If you were God...

  • Thread starter Thread starter R_Daneel
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Interesting statements for a Catholic to make, TRey, particularly the second one.
tonyrey said:
thirdworld;7132839:
So you want a world with no privacy whatsoever and with Big Brother controlling every devious thought and action - a world of sycophants and hangdogs terrified of displeasing the Grand Inquisitor and incapable of living their own life…
Click to expand...
Religiosity as we tend to know it is familial in construct with the “judging father” a feared authority. So those who subscribe to that are third partying their morality according to an imposed code rather than having a loving structure for looking at the nature of a voluntarily discovered internal integrity congruent with being made in the Image and Likeness of God. The patristic approach is top dominant and requires submission to a superior will. The matriarchal, though it can also go bad, mostly is based on the inclusion of the individuality of the individual as a meaningful developmental contribution to the society. I wonder if that is why Mary (Sumeramis? Isis?) worship is so common?
Those in hell never cease to have chances…
Click to expand...
Yes this is the one that got my attention. You don’t subscribe to the “eternal” hell? Hmmm. Good for you. I wonder what got you thinking that way?
Most of the suffering in the world is not caused by men like Hitler and Stalin but by those who blindly follow them or couldn’t care less about what is happening in other countries. Why do you think many people in the third world
Click to expand...
are deprived of the basic necessities of life? It is not due to a few individuals but the result of the selfishness and indifference of the vast majority… Yes, similar to the current Obama bashing, we tend to find a focus for our blame not accounting for the cloud through time of associations which includes ourselves, that sponsor it. I guess that unless we have a clear target we have no sense of effectuality. And it is far better to emotionally based individuals to blame and judge in a right/wrong dualism commensurate with the patristic scheme than to use the self inventory and action/consequence analysis lens. That takes work, honesty, and integrity, and doesn’t always seem to follow “rules.”
Click to expand...
 
Interesting statements for a Catholic to make, TRey, particularly the second one.
tonyrey said:
thirdworld;7132839:
So you want a world with no privacy whatsoever and with Big Brother controlling every devious thought and action - a world of sycophants and hangdogs terrified of displeasing the Grand Inquisitor and incapable of living their own life…
Click to expand...
Religiosity as we tend to know it is familial in construct with the “judging father” a feared authority. So those who subscribe to that are third partying their morality according to an imposed code rather than having a loving structure for looking at the nature of a voluntarily discovered internal integrity congruent with being made in the Image and Likeness of God. The patristic approach is top dominant and requires submission to a superior will. The matriarchal, though it can also go bad, mostly is based on the inclusion of the individuality of the individual as a meaningful developmental contribution to the society. I wonder if that is why Mary (Sumeramis? Isis?) worship is so common?
Those in hell never cease to have chances…
Click to expand...
Yes this is the one that got my attention. You don’t subscribe to the “eternal” hell? Hmmm. Good for you. I wonder what prompted you go in that direction?
Most of the suffering in the world is not caused by men like Hitler and Stalin but by those who blindly follow them or couldn’t care less about what is happening in other countries. Why do you think many people in the third world
Click to expand...
are deprived of the basic necessities of life? It is not due to a few individuals but the result of the selfishness and indifference of the vast majority… Yes, similar to the current Obama bashing, we tend to find a focus for our blame not accounting for the cloud through time of associations which includes ourselves, that sponsor it. I guess that unless we have a clear target we have no sense of effectuality. And it is far better to emotionally based individuals to blame and judge in a right/wrong dualism commensurate with the patristic scheme than to use the self inventory and action/consequence analysis lens. That takes work, honesty, and integrity, and doesn’t always seem to follow “rules.”
Click to expand...
 
Interesting statements for a Catholic to make, TRey, particularly the second one.
tonyrey said:
thirdworld;7132839:
So you want a world with no privacy whatsoever and with Big Brother controlling every devious thought and action - a world of sycophants and hangdogs terrified of displeasing the Grand Inquisitor and incapable of living their own life…
Click to expand...
Religiosity as we tend to know it is familial in construct with the “judging father” a feared authority. So those who subscribe to that are third partying their morality according to an imposed code rather than having a loving structure for looking at the nature of a voluntarily discovered internal integrity congruent with being made in the Image and Likeness of God. The patristic approach is top dominant and requires submission to a superior will. The matriarchal, though it can also go bad, mostly is based on the inclusion of the individuality of the individual as a meaningful developmental contribution to the society. I wonder if that is why Mary (Sumeramis? Isis?) worship is so common?
Those in hell never cease to have chances…
Click to expand...
Yes this is the one that got my attention. You don’t subscribe to the “eternal” hell? Hmmm. Good for you. I wonder what prompted you go in that direction?
Most of the suffering in the world is not caused by men like Hitler and Stalin but by those who blindly follow them or couldn’t care less about what is happening in other countries. Why do you think many people in the third world
Click to expand...
are deprived of the basic necessities of life? It is not due to a few individuals but the result of the selfishness and indifference of the vast majority…
Yes, similar to the current Obama bashing, we tend to find a focus for our blame not accounting for the cloud through time of associations which includes ourselves, that sponsor it. I guess that unless we have a clear target we have no sense of effectuality. And it is far better to emotionally based individuals to blame and judge in a right/wrong dualism commensurate with the patristic scheme than to use the self inventory and action/consequence analysis lens. That takes work, honesty, and integrity, and doesn’t always seem to follow “rules.”
Click to expand...
 
tonyrey said:
So you want a world with no privacy whatsoever and with Big Brother controlling every devious thought and action - a world of sycophants and hangdogs terrified of displeasing the Grand Inquisitor and incapable of living their own life…
Click to expand...
Please understand that I didn’t take the question too seriously considering it is an absolute impossibility for me to be God. It took me about maybe 5 seconds to come up with my reply. It wasn’t meant to be a thought provoking or intelligent post. I apologize if you misunderstood me. I’m not insulting God by my post. I’m just saying what me, as a fallible human with my fallible human intellect would do if I were God. I would make myself apparent to everyone so they would know I exist and would have no excuse to act immorally and whatnot. It’s not about “big brother” watching (God already watches us) it’s about making the existence of God apparent to everyone in a stunningly obvious way.
Those in hell never cease to have chances…
Click to expand...
Do you mean the people currently in Hell still have chances or they never ceased to have chances while alive on earth?
Most of the suffering in the world is not caused by men like Hitler and Stalin but by those who blindly follow them or couldn’t care less about what is happening in other countries.
Click to expand...
This is true and if the sheep followed a good shepherd there would not be problems like the Holocaust. I admitted I would be tampering with free will. I would make anyone appointed a leader good and honest. Someone the people could follow with trust.
Why do you think many people in the third world are deprived of the basic necessities of life? It is not due to a few individuals but the result of the selfishness and indifference of the vast majority…
Click to expand...
I know. I totally agree. It sickens me. Make no mistake, my name is exactly what you think it means. I have plans to volunteer in third world countries when I am able to. The oppression of the poor and weak has been a big issue that I feel connected to. I understand the true reasons for poverty and it has to do with war, corruption, greed, power tripping, etc. and almost nothing to do with so called “overpopulation” or “food shortages.”
 
Tuno said:
Interesting statements for a Catholic to make, TRey, particularly the second one.
tonyrey;7132881:
Religiosity as we tend to know it is familial in construct with the “judging father” a feared authority. So those who subscribe to that are third partying their morality according to an imposed code rather than having a loving structure for looking at the nature of a voluntarily discovered internal integrity congruent with being made in the Image and Likeness of God. The patristic approach is top dominant and requires submission to a superior will.
Click to expand...
The patristic approach is dominant because Jesus lived in a patriarchal society and had to communicate in terms the ordinary people understood. He was put to death for blasphemy without even elaborating on the nature of God. His decision to be born like everyone else and his acceptance of women as equals makes it quite clear that He did not regard males as superior to females or fatherhood as more symbolic of divinity than motherhood.
The matriarchal, though it can also go bad, mostly is based on the inclusion of the individuality of the individual as a meaningful developmental contribution to the society. I wonder if that is why Mary (Sumeramis? Isis?) worship is so common?
Click to expand...
Catholics do not worship but revere Mary as the co-redemptrix. We pray to her because we know she is the greatest of all the saints by having shared the suffering of her Son on the Cross more deeply than any one else in this world. There is no closer bond than that between a woman and the child she has carried in her womb. As a result of her sacrifice motherhood has been exalted way beyond the dreams of mankind. Yet God cannot be adequately understood in terms of the roles of one parent or the other. When all is said and done divine love encompasses and far exceeds all forms of human love…
Yes this is the one that got my attention. You don’t subscribe to the “eternal” hell? Hmmm. Good for you. I wonder what prompted you go in that direction?
Click to expand...
I do subscribe to the possibility of eternal rejection of God. If we are **genuinely free **to choose our own destiny it cannot be otherwise.
Yes, similar to the current Obama bashing, we tend to find a focus for our blame not accounting for the cloud through time of associations which includes ourselves, that sponsor it. I guess that unless we have a clear target we have no sense of effectuality. And it is far better to emotionally based individuals to blame and judge in a right/wrong dualism commensurate with the patristic scheme than to use the self inventory and action/consequence analysis lens. That takes work, honesty, and integrity, and doesn’t always seem to follow “rules.”
Click to expand...
In other words we ignore the fact of collective responsibility - and guilt!
Click to expand...
 
tonyrey said:
Tuno;7133592:
Interesting statements for a Catholic to make, TRey, particularly the second one.

The patristic approach is dominant because Jesus lived in a patriarchal society and had to communicate in terms the ordinary people understood. He was put to death for blasphemy without even elaborating on the nature of God. His decision to be born like everyone else and his acceptance of women as equals makes it quite clear that He did not regard males as superior to females or fatherhood as more symbolic of divinity than motherhood.
Click to expand...
As Gandhi pointed out, Jesus is not the problem, It is what institutionalizing His spontaneity has done to the “transmit-ability” of His Awareness Essence. What was at THAT moment a one-on-one encounter with Divine Awareness has been museified and historicized into a code that has no Soul, save what the well intended breath into it. Saints, I maintain, become so despite their religion, not because of it, except as an obstacle to overcome in the manner of a koan. And if their consequent expression matches the teachings they went through, I’m guessing, that like the Sufi poets, they assumed protective coloration to the extent necessary to remain safe from the Church itself.
Catholics do not worship but revere Mary as the co-redemptrix. We pray to her because we know she is the greatest of all the saints by having shared the suffering of her Son on the Cross more deeply than any one else in this world. There is no closer bond than that between a woman and the child she has carried in her womb. As a result of her sacrifice motherhood has been exalted way beyond the dreams of mankind. Yet God cannot be adequately understood in terms of the roles of one parent or the other. When all is said and done divine love encompasses and far exceeds all forms of human love…
Click to expand...
All that, especially the last line, has meaning and usefulness, and doesn’t exclude, as far as I can see, what I, when I was in the Church, perceived as blatant Mary worship on the part of a few. I’m not saying it’s wrong, or anything. I’m just saying I saw it and it matches on some levels devotion I’ve seen to other symbols of the Feminine.
I do subscribe to the possibility of eternal rejection of God. If we are **genuinely free **
Click to expand...
to choose our own destiny it cannot be otherwise. Can God eternally, or in any sense, reject Himself? This entire level of religious perception is short of where actual perception of the Divine takes place. That thought dynamic doesn’t even apply where perception occurs beyond an intellectual-emotional assertion.
In other words we ignore the fact of collective responsibility - and guilt!
Click to expand...
Collective responsibility, yes. Guilt contrasted to responsibility is an emotional evaluation referring to the sense of culpability, unless you are meaning it in the sense of “X did it.” The refusal to accept responsibility and see it clearly hampers and clouds useful action in that it recycles the blame game and makes work impotent.
Click to expand...
 
Tuno said:
tonyrey

The patristic approach is dominant because Jesus lived in a patriarchal society and had to communicate in terms the ordinary people understood. He was put to death for blasphemy without even elaborating on the nature of God. His decision to be born like everyone else and his acceptance of women as equals makes it quite clear that He did not regard males as superior to females or fatherhood as more symbolic of divinity than motherhood.

As Gandhi pointed out, Jesus is not the problem, It is what institutionalizing His spontaneity has done to the “transmit-ability” of His Awareness Essence. What was at THAT moment a one-on-one encounter with Divine Awareness has been museified and historicized into a code that has no Soul, save what the well intended breath into it.
Click to expand...
The teaching of Jesus would not have survived without the institution He founded but you are right in noting that each of us has to have a one-to-one encounter with God for our faith to be authentic.
Saints, I maintain, become so despite their religion, not because of it, except as an obstacle to overcome in the manner of a koan. And if their consequent expression matches the teachings they went through, I’m guessing, that like the Sufi poets, they assumed protective coloration to the extent necessary to remain safe from the Church itself.
Click to expand...
Every human organization has its drawbacks and the Church is no exception but her divine origin is a source of liberation and grace which enables us to overcome the limitations of its members.
Catholics do not worship but revere Mary as the co-redemptrix. We pray to her because we know she is the greatest of all the saints by having shared the suffering of her Son on the Cross more deeply than any one else in this world. There is no closer bond than that between a woman and the child she has carried in her womb. As a result of her sacrifice motherhood has been exalted way beyond the dreams of mankind. Yet God cannot be adequately understood in terms of the roles of one parent or the other. When all is said and done divine love encompasses and far exceeds all forms of human love…
Click to expand...
.
All that, especially the last line, has meaning and usefulness, and doesn’t exclude, as far as I can see, what I, when I was in the Church, perceived as blatant Mary worship on the part of a few. I’m not saying it’s wrong, or anything. I’m just saying I saw it and it matches on some levels devotion I’ve seen to other symbols of the Feminine.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately it is impossible to eliminate superstition even in the absence of religion. In fact it seems to increase…
I do subscribe to the possibility of eternal rejection of God. If we are genuinely free to choose our own destiny it cannot be otherwise.
Click to expand...
Can God eternally, or in any sense, reject Himself? This entire level of religious perception is short of where actual perception of the Divine takes place. That thought dynamic doesn’t even apply where perception occurs beyond an intellectual-emotional assertion.
Click to expand...

God cannot but it is not beyond His power to enable us to do so. Otherwise the reality of omnipotence - and evil - disappears…
In other words we ignore the fact of collective responsibility - and guilt!
Click to expand...
Collective responsibility, yes. Guilt contrasted to responsibility is an emotional evaluation referring to the sense of culpability, unless you are meaning it in the sense of “X did it.”
Click to expand...

I mean a clear recognition of our culpability.
The refusal to accept responsibility and see it clearly hampers and clouds useful action in that it recycles the blame game and makes work impotent.
Click to expand...
I agree. 🙂
 
tonyrey said:
The teaching of Jesus would not have survived without the institution He founded but you are right in noting that each of us has to have a one-to-one encounter with God for our faith to be authentic.
Click to expand...
Imho, this statement is a semantic can of worms that epitomizes our different cosmologies. I won’t elaborate unless specifically requested, as you rightfully may not give a hoot. And I have nothing really to prove or defend, and have little doubt you feel the same. I’ve experienced you so far, as a text presence 🙂 to be a very ethical person with high integrity. No guarantees, (de gustibus non disputandum) but I might even like you in person. I used to get along very well even with some Priests, despite the odd kick in my gallop.
Every human organization has its drawbacks and the Church is no exception but her divine origin is a source of liberation and grace which enables us to overcome the limitations of its members.
Click to expand...
Well, to some extent. Again, I’ve maintianed that Goodness is a vector only seemingly associated with religion. Extremity of self discipline, great distress, or trauma have often worked as well, usually in a psycho-emotional form, but sometimes in the from of a genuine Realization. What that has to do with a particular religion is problematic, and seems to have more to do with the idea that all men are created in the Image and Likeness of God, and the religious, or not, aspect is secondary in the crunch. As well, there is nothing that doesn’t have a Divine Origin whichself is a constant and ready Source of Liberation to what appears as all.
Unfortunately it is impossible to eliminate superstition even in the absence of religion. In fact it seems to increase…
Click to expand...
Yes, but say even one system is right. That means that everyone else is living by superstition. And I think it is so. The usual boatload of parochial lore inherited from our parents is good enough to get us to the store and back usually without breaking a leg. But the ordinary person speaks making frequent use of more than a hundred common logical errors. Multiply that by a lifetime. Even the most extremely competent of us are usually os in some small are of expertise, and the rest sometimes doesn’t look so good. Living as a human is very difficult and fraught with dangers, more in the psychic realm for us here who have relative physical safety. Most of the world lives in a soup of astonishing turmoil.
God cannot but it is not beyond His power to enable us to do so. Otherwise the reality of omnipotence - and evil - disappears…
Click to expand...
See paragraph 1
I mean a clear recognition of our culpability
Click to expand...
.OK
I agree. 🙂
Click to expand...
🙂
 
Tuno said:
The teaching of Jesus would not have survived without the institution He founded but you are right in noting that each of us has to have a one-to-one encounter with God for our faith to be authentic.
Click to expand...
I take it that you agree that the teaching of Jesus would not have survived without the institution He founded.
Every human organization has its drawbacks and the Church is no exception but her divine origin is a source of liberation and grace which enables us to overcome the limitations of its members.
Click to expand...
Well, to some extent. Again, I’ve maintained that Goodness is a vector only seemingly associated with religion. Extremity of self discipline, great distress, or trauma have often worked as well, usually in a psycho-emotional form, but sometimes in the form of a genuine Realization.

What that has to do with a particular religion is problematic, and seems to have more to do with the idea that all men are created in the Image and Likeness of God, and the religious, or not, aspect is secondary in the crunch. As well, there is nothing that doesn’t have a Divine Origin which self is a constant and ready Source of Liberation to what appears as all.
Click to expand...

The problem with individual revelations is that there is no guarantee that they are authentic. They have produced thousands of different sects which are at odds on many issues.
Unfortunately it is impossible to eliminate superstition even in the absence of religion. In fact it seems to increase…
Click to expand...
Yes, but say even one system is right. That means that everyone else is living by superstition. And I think it is so. The usual boatload of parochial lore inherited from our parents is good enough to get us to the store and back usually without breaking a leg. But the ordinary person speaks making frequent use of more than a hundred common logical errors. Multiply that by a lifetime. Even the most extremely competent of us are usually os in some small area of expertise, and the rest sometimes doesn’t look so good. Living as a human is very difficult and fraught with dangers, more in the psychic realm for us here who have relative physical safety. Most of the world lives in a soup of astonishing turmoil.
Click to expand...

This is the inevitable consequence of the complexity of life but expertise and logic are less important than love. What counts most in the end is not our mistakes but our good will. The road to hell may be paved with good intentions but without good intentions it leads to only one possible destination!
Click to expand...
 
tonyrey said:
I take it that you agree that the teaching of Jesus would not have survived without the institution He founded.
Click to expand...
No.
The problem with individual revelations is that there is no guarantee that they are authentic. They have produced thousands of different sects which are at odds on many issues.
Click to expand...
That’s not what I’m talking about
This is the inevitable consequence of the complexity of life but expertise and logic are less important than love. What counts most in the end is not our mistakes but our good will. The road to hell may be paved with good intentions but without good intentions it leads to only one possible destination!
Click to expand...
Yes. The quality of awareness under the aegis of Love is critical
 
Tuno said:
That is interesting. That part, and in a subtle way the above, actually would stick to the thread in a broad sense, but not in the intended sense, for sure.
Click to expand...
Do you mean that if you were God you would have arranged things differently? 🙂
 
R_Daneel said:
…what would you do differently? Or what would you do in general? Later in the thread I will present my view, but not right now, because if I did then most of the posts would be just some criticism, and not presenting your own ideas about the subject. 🙂
Click to expand...
Please forgive me for entering into this discussion so late. I just couldn’t help myself, but trying to answer this question.

I am pretty sure I would be a great mess-up. I cannot fathom the greatness of God, nor am I able to follow His thoughts.
I am a human being. I am nothing. I am unworthy.
I wasn’t there when He laid the foundation of the earth. I did not tell the ocean how far it can go. I did not make the clouds. I have never commanded the morning nor caused the dawn to know its place. I have not seen the springs of the sea or walked across the recess of the deep. I don’t understand the expanse of the earth and the universe. I cannot make the seeds of grass sprout. I do not know the time that the mountain goat gives birth and I do not observe the calving of the deer. I did not set the wild donkey free and I did not give it a home in the wilderness. The wild ox does not consent to serve me and it will not spend the night at my manger. I did not give the horse its might and I did not clothe its neck with a mane. I did not make it leap like a locust and I did not make it rejoice in it’s strength. I did not create the hawk or make it soar. I did not command the eagle to make its nest on high and I did not give it brilliant eyes.

I cannot annul His judgement nor can I condemn Him that I may be justified.
I would not be able, not even hypothetically, to be Him.

God is eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, faithful, good, holy, immutable, impartial, incomprehensible, infinite, just, loving, merciful, righteous, self-existent, self-sufficient, sovereign, true and wise.
He is perfectly just and infinitely merciful. Who am I to even assume I could be better in any way and in anything that He does?
 
Janet1983 said:
I am pretty sure I would be a great mess-up. I cannot fathom the greatness of God, nor am I able to follow His thoughts.
I am a human being. I am nothing. I am unworthy.
I wasn’t there when He laid the foundation of the earth. I did not tell the ocean how far it can go. I did not make the clouds. I have never commanded the morning nor caused the dawn to know its place. I have not seen the springs of the sea or walked across the recess of the deep. I don’t understand the expanse of the earth and the universe. I cannot make the seeds of grass sprout. I do not know the time that the mountain goat gives birth and I do not observe the calving of the deer. I did not set the wild donkey free and I did not give it a home in the wilderness. The wild ox does not consent to serve me and it will not spend the night at my manger. I did not give the horse its might and I did not clothe its neck with a mane. I did not make it leap like a locust and I did not make it rejoice in it’s strength. I did not create the hawk or make it soar. I did not command the eagle to make its nest on high and I did not give it brilliant eyes.

I cannot annul His judgement nor can I condemn Him that I may be justified.
I would not be able, not even hypothetically, to be Him.

God is eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, faithful, good, holy, immutable, impartial, incomprehensible, infinite, just, loving, merciful, righteous, self-existent, self-sufficient, sovereign, true and wise.
He is perfectly just and infinitely merciful. Who am I to even assume I could be better in any way and in anything that He does?

Please forgive me for entering into this discussion so late. I just couldn’t help myself, but trying to answer this question.
Click to expand...
Trying? Succeeding! 🙂
 
Janet1983 said:
God is eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, faithful, good, holy, immutable, impartial, incomprehensible, infinite, just, loving, merciful, righteous, self-existent, self-sufficient, sovereign, true and wise.
Click to expand...
I always get good chuckle when I see a list like this. Twenty (!) attributes and one of them is “incomprehensible”. Funny as a three-legged rabbit, hopping in neat little circles! 🙂
 
R_Daneel said:
I always get good chuckle when I see a list like this. Twenty (!) attributes and one of them is “incomprehensible”. Funny as a three-legged rabbit, hopping in neat little circles! 🙂
Click to expand...
I’m always highly amused when I come across anyone equating incomprehensibility with **total **incomprehensibility. It amounts to saying any incomplete explanation is worthless! The hypothesis that mindless matter produced mind would certainly fail miserably if that were the case…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top