Again, this seems like the standard supernaturalist conviction that the forms displayed in the natural world are merely imperfect reflections of ideal forms existing in an undetectable realm of reality, beyond the natural - hence supernatural. I would be intrigued if there were evidence for this, beyond faith that it is just so.
I don’t think it’s so hard. From what we know about the natural, when we look at large and fast things, we totally failed until Einstein opened a whole new way of looking at it that changed everything. Our entire Newtonian system of physics was but an imperfect reflection of something we can measure now.
We were beholden to weirdness we could never have imagined. Then we look at really tiny things and found out they behave even weirder than big things. They seem to be time-traveling or otherwise operate in time in a way we cannot even imagine. The entire idea of “sequencing” is thus an artificial, simplified construct.
This does not prove there is a construct so mysterious that it is actually going to be impossible to find – ever – but I think it shows that we are routinely accustomed to living in a world we know for a fact is a simplified “shadow” of “reality.”
I’ve seen this comparison made before, but I don’t think it’s entirely legitimate to compare human love to the existence of supernatural gods.
That’s because you don’t know my wife and me.
(Note I didn’t say “prove,” just agreed to “compare.”)
Love is demonstrated by actions, as are all human emotions. What’s more, similar actions can be evidence of different emotions - it may be that the martyr’s actions are not motivated so much by love of god or love of fellow humans but by desire for eternal bliss. Who knows? On the other hand, I could hardly claim that my husband loved me if he insisted on living apart from me and only approached me when he needed money! And by the same token, the “love” that an abused spouse feels towards their abusive partner may not actually serve as evidence for the abuser’s love towards their spouse, even though they may swear blind that the beatings are really an act of devotion (read irrational jealousy, at least in some cases). Sometimes faith is indistinguishable from delusion.
I wholeheartedly agree with this, and this is why we “mystics,” or if you’re not buying that then “mystical wannabees,” tend to call the rest of the faithful (esp. self-righteous) to a truer and more authentic version of love. Jesus did that, and didn’t hesitate to do so publicly and loudly. It is very difficult IMO to make that crossover when we beat it into kids’ heads since they are small that what they do at any given time could result in eternal bliss or torture. That kind of religion is the kind Jesus came to save us from. He didn’t come to be our thought police, now taunting us with life or death with every passing thought instead of every observable action – He came to show us a truer love.
As far as whether Jesus dying for us is an example of selfless love, you are right also in that we have to accept this on faith. Maybe He just wanted to be the inspiration for the Best Seller Ever? Kind of like an early Deepak Chopra mixed with a little Jim Bakker? I don’t think so but you’re right – observable actions do not conclusively tell us the internal state. That’s why Jesus said not to judge, and why He failed to do so on the cross. The reason I believe He is authentic is that with His coaching and a whole of of others, I have been healed of a supposedly incurable mental illness and am currently experiencing the kind of “kingdom” Jesus talked about. It all makes sense. Even the literalists fighting about whether it makes sense, makes sense. That’s because Jesus calls me a “friend” not a “slave” because He told me what’s up and not just to get down and grovel. Personally I don’t think any God worth its salt is all that into groveling – if they are truly empowered they wouldn’t have to behave like worldly tyrants in order to get their way.
King Arthur found this out first hand.
Despite the process of consecration such an individual has been through? Interesting!
Certainly. Priests and bishops aren’t necessarily any more holy than the rest of us, although we like to think so because we like to make idols and heroes out of our leaders. I’m not impressed with a man just because he wears a funny hat and leads a procession and spews good sounding stuff from the pulpit. I’m still drawn toward him and curious, and as far as he knows I obey – but not as an idol. I think when we worship our clergy (and most of us tend to do it) it screws up everything, including our souls and those of the clergy themselves.
Perhaps that’s why they don’t make saints out of people until they’re dead. Can you imagine how emotionally, spiritually, and socially mixed up a Catholic would become if canonized during life?
I will leave the explanation of this state of affairs to the believers. Mine would only be taken as evidence of bias…
Fair enough. But since you are a pantheist, how does your belief differ from atheism – at least in light of this discussion topic?
Alan
*
