply received as such, and can then be accurately articulated. This means that any description from a given perspective includes as an element the translation of the perceiver. And this translation may be affected by expectations…

In Zen, of course, one ought not to cling to such things.

Thanks, Howard: you’re helping me to clarify my own thinking on this…

Originally posted by vistesd
Ya. I personally have always had problems with the Zen talk (that is, the talk of some Zennists) of “beyond being and not-being…” Too metaphysically complicated… I just think of it as “clear mind.”

[b]Quite what mystical experience is ever had in this state, is hard to comprehend :-)

LOL! Absolutely. That’s why I use that terrible word “ineffa ...[text shortened]... ng[/i] to such things.

Thanks, Howard: you’re helping me to clarify my own thinking on this…[/b]

No worries. Good luck!

What is clear, however is that the evidence you gave, does not support LuciferH's assertion that mystical experiences are evidence for God's existence.

Originally posted by howardgee
No worries. Good luck!

What is clear, however is that the evidence you gave, does not support LuciferH's assertion that mystical experiences are evidence for God's existence.

There’s definitely a language problem in all this, and I frankly haven’t figured out how to overcome it. In all the major religions there is a stream commonly called the “perennial philosophy” which is basically monistic. In some of the religions people in this stream use the word “God,” but do not mean a supernatural being—they mean something like the Tao in Taoism or Zen, or Brahman in Advaita Vedanta. That is how D.T. Suzuki was trying to use it, for example. And sometimes, because I’ve spent so much time with this stuff, I simply assume the terminology. But it does become confusing (and sometimes maybe deliberately so—to forestall charges of “heresy” ), and I realize that I have been careless about it.

Originally posted by howardgee
Here are some symptoms of acute schizophrenia as noted in a religious believer:

"distorted reality, perceptual disturbances, auditory and visual hallucinations and the presence of paranoia"

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/suspect-is-mentally-disturbed/2005/11/15/1132016796593.html

If you think God exists, or have seen or heard him or worry abo ...[text shortened]... s,
then please go to your nearest asylum and ask to be treated as insane.

Because you are.

Hurtling towards global climate catastrophe...blowing people up to bring peace to the world...trying to find happiness in surrounding ourselves with material goods....sending men to the moon and thinking we have achieved 'great' things when half the world is in poverty....glorifying romantic marriage and then half of us divorcing...dealing with our angst by pumping ourselves full of alcohol, nicotine, drugs,prozac, food.....knowing our leaders lie to us but still voting for them...etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

If this is the 'sanity' of the world, I'll take God's insanity any day! I'm insane and proud of it!

Originally posted by knightmeister
Hurtling towards global climate catastrophe...blowing people up to bring peace to the world...trying to find happiness in surrounding ourselves with material goods....sending men to the moon and thinking we have achieved 'great' things when half the world is in poverty....glorifying romantic marriage and then half of us divorcing...dealing with our ang ...[text shortened]... the 'sanity' of the world, I'll take God's insanity any day! I'm insane and proud of it!

If God created this world, then it is God's insanity.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
If God created this world, then it [b]is God's insanity.[/b]God

If you had look a little closer then you would have seen that I referred to things that men do. So unless you think that God is 100% responsible for men's actions 100% of the time (in which case we would be mere robots-which is not Christian theology anyhow) then God is not responsible. Of course you can cry out "It's all God's fault , not us mister it was him he did it , we didn't do it!" and absolve men of all responsibility but that's the easy way out. Is this how you live your life.? Re-think please.

Originally posted by knightmeister
Hurtling towards global climate catastrophe...blowing people up to bring peace to the world...trying to find happiness in surrounding ourselves with material goods....sending men to the moon and thinking we have achieved 'great' things when half the world is in poverty....glorifying romantic marriage and then half of us divorcing...dealing with our ang ...[text shortened]... the 'sanity' of the world, I'll take God's insanity any day! I'm insane and proud of it!

Pride is a sin.

Originally posted by knightmeister
If you had look a little closer then you would have seen that I referred to things that men do. So unless you think that God is 100% responsible for men's actions 100% of the time (in which case we would be mere robots-which is not Christian theology anyhow) then God is not responsible. Of course you can cry out "It's all God's fault , not us mister it ...[text shortened]... onsibility but that's the easy way out. Is this how you live your life.? Re-think please.

We were made in God's image so unless you think women aren't God's creation or that God is rather freaky ( pardon the pun)looking. so yes we all do what is expected of us by your God.

Originally posted by frogstomp
Pride is a sin.

..and your point is....?

Originally posted by knightmeister
If you had look a little closer then you would have seen that I referred to things that men do. So unless you think that God is 100% responsible for men's actions 100% of the time (in which case we would be mere robots-which is not Christian theology anyhow) then God is not responsible. Of course you can cry out "It's all God's fault , not us mister it ...[text shortened]... onsibility but that's the easy way out. Is this how you live your life.? Re-think please.

Would you give a knife to a murderer, knowing full well that he'd use it to kill someone?

Well, allegedly your omniscient, omnipotent God did just that. He made humans, knowing full well in advance that humans were going to do wicked and evil things.

Rather than accept that God is a knowing accessory and accomplice for all kinds of evil acts, perhaps even an instigator of them, I prefer the more logical conclusion that an omniscient, omnipotent, morally perfect God does not exist, because he never would have made a world such as this.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
Would you give a knife to a murderer, knowing full well that he'd use it to kill someone?

Well, allegedly your omniscient, omnipotent God did just that. He made humans, knowing full well in advance that humans were going to do wicked and evil things.

Rather than accept that God is a knowing accessory and accomplice for all kinds of evil acts, pe ...[text shortened]... ent, morally perfect God does not exist, because he never would have made a world such as this.

I'm sorry to be so brutal with you but this is Kindergarden theology. God must have known that giving us free will could have had all sorts of negative consequences like the fact that we might fall out of fellowship with him. However , he thought it a worthwhile risk to do it because without freedom there can be no love or sense of being alive.
He could have made us robots and controlled the whole deal from start to finish but instead decided to give us the gift of autonomy and the freedom to love (or hate), to make real moral decisions (which implies the possibility of doing evil) and be truely alive and human, sentient. God took a risk in making a real world with real people who could do beautiful things or terrible things. You feel it was not worth the risk and would have prefered the robot scenario. I feel the risk was worth it. Without it I would not feel truely alive , I would not know what it was to love and commit to a real relationship with anyone.
If you have ever seen the film "invasion of the body snatchers" with Donald Sutherland you will understand the point. So by all means ask God to take away our freedom and wrap us up in the blissful, ignorance of cotton wool world , but don't use it as a reason to say he doesn't exist without understanding why he might have done what he has done. God ain't 'easy' . Get used to it.

Originally posted by knightmeister
I'm sorry to be so brutal with you but this is Kindergarden theology. God must have known that giving us free will could have had all sorts of negative consequences like the fact that we might fall out of fellowship with him. However , he thought it a worthwhile risk to do it because without freedom there can be no love or sense of being alive.
He co ...[text shortened]... nderstanding why he might have done what he has done. God ain't 'easy' . Get used to it.

If this is Kindergarten theology, then obviously, you never graduated.

God is incapable of taking risks. He allegedly knows what will happen before it actually does happen. (I almost hate to spoil this argument for you, after counting how many times you used it in your post!)

If I stop a rapist from raping, I have not denied him free will. I have merely prevented him from succeeding at what he has willed to do. God could do the same. Your 'free will' argument is bunk.

"He could have made us robots and controlled the whole deal from start to finish...

If he's omnipotent and omniscient, he did control the whole deal from start to finish.

Talking with "God's followers" isn't easy (because so many of them, including you, don't even understand the most basic tenets of the faith they profess), but I'm already used to it.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
[
God is incapable of taking risks. He allegedly knows what will happen before it actually does happen. (I almost hate to spoil this argument for you, after counting how many times you used it in your post!)

b]

If you read my response in the recent 'free will' thread you will understand my argument that God only knows what will happen because he is outside time , not because he looks along the timeline like we do.

So he may know about what the rapist does but not 'in advance' . He knows because he is already in the future watching it. But it's equally possible that the rapist might not have been a rapist and God would have known that too. You assume (without having thought it through) an unbreakable logical link between God knowing everything and men not being free.In one sense God doesn't know what you are going to do tomorrow until you have done it but because he is eternal he doesn't have to wait to find out , he justs sits in tomorrow watching it happen.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem

If I stop a rapist from raping, I have not denied him free will. I have merely prevented him from succeeding at what he has willed to do. God could do the same. Your 'free will' argument is bunk.

So where does God stop? Does he intervene at every single point where sin is happening or likely to happen? If he does then we have no space at all to learn , grow , make mistakes or live at all. If he doesn't then you would accuse him of not intervening! He can't win. Infact , God is itching to intervene all the time and holds off waiting for a decision for us. He says he will intervene one day and put everything right. The person raped will be healed of their pain and be ressurected to new life. The rapist will have to account for his behaviour.

You want him to intervene in a certain way , God intervenes in his own way , presumably because he understands better than you the value of true freedom and is prepared to pay the price for it (even his own life)