The theory of God what is it?

[Stubbly_Dooright]

You could spend 6 months listening too for and against arguments on God before you came across anybody with any original thought or ability question, criticise and make their own minds up. The problem is the rest cannot think for themselves (although they like to believe that they do) and are just regurgitating whatever views are going around in society at that point in time. There is no worldview which is infallible as they are all underpinned by assumptions, biases and wishful thinking of the person holding the opinion (even if they cannot identify it).

One crucial assumption to modern science is that if you keep dividing things into smaller and smaller quantities then you reach its fundamental building blocks. Yet when we calculate the area inside the orbit of the Earth (as an example) we get an irrational answer (a number with infinite decimal places). Numbers with infinite decimal places are incompatible with a universe made out of fundamental building blocks. So either maths doesn't describe the universe, the universe isn't made out of fundamental building blocks, or both. Either way people shouldn't be so naïve in believing physics explains everything. The bit of knowledge they are missing about modern science is how physics calculations include a percentage error (up to 5% inaccuracy is usually allowed) behind which the problem with maths is hidden.

One crucial assumption many atheists make is that a human being is nothing more than a complicated robot. Does a robot have free will? Does it question, criticise and make its own mind up about things? Is it capable of abstract thought and consciousness? Does it have emotions? Does it have psychological needs? Is a complex adaptive system which co-evolves with its environment? Of course not, its just a machine executing lines of computer code which can be written to try and mimic human behaviour. Human beings are capable of non-deterministic behaviour which a robot isn't.

To reach an understanding of God you need to explore how your mind works and then what you can infer from it. To begin with you have to start by questioning the assumptions that your mind is just a computer program running on a machine and that you live in a universe which can be described using maths. You have to open yourself to the idea that there are aspects of the mind which exist independently from your brain and until people let go of the mechanistic reductionist perceptions of themselves they don't do that.

If something true existed then it would be true for all people not just one (or a limited set of them) based on their own unique perceptions or situational circumstances. Take colour as an example. You see a blue sky while a colour blind person see's a green one. Even if we put aside the colour blind person then because people don't have identical numbers of cells in their eyes (which detect the wavelengths of light associated with the colour blue) we experience different shades of blue to each other. If it isn't true for all then it isn't true, its perception instead. The whole of reality is relative to the perceptions or situational circumstances of the person experiencing it. There is no truth other than mind itself. Thats because even if what the mind experiences is false you still require a mind to experience it.

A lot of people struggle to comprehend the implications of the above paragraph (or rather choose not too). Once you realise you're just a mind having experiences, once you let go of the identity you've built up based on your self-perceptions and instead accept you're quite literally nothing more than a mind having experiences, then you have started on the path that leads you to your realisation of what God is. The journey ends with you realising that God is the initial state your mind existed in before it started allowing itself to have experiences. It is the experiencing which creates and maintains the existence of the universe. It is the experiencing which destroys the God mind by fragmenting it into pieces one of which you think is yours. This occurs because it takes an 'I' to have an experience. An 'I' is also separate from 'others'. So by having an experience the God mind separates into 'I' and 'others'. It is this separation which creates reality for the 'I' which is in fact just its experiences. But because it thinks its experiences are real it takes them all in hook line and sinker.

In a sense, I can see how you have come to your conclusions here. There is a part of me, wonders, if this is labeling varying individuals too quickly and too black and white. Example, is it true with all Atheists, that they think we are all robots?

I feel, there is more subjectiveness deep down each situations here.

In fifty years of serious reading, I've consumed volume after volume concerning God and not one contained a single shred of real information. So, if you are going post on the topic, be terse and concise and get to the ruddy point. Walls of text where one does nothing more than verbally prance around impresses no one.

I think this should be your sig. Or someone's. *shrugs*

Very good episode.

I think it won a few awards.

[+Sherapy]

LG

Yes, and for the excellent reason that Jung's beliefs rely on categories that are very different from what most people use when discussing religion.

So, looking at the presenting complaint, from Habitat

Holy crap. For a factually oriented discussion of the Jung TV interview and the subsequent letter (and his having said much the same things in print a few years before), see

https://uncertaintis...owledge-of-god/

There is nothing enigmatic about how Jung used "I don't need to believe, I know." He makes the same distinction elsewhere in the same interview. It's not even an unusual way to speak, especially not for physicians. (It does drive some of us up the wall, those of us who see knowing as the limiting case of belief, not as a different thing.)

Jung was frankly and self-consciously Christian in his cultural assumptions. His vision of the end state of "individuation" (his notion of the "great work") is parallel with Orthodox theosis - a never-ending process of union with ... wait for this ... yourself.

In the meantime, Jung carefully distinguishes between the imago dei, people's conceptions of God which he as a psychologist can discuss as an expert, and God as such where Jung is in the same boat as everybody else.

So, no, Jung didn't reach any zenith or acme, at least not in his own view. Nobody does. As to the God Jung knows to exist, from one earlier press interview:

and in another interview (maybe parts of the same interview marketed separately by the interviewer):

This is pretty sane and straightforwardly rational discourse. The vocabulary is deep in some places, and Jung is subtle and complicated. He uses common words in an uncommon way. Unfortunately, God is one of those words. Jung is not full of crap, but it is easy to paraphrase him or selectively quote him and have that rehash be full of crap.

On a point arising,

There actually is a literature about that, since some people blind from birth have acquired sight later in life. The experience is much more complicated than this sentence suggests. And as always with this poster, there is a profound confusion between lacking doubt and being correct.

Yes, it is possible to have an operation intended to confer sight that fails or takes time to work, and yet to have novel experiences immediately thereafter and to mistake those new experiences for sight (which, after all, you have no idea what it is really like). That is why the surgeon asks "How many fingers am I holding up?" (Lol, so she can know and not just believe that her patient really can see.)

If my memory serves me, Jung's "I don't believe in God; I know" has come up before.

Do you have a link for the interview?

I would love to listen to it.

Great counter!

I have come away richer for it.

Edited April 11, 2016 by Sherapy

[eight bits]

Sheri

The BBC "Face to Face" interview is on YouTube, and you have your choice of the whole thing or just the God part. Here is a link to the focused quote,

here is the whole episode (the God exchange is at about 7:50):

This material moves around on YouTube.

The letter to The Listener and some related material (like the pertinent part of the Time interview) is here

https://uncertaintist.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/jung-on-god.pdf

The blog article is here (same as referenced in an earlier post),

https://uncertaintist.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/carl-jungs-knowledge-of-god/

[back to earth]

Worshippers, with their rituals and observances, prostrating themselves, emphasis on externalised mumbo-jumbo, mumbling prayers they are oblivious to the meaning of, and worst of all, wanting to be seen by others doing it, are the antithesis of the truly religious. If the interior does not match this exterior, totally void.

Hmmm ... you sort of segwayed away from 'worship' to a type of external trappings and empty shell of religion.

You are saying worship is invalid by describing worship as something else.

You dont seem to understand the internal psychological effects of a lot of religious technology . The psychological effects are similar in mysticism , but generated by 'process' and 'meditation' with less 'technology'.... OR ... mysticism is more focused on the internal effect psychologically and the mental states generated.

Either way, one comes up against 'psychological effects' .... if one doesnt understand these dynamics then one is being led by forces they are not aware of .

[back to earth]

In fifty years of serious reading, I've consumed volume after volume concerning God and not one contained a single shred of real information. So, if you are going post on the topic, be terse and concise and get to the ruddy point. Walls of text where one does nothing more than verbally prance around impresses no one.

Ohhh ... I dont know about that ... Henry Cyril Paget (The 5th Marquess of Anglese and Professional Nincompoop ) was awfully impressed !

[Mr Walker]

Plausible? You replace ancient mythology with modern mythology, that's all. You can no more show me these Aliens than Homer could his Olympians or Abraham his Yahweh.

To reverse your comment. I can just as easily show you their presence.

My point is that not all beliefs come form internal imaginings, many are constructed to explain physical experiences with inexplicable entities, either in the external environment, or in our internal environment of body and mind.

For example, jungian archetypes .

[Habitat]

Hmmm ... you sort of segwayed away from 'worship' to a type of external trappings and empty shell of religion.

You are saying worship is invalid by describing worship as something else.

You dont seem to understand the internal psychological effects of a lot of religious technology . The psychological effects are similar in mysticism , but generated by 'process' and 'meditation' with less 'technology'.... OR ... mysticism is more focused on the internal effect psychologically and the mental states generated.

Either way, one comes up against 'psychological effects' .... if one doesnt understand these dynamics then one is being led by forces they are not aware of .

The effects of rituals and religious paraphenalia and imagery is in the service of keeping the dangerous real religious impulse at bay, not of facilitating it. Which may be just as well, there are real risks in surrendering to the depths within. But that is where the "kingdom" is, within. If not, the gospels are void, and the "worshippers" are idolizing a false prophet.

[psyche101]

Deep Space Nine? That's Quark, right? Or is it Rom?

Wait! That's Voyager! Is it?

Arridor and Kol

Both Voyager with "False Profits" and Star Trek TNG "The Price" - which is how it all began.

Trying to find a reply post of yours MLady that only got half way through yesterday.....

[psyche101]

To reverse your comment. I can just as easily show you their presence.

I accept!!

Lets see a God then!!

Taps foot........

Waiting, waiting........

[Habitat]

I accept!!

Lets see a God then!!

Taps foot........

Waiting, waiting........

Seriously, any frank demonstrations from the "other side", would do your head in. You'd be curled up in the foetal position in the corner, rocking back and forth, with glazed eyes. The Divine does not want you to suffer the trauma of a drastic world-view change like that. Steady as we go is the nature of psychological progression.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Habitat

[psyche101]

Seriously, any frank demonstrations from the "other side", would do your head in. You'd be curled up in the foetal position in the corner, rocking back and forth, with glazed eyes. The Divine does not want you to suffer the trauma of a drastic world-view change like that. Steady as we go is the nature of psychological progression.

Seriously - nah, Bring it on. I am an Aussie Tradesman, we are men of steel, God is nothing to an Aussie Tradesman. He would be the one in the foetal position.

Not to mention you managed it according to you, and you don't strike me as the strong minded type. Or did God only speak to you through pony wins so far?

[Habitat]

Seriously - nah, Bring it on. I am an Aussie Tradesman, we are men of steel, God is nothing to an Aussie Tradesman. He would be the one in the foetal position.

Not to mention you managed it according to you, and you don't strike me as the strong minded type. Or did God only speak to you through pony wins so far?

Aussie tradesman are men of "steal" alright, way too expensive, nothing they do I haven't been able to do as well myself. Naturally, I don't fool around with electricity. But, back on subject, there is little doubt the "other side" only reveals itself to apt subjects.

[+Sherapy]

Aussie tradesman are men of "steal" alright, way too expensive, nothing they do I haven't been able to do as well myself. Naturally, I don't fool around with electricity. But, back on subject, there is little doubt the "other side" only reveals itself to apt subjects.

" there is little doubt the "other side" only reveals itself to apt subjects" ( Habitat ).

What does this mean?

[Habitat]

" there is little doubt the "other side" only reveals itself to apt subjects" ( Habitat ).

What does this mean?

If you are likely to be psychologically disturbed by something overwhelmingly strange and unexpected from "beyond", it will spare you the grief by not appearing. Or so it seems to me. I've never seen a ghost, but any amount of "spooky" happenings, however, all the people I've heard talk about their horror of ghosts and such-like, have never seen a ghost, or similar spooky occurrence. The ones I've heard speak of having had these experiences, are just matter of fact about it, and not overly perturbed. Go figure.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Habitat

[psyche101]

Aussie tradesman are men of "steal" alright, way too expensive, nothing they do I haven't been able to do as well myself. Naturally, I don't fool around with electricity.

LOL cheap hey? I'd like to see you build a Hospital, I am sure you would have had need for one at some point in your life! Most of us do!

A great many tradesmen do not go home to their families due to the dangers of the job. There is no price you can really put on that.

But, back on subject, there is little doubt the "other side" only reveals itself to apt subjects.

What I have been saying all along. "Special" people see God, and these days we help them with mental institutions and mental care. That is why when someone says they drowned a baby in a bathtub because God told them to do it, they have to be accountable for both themselves, and their imaginary friend. In a similar fashion, The Jehovah's Witnesses also feel they have "special insight" to God and can see through the "pagan traps" set in the ordinary bible, full of misleading lies, I mean, they feel they have proof that Jesus was not nailed to a cross, but a post, I mean, imagine the havoc that might cause!! Post not Cross!! /sarcasm. Nowadays the courts intervene in JW decisions regarding human life, they can no longer allow children to die so they do not pollute their eternal spirit and relationship with God. JW's have killed too many children in the name of God, and "special knowing" just like your own esoteric intimate models, and their intimate knowledge led to sacrificing children to this imaginary being.

No more. Accountability has to take precedence.

Edited April 12, 2016 by psyche101

[Habitat]

No more. Accountability has to take precedence.

You miss the point. The very reason the evidence is not openly available, is the fact that it is directed, and does not reach those it is not intended for. Certainly appears that way to me, though I can understand people not being accepting of that, but they'd be wise to leave it as an open question. Those rudely dismissive, perhaps see deception around every corner, and are likely projecting their own tricky ways on to others. "I cheat and lie, surely others think and act the same way"

Edited April 12, 2016 by Habitat

[GoldenWolf]

The effects of rituals and religious paraphenalia and imagery is in the service of keeping the dangerous real religious impulse at bay, not of facilitating it. Which may be just as well, there are real risks in surrendering to the depths within. But that is where the "kingdom" is, within. If not, the gospels are void, and the "worshippers" are idolizing a false prophet.

Isn't sorcery supposed to be against biblical law?

[+Sherapy]

You miss the point. The very reason the evidence is not openly available, is the fact that it is directed, and does not reach those it is not intended for. Certainly appears that way to me, though I can understand people not being accepting of that, but they'd be wise to leave it as an open question. Those rudely dismissive, perhaps see deception around every corner, and are likely projecting their own tricky ways on to others. "I cheat and lie, surely others think and act the same way"

I would ask why the evidence of ghosts or gods are not openly available, and I'd ask how do you know/conclude this "evidence" doesn't reach those it isn't intended for? What are people not accepting of? Why would it be wise to leave this as an open question? Thank you for the clarity.

[GoldenWolf]

The effects of rituals and religious paraphenalia and imagery is in the service of keeping the dangerous real religious impulse at bay, not of facilitating it. Which may be just as well, there are real risks in surrendering to the depths within. But that is where the "kingdom" is, within. If not, the gospels are void, and the "worshippers" are idolizing a false prophet.

You miss the point. The very reason the evidence is not openly available, is the fact that it is directed, and does not reach those it is not intended for. Certainly appears that way to me, though I can understand people not being accepting of that, but they'd be wise to leave it as an open question. Those rudely dismissive, perhaps see deception around every corner, and are likely projecting their own tricky ways on to others. "I cheat and lie, surely others think and act the same way"

Revelation 22:15

Outside are the dogs, those who practice magic arts, the sexually immoral, the murderers, the idolaters and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.

[Stubbly_Dooright]

Arridor and Kol

Both Voyager with "False Profits" and Star Trek TNG "The Price" - which is how it all began.

*slaps forward* Of course!!! I should have remembered. I'm a bad bad bad Trekkie!

I should have remembered the TNG episode, and was quite satisfied when they went back and showed a fellow up to those two hapless Ferengi's in the Voyager episode. So, I was half right, eventually.

Trying to find a reply post of yours MLady that only got half way through yesterday.....

What post is that?

Seriously, any frank demonstrations from the "other side", would do your head in. You'd be curled up in the foetal position in the corner, rocking back and forth, with glazed eyes. The Divine does not want you to suffer the trauma of a drastic world-view change like that. Steady as we go is the nature of psychological progression.

You know confidently, that this is what it is? Do you have a link that says, that is what it is?

How can you know something is hard to see, if you having a hard time seeing it yourself?

Aussie tradesman are men of "steal" alright, way too expensive, nothing they do I haven't been able to do as well myself. Naturally, I don't fool around with electricity. But, back on subject, there is little doubt the "other side" only reveals itself to apt subjects.

How is that, little doubt? What makes it have little doubt to it?

If you are likely to be psychologically disturbed by something overwhelmingly strange and unexpected from "beyond", it will spare you the grief by not appearing. Or so it seems to me. I've never seen a ghost, but any amount of "spooky" happenings, however, all the people I've heard talk about their horror of ghosts and such-like, have never seen a ghost, or similar spooky occurrence. The ones I've heard speak of having had these experiences, are just matter of fact about it, and not overly perturbed. Go figure.

Ok, here goes. ( but remember, I say this from point of view and what I consider it as an experience from this. )

I feel, I have seen a ghost. I feel, I have heard them too on various occasions. Even believe, I felt one. From seeing an individual behave weirdly to then reading about his description fading away from others. I have heard voices, where voices have no bodies to be a voice there. I even feel, that one felt me up at night.

Granted, this is open to speculation of it being ghosts or rational explanations, but my point is, I wasn't afraid during all of these. Granted, I'm not in the habit of sleeping legs out of the blankets again, but there was no crazy sparking in me either. In fact, I'm left with a strong sense of curiosity with them now. It's an interest, not a fear for me. While some may feel they don't want to go somewhere reported to be haunted, I'd be like, 'bring it on'. So on that point, how do you know everyone will react to something they don't have an awareness of. To some, there will be fear, to others confusion, and to some more, curiosity. One can tell me a ghost story worried about instilling fear, and find out I want more and am not afraid. So, I feel strongly, that there are so many different types of people with different types of conscious attitudes, why hold back from them all, when God holds his existence from mankind?

You miss the point. The very reason the evidence is not openly available, is the fact that it is directed, and does not reach those it is not intended for. Certainly appears that way to me, though I can understand people not being accepting of that, but they'd be wise to leave it as an open question. Those rudely dismissive, perhaps see deception around every corner, and are likely projecting their own tricky ways on to others. "I cheat and lie, surely others think and act the same way"

So, how does those particular people apply to get the experience then? I ask, because sometimes some do get it, from their accounts, and they can't handle it. There are others, who are ready for it and their demeanor shows that they can, and they get nothing. The way I see it, when it comes down to explanations like these, I find that they don't hit the mark very realistically.

I would ask why the evidence of ghosts or gods are not openly available, and I'd ask how do you know/conclude this "evidence" doesn't reach those it isn't intended for? What are people not accepting of? Why would it be wise to leave this as an open question? Thank you for the clarity.

Well, if this wasn't considered a clear question, I don't know what is. Good question.

[Mr Walker]

I accept!!

Lets see a God then!!

Taps foot........

Waiting, waiting........

Read the comment carefully, and the post it was responding to.

[Mr Walker]

Seriously, any frank demonstrations from the "other side", would do your head in. You'd be curled up in the foetal position in the corner, rocking back and forth, with glazed eyes. The Divine does not want you to suffer the trauma of a drastic world-view change like that. Steady as we go is the nature of psychological progression.

My point was that it is just as possible for a person from today to experience god as someone from ancient times. Thus, it is also as easy or difficult today, as it was in the past, to demonstrate this to others, and for the same reasons. When the shaman seeks the buffalo spirit and finds the herd for hunting, how does he prove this to others. Simply finding the herd is no proof at all to a skeptic, yet HE knows from the context of his inner experiences, where the knowledge came from

Or if the great spirit comes to him, walks with him, and imparts wisdom to him, it is just as easy (or as hard ) for him to convince another of this reality as it is for me today. .

I agree with your comment but it is a part of a wider problem/reality. Unless an individual experiences god, either from an inner experience, or from an external one, they are forced to either believe or disbelieve in the existence of god(s) Some people have strong reasons to believe. Many have compelling reasons to refuse to believe. i often wonder how others would cope with having their precious disbelief shattered in a moment, and then having to either adapt their life to the existence of a real, caring and powerful god in it, or else live with a constant dichotomy and conscious denial of reality,

Edited April 13, 2016 by Mr Walker

[Habitat]

i often wonder how others would cope with having their precious disbelief shattered in a moment, and then having to either adapt their life to the existence of a real, caring and powerful god in it, or else live with a constant dichotomy and conscious denial of reality,

Seems to me they are spared that trauma, shocking people out of disbelief doen't seem to be on the play-card. Out of compassion for the subject ? I don't know.

[XenoFish]

Seems to me they are spared that trauma, shocking people out of disbelief doen't seem to be on the play-card. Out of compassion for the subject ? I don't know.

With 20 plus years of dedicated occult practice I can safely say that I've yet to cross path with any so called gods. Just figments of the imagination. Or servitors of my own creation wrapped in a nice little deity package. Nothing more than a mental construct. Your minds blown because that's exactly what you want.

[Habitat]

With 20 plus years of dedicated occult practice I can safely say that I've yet to cross path with any so called gods. Just figments of the imagination. Or servitors of my own creation wrapped in a nice little deity package. Nothing more than a mental construct. Your minds blown because that's exactly what you want.

My mind has not been "blown" at all. Everything I've seen that convincingly demonstrated the "other side", did not perturb me in the least. I'd have expected to be shocked. I was not. I don't discount the possibility your thoughts or mood can be adjusted from "beyond".