Religion
Related: About this forumWhat does God need? Does God need to be believed in?
These are two questions that I think should be given an answer.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scuba
(53,475 posts)
rrneck
(17,671 posts)
canoeist52
(2,282 posts)
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Start by defining what your concept of god is and then prove it exists. THEN you can move on to what its needs may be. Until then, your question is pointless.
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)they both proceed from an anthropomorphic notion of God as a bigger person with the same personal needs we have. But what if we think of God as the energy that inhabits all things, not a being but the ground of being, that spark of being which is in all things, not a being itself? What then might the important questions be?
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)I was under the impression that you identified as a christian. Is that correct?
mr blur
(7,753 posts)what does this even mean?:
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)which means God is nothing more a phenomenon generated in our brains, at that point, why call this process God at all?
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)It is the energy underlying all things, both within and apart from any human consciousness.
It was at work long before the brief time humans have even been here. It is the energy under and within the drive we call evolution.
You don't have to call this energy or impulse God, but many of us use that word as a legitimate sign of this reality. And it is what drives most progressive theology these days.
I keep being reminded of the aboriginal who got a new boomerang for his birthday. His problem was he couldn't throw the old one away.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)I don't really get it, the drivers for evolution are relatively understood, and how the food chain itself operates is either through photosynthesis or chemosynthesis(black smokers on sea floor is one example of this, ecosystems in deep caves is another). Which is where all organisms on the planet derive their energy.
As far as the energy "underlying all things" well in physics again, pretty well understood, all mass has potential energy, and that energy can be derived in many different ways, from kinetic to atomic, to even colliding with its anti-counterpart in a burst of gamma rays. I don't see what relation this would have to a deity, or even how a deity can be inserted in these known, natural, processes.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)How has it been observed and measured? How does it drive evolution or anything else? Why is it different from the other types of energy that we understand, and how can you tell when you're dealing with this underlying energy and not one of the other kinds?
Oh, that's right. It (conveniently) can't be observed. You just know it's there (by one of those "other ways of knowing", no doubt). It can't be understood....except when it's handy for you to be able to say something about it that advances your agenda. Then and only then is it not so mysterious and ephemeral.
cleanhippie
(19,705 posts)Does this energy have intelligence?
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)when in many religious and non-religious setting people are so centered on God being a big important being. Paul Tillich, one of the outstanding theologians of the last century, coined the phrase,"ground of being." Using this metaphor, God is not a person with needs, or a being, just more powerful than the rest of us. I know that notion of God as a person is hard to get rid of.
But let's try.
God is not a thing but is the energy in everything; that gives life and meaning. It is the vision that drives us on. It is what the philosophers Bergson called the "elan vital." It is the impulse that drives the seed up through the rock blocking its progress. It is what lures people on to try and make the world livable for everyone. It is what inspired M.L. King to go to the mountain top. It is the processes of nature--the creative impulse. It is the vision of what is possible. It is the process by which nature exists, not nature itself. It is what finally makes for life. It is the spark which we call evolution. It gives meaning to everything. The most basic of all philosophic questions is: "Why is there something and not nothing?" Perhaps there is written into the universe the energy which gives life, which is God.
But you have to stop thinking of God as a smarter human.
darkstar3
(8,763 posts)as practiced by most denominations world-wide? It doesn't fit with Catholicism, or Lutheranism, or Methodism, or Presbyterianism, or Baptism...the list goes on at some length. What version of Christianity is this?
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)Elsewhere I listed about 30 of the recent books from Christian thinkers that talk about this "process notion of God."
and I only got through C in the alphabet. (I was responding to a question asking for a list of such books.) If you were inside the theological schools of any of the groups you mentioned you would see what is going on. As it is, the public press--etc. is dominated by evangelicals who are somewhere in the 19th century. Theology is dynamic, just as science is dynamic. It changes, and to understand its new insghts won't be gotten by what seem to dominate the popular media, and many church pronouncements. If the flat earth people in science were dominant one might assume that science is really about that image. But science is always in motion. So is theology.
In both science and theology, there is nothing more exciting than seeing a new way of thinking being born.
darkstar3
(8,763 posts)I happen to know no less than 3 pastors who all went to different seminaries with different theologies. They are Presbyterian, Lutheran, and Baptist, respectively , and not one of them received any education remotely like what you're espousing.
There are no pastors of these denominations anywhere I have ever lived that espouse this idea of God, and being familiar as I am with the doctrines of the churches listed above I find their version of God and yours completely contradictory.
So which version of Christianity is yours? Don't tell me that I should go take theology classes, because you and I both know that if I looked at 6 different theology classes I'd find 6 different ideas regarding God. Give me a name: What is your denomination?
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)most leaders and people were horrified at what new was coming.
But the new always broke through. Can you imagine the horror when Luther appeared? Or what was the reaction when King started about the end of religiously sanctioned segregation?
And what about when Jesus said, "You have heard it said of old, but I say to you....."These examples are ubiquitous in church history.
If you resisted the new in science or anything else because you knew people committed to the old you would hardly be a modern person. Why not pay attention to a fresh approach you might find appealing instead of being convinced that the old way in religion is what will happen down the road--or is even now happening? What I described is currently happening. Let me refer you to the most outstanding American seminary; Union Theological Seminary in New York. Have a look art anythttp://www.utsnyc.eduhing published there.
darkstar3
(8,763 posts)What denomination are you?
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)I am currently involved in congregations in three deominations:
The Christian Church(Disciples of Christ)
The United Church of Christ
The Episcopal Church
My last teaching assignment was in Australia where I was on the theological faculty of
the Melbourne College of Divinity--now an authorized university..
It was an ecumenical institution composed of
three Catholic seminaries, two Anglican, the Uniting Church (Methodist congregational and Presbyterian,) Baptist and the Churches of Christ.
In our residential community there are 13 denominations in residence all the way from Roman Catholic to Unitarian.
Our Methodist Seminary is currently also involved in a new interfaith University, training Catholic, Jewish and Muslim clergy.
Every time I say anything about myself I get blasted here. But since you asked twice , here it is.
darkstar3
(8,763 posts)made up of splinter groups from other denominations. I don't know why you didn't just come out and say that.
No, wait, I do. It's because you desperately want people on this board to believe that your version of Christianity is the majority one. Not so much...
tama
(9,137 posts)you are so interested in - denominations - and derive your conclusions from, don't fit the reality on the ground, how people behave in terms of religions and ecumenical connections. Of course there are religious people who as stuck with definitions and nominations as you are, and many of them are very vocal and bothersome, but... syncretism was the word I was looking for. Most people, religious people included of course, are seeking what unites them, not what divides them.
darkstar3
(8,763 posts)You see, the denominations I refer to represent Christianity around the nation I live in, and indeed around the world. Every chuch that doesn't claim to be "non-denominational" calls itself Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, etc.
The people who go to these churches call themselves members of these well-known denominations, or congregations if you prefer.
As for most people seeking what unites them, that's a funny joke.
The reality on the ground is something you seem to be quite separated from.
tama
(9,137 posts)(which begs the question, what to look for?).
I see people from different religions and similar traditions sharing their experiences and backgrounds and the unity behind their approaches, and I see that as a good thing. Do you really oppose it? Sure there are divisions, but the less I give them attention, the better for everyone.
darkstar3
(8,763 posts)Do I oppose them? Of course not. I simply don't wish to ignore the vast majority and thereby live in my own little world.
a meaningful difference between ignoring and not giving attention. The difference is analogical to difference between space and energy, I guess.
There is much to be said for building your own nice little world and giving attention to simple joys of life, instead of looking for things to oppose and set right. I'm not saying I'm a good example, but the hobbit way is a good way.
edhopper
(37,339 posts)who talked to people, who created a son to sacrifice, who is proactively aware and engaged with us. That is just bullshit?
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)No one believes in that god any more (or at least, no one that TMO knows).
Leontius
(2,270 posts)don't like others do when they make God "a smarter human". We all have limits to what we can comprehend of what God is but when we reach that limit is that God's limit?
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Important questions may be:
Would that God have opinions outside of each being's opinions?
Would that God have emotions outside of each being's emotions?
Would that God have power outside of each being's power?
tama
(9,137 posts)those important questions are Russel's paradox:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_paradox
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)"god" is a process. It seems that your concept of "god" morphs into whatever is most useful in advancing your agenda at any particular moment.
Thats my opinion
(2,001 posts)i have quit responding to these kinds of put downs. So since you now start it up again, our conversations have ended.
skepticscott
(13,029 posts)or that I have any hope of getting honest and substantive responses from you. I gave up on that long ago, after trying over and over to get them (along with many other people here). Any more, my responses to your posts are only to point out their flaws to people who are still looking for rationality, not to convince you of anything. If you choose not to answer or to defend your posts, that's your business, but knowing that you refuse to won't change my responses.
The Straight Story
(48,121 posts)Not sure I could answer them in a way they could understand at this point in their evolution.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)A liberal Christian may say God needs nothing, but wants us to be nice to each other.
A conservative Christian may say God needs absolute devotion, tax reductions, and straight-only marriage.
An Islamic Jihadist and/or a white nationalist may say God needs martyrs.
Many to all religious Jews used to think God needed blood sacrifices, but now most of them don't think that.
I saw a movie in my anthropology class about two villages constantly seeking balance for their gods. If one member of one village killed a member of the other village, then a revenge killing was in order. But this revenge killing also needed to be avenged. So they were constantly killing each other for balance. If they did not do this, then supernatural forces would come after them, or so they believed.
tama
(9,137 posts)for their gods sounds like seeking balance within the local ecosystem by population control of ritual vendetta.
Not the nicest way of population control, but beats going overshoot and then die-off, I guess.