I think that prayer, at least, would be dependent on belief. You can’t speak to an entity if you don’t believe it exists.
If by “church” you mean merely attendance then no belief is necessary but if you mean worship then, once again, you have to believe something exists before you can worship it.
I also think that children do simply believe what they’re told about religion. They have no reason not to at first. My child believes whatever I tell her and I’m starting to realize what a sobering responsiblity that puts on me.
Why doesn’t God make us the sort of people that would never freely choose to deny his own existence? God, for instance, presumably has free will. Yet, he is perfectly good. So it’s not at all impossible to be the sort of being that never does wrong, while at the same time that being a freely willed choice. Why aren’t we that way if it’s possible?
Why should God’s existence be what’s at dispute? If everyone did intuitively know that God existed, they could still deny him all they want. Just knowing about something doesn’t force you to choose any particular choice.
I understood what your example was demonstrating. I thought I directly answered it by saying your definition of free-will is incapable of altering consequences. What if this same psychic (correctly) said tommorrow you’ll be in a bad mood, order a salad-no radishes for lunch and hit your thumb with a hammer at 6:47pm? Would that impede your free will? Err no, but what did your free will exactly do again?
Diogenes the Cynic – To put it shortly for now (it’s getting late here) my sense is that belief/faith is like driving a car. After a while it may not seem like an effort but it was there in the beginning and in the background still. Also in both, unattended skills grow rusty.
I guess I’m not getting you at all. Are you saying free will serves no purpose and has no effect or just mine. When I got my salad at lunch, I noticed the waitress looked upset. I asked her if I could help and well without going into it, I helped her when she was desperate. She wasn’t planning on living another day. Now we’re buddies and she’s helped a customer who was choking to death. The psychic or G-d having prior knowledge of these events has no effect on me. I don’t know about it and even if I think G-d has prior knowledge, who cares. I’m still going to do what I think is right for me.
Okay, this one isn’t mine, but I’m curious. Why would Diogenes make any effort to find a G-d he doesn’t believe exists. What would be his motivation? Should we all look for things that we don’t believe exist or just G-d?
The main principle of Christianity is love. So where does Christendom go wrong? Why are there people who call themselves Christians, but do not love when Jesus said, “By this will all men know you are my disciples, that you love one another.”? Like you, I’ve thought long and hard about it, and what I came up with is this — they worship an electromagnetic field. Their understanding of Christ as an entity is jejune and Neanderthal. They see Him as locked into the spacetime continuum, just like all the other atoms. Those that came together to form the molecules that formed the cells that formed the organs that formed the man that walked from Galilee to Jerusalem constitute, for them, their savior. They see Him as their team captain, and all the people who do not have their mistaken impression, they see as on the other teams. It is rah-rah for our side, and if you’re on the wrong team, you lose.
They worship an idol made of flesh rather than gold. They wear their crosses like talismans, using them both to bless and to curse. They follow doctrine instead of God, invoking God’s name to validate their own worthless judgments. They believe that a book is infallible, thereby elevating even it to the level of Godhood. They use Christ as a weapon to bludgeon those who they believe have sinned, not even knowing or caring what sin really is. When they witness, they present Christ as an angry gargoyle Who hides behind the bushes at the gates of hell, waiting to ensnare those who pass by and throw them in. They justify themselves by their perception of their own righteousness. Their hope is not that they be saved, but that all others be punished so that they might be vindicated.They have appointed Him as judge and themselves as His interpreter, despite that He Himself has said that neither He nor His father judges anyone at all. And Christ will call them evildoers and say that He never knew them.
Christ is not an electromagnetic field. He is Spirit. And His Spirit seeks to dwell in every man. His Spirit sought to dwell in Abraham, and in David, and in Jesus, and in Hitler, and in you, and in me. This is what is life — the Spirit of God. He is eternal because His essence preceded even His existence. Flesh rots. Universes die. But He Who is Christ lives beyond time and space. He does not stand against any man who loves, whether that man is a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Wiccan, or an atheist. Intellectual belief and opinion are trivial. What He seeks are not open minds but open hearts. He does not dwell in the mind but in the very essence of men. He is not about power; He is about morality. He is not interested in the piddly shit about which religion is forever in turmoil. He does not seek to be the head knocker of a grand fraternity. He did not come down through the ages to rule an anthill for a day. His desire is to merge His own essence with ours so that we and He become one.
His commandment is simple: Love. But what is love? Love is the means by which His favored aesthetic is facilitated and shared. But what aesthetic does He favor? He favors goodness, because His concern is morality. But what is goodness? It is that which morally edifies. But what is morality? It is the fulfillment of the longing of the heart. But where is the heart? It is wherever a man keeps what he treasures. Freewill is not about making intellectual choices; it is about making moral choices. The brain merely instructs a man’s body, but the Spirit instructs a man’s heart. God’s creation is not man the animal; that is a creation of evolution, an electromagnetic field made of what stars have discarded. God’s creation is man the spirit — God breathed into man His very own essence, and then gave it over to him free and clear. Christ teaches that we all are gods. Like an embryo of goodness, He both divided and multiplied Himself so that His most valued aesthetic might multiply. When one free moral agent edifies another, that is love, and goodness has increased.
God gives to every man the longing of his own heart. He judges no one, but leaves man to judge himself by His own standard. Evil men sin. But what is evil and what is sin? Evil does not exist because it has no essence. It is merely the absence of goodness, just as darkness is the absence of light. Sin is the obstruction of goodness — it is that which clogs up what love would facilitate. Worshippers of the electromagnetic field say that when a man holds another man’s penis, he is committing a sin. But it is no sin to hold onto a penis; it is a sin to hold onto condemnation. To condemn is to destroy goodness, but not in the object of the condemnation, but rather in the one who condemns. Forgiveness is the healing of wounded love, and it heals not the object of forgiveness, but the person who forgives. And faith is not a result of effort, but rather it is the result of surrender. When a man ceases to resist and opens his heart, that is when God pours Himself inside. He does not trump your will with His. You and He are equally free.
Just as your actions failed to change God/psychic’s prediction.
Well I’m going to have to give up on the free will thing. If your thoughts and actions have no effect on the future but you want to keep calling it “free will” because it “feels” like free will then that’s the end of my argument road.
Well for example, if Diogenes felt alone and without purpose he might “seek comfort in the lord”. If he was dating some really hot buddhist he might give that a shot.
I think there is a pre-existence of a need to be fulfilled but not belief itself. Belief is cajoled into existence and nurtured to fill that need. For children it’s fitting in and learning how society works. With adults it is usually a deeper emotional need.
I can’t seek comfort in something unless I blieve it exists in the first place. Exploration can result in belief but belief is a necessary condition for worship.
I have explored Buddhism and I practice Zen meditation but Buddhism does not require any formal theistic beliefs.
Well I can pretty much agree with everything you said and have said a lot of it myself, except for your first statement. Christianity should be about love, but it’s not. It’s not what I experienced before I turned my back on it and it’s not what I see from the staunch Christians that post here. It’s about going through the motions of accepting Christ, then you’re saved and not at all about how you live. I know that’s not how it is for every Christian, but if you’re completely following the doctrine, it is not about tolerance or unconditional love. It barely resembles what Jesus taught. I’m not sure why you call yourself a Christian, when your beliefs are very different from the norm, but it’s why I can’t anymore. Of course that is just IMHO. Thank you for sharing your beliefs.
Well see that’s where we disagree. I contend that the need for something is there, searching finds that a belief in a particular god/universal philosophy may be helpful. The belief is then adopted.
Also, while I’m aware that modern Buddhism can take a more secular humanism slant, Gautama did speak of levels of heaven and all manner of spirit creatures(though not giving them neccesarily high status). It is perhaps not the core and much can be written off as metaphor, but Buddhism shouldn’t get a free ride on the IPU scale.
I mean the legend/metaphor for his birth is a child initiated Cesarean section after which the child jumps out talking. IMHO that trumps a virgin birth. (personally I had the notion it was a later addition metaphor for stream entry not actual birth, but that’s another thread- plus lots more reading)
Yes, if “Christ” is defined as being identical to love then a lot of the tradition problems of Christian theology and soteriology are resolved, i.e. “There is no way to the Father but through love.”
This also works for Buddhism since love is the only perfectly good and non-egoistic emotion. Love is always a reliable and non-deceptive escape from the ego.
The future has nothing to do with what’s predicted and only has to do with my actions. I can’t change what G-d knows is going to happen, because he still knows what’s going to happen. But okay, I quit too.
So you’re saying it’s needy people that try to find G-d? Or children who are programmed early into acceptance? Seems like that’s taking G-d’s power and turning it into man’s weakness.
Don’t take it insultingly, everybody has needs. Personal inclination directs how we fulfill them. I meant nothing more than that. A (generic)child’s need to fit in can’t be disputed, can it?
Re: your last sentence. Please understand that I don’t believe in God’s power and that I don’t see need as weakness.
I’m not insulted. Obviously I do need G-d or I wouldn’t have found him. I felt more oddly compelled than needy though. But I don’t think everyone feels this need, which pretty much makes for no reason to try and put yourself into a position to attempt to believe. OTOH, there are probably many that don’t believe, that act like they do, just to fit in. That is a weakness.
Well I wasn’t addressing pure shams, though they exist I’m sure. I meant people truly internalizing (to various depths)beliefs in an instinct to fulfill a need. If you have a strong need to “make sense of it all” an ongoing treatment of belief, on moderate dosage, can have many positive results.
(I’m not making any guesses as to what any particular person’s “needs” are)
I find it somehow curious to use the term “allows his followers to deny His existence.” IMHO, those who deny His very existence aren’t His followers. How can they be followers of Someone they don’t believe exists?
I think God allows free will because He doesn’t want a bunch of robots programmed to believe in and love Him. He’s taken a risk by giving us free will. He wants us to come to Him by our free choice, not as a programmed response.
Submitted too quick. That’s all addressing DtC comment to Lib.
So IOW “Love” is not core in Buddhism, not mentioned in 8 precepts or 4 Noble truths. Buddha didn’t go around loving people like Jesus. As an enlightened one, human concepts of “love” was not a motive to Buddha.
Just thought a distinction should be made in the philosophies.
