What if God was an event?

[lowbrass]

@cosmosdan

That being said, I don’t think morality can be arrived at intellectually. It must be IMHO, our emotions and intellect working together. The spiritual journey is an exploration of our own consciousness. We explore our motivations both conscious and subconscious hoping to make more conscious choices. We explore the depth of our connection to the people and world around us. Through a healthy discipline we seek to change how we feel about things. To change how we perceive our relationship with others, and in so doing how we act and react.

I don’t see any of those things as being inconsistent with an intellectual approach.

[lowbrass]

@cosmosdan

I asked you if you saw your own statement of “Love is the most important thing in life” as truth. Do you? Please answer directly. If you think it cannot be truth because of it’s subjective nature then we have at least defined a major difference between us. I’ll explain more in my response to your post 131

That there is a major difference between us is obvious. I don’t recognize the phrase “cannot be truth”. Do you mean “cannot be true”? That statement can be true, but since it is a statement of opinion, it is only true for the person who uttered it. Can the statement “Chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream” be “truth”? If you can answer that, I might get a better idea what you’re getting at.

[cosmosdan]

@Kalhoun

The more I think about your response, the more I think maybe you didn’t get what I was saying. Sometimes good and bad happen independently of other people. You don’t need another person’s approval or interaction to feel pleased with something you’ve done. I don’t think this aspect of the conversation is all that deep. Be pleased or proud of your accomplishments. It’s good for society. That’s all. I see nothing wrong with that.

I think I got it. I was just pointing out the value of humility. When someone does what I believe to be a good job I say “You did a good job” not "praise the Lord.

Understanding how we interact helps keep the ego in check so the pendulum doesn’t swing to far the other way. I’ve met some arrogant pricks, haven’t you?

[cosmosdan]

@lowbrass

That there is a major difference between us is obvious. I don’t recognize the phrase “cannot be truth”. Do you mean “cannot be true”? That statement can be true, but since it is a statement of opinion, it is only true for the person who uttered it. Can the statement “Chocolate is the best flavor of ice cream” be “truth”? If you can answer that, I might get a better idea what you’re getting at.

Interesting difference.

I may prefer blue and you may prefer red. That would be true. We would both recognize blue as blue and red as red. That would be a consistent truth that all people share. {except for the colorblind, but you get my drift}

I do believe that love can be a consistent truth for all of us. It’s a matter of trying to shift out the things we mistakenly perceive as love, from true love. It’s been part of the human equation for quite some time. Kept poets and songwriters trying to express it.

Does that help?

[Czarcasm]

@fessie

Mind if I toss a question back?

How do you live without prayer?

I find this question rather baffling. I eat. I sleep. I breath. I work. I play. I grow. I learn. I love. I have sex. I hate. I live, without prayer. I die.
I live, without prayer.
I live.

[cosmosdan]

@lowbrass

I don’t see any of those things as being inconsistent with an intellectual approach.

No foolin? Changing how we feel is consistent with the intellectual approach?

I’d be interested in how you see that.

[Kalhoun]

@cosmosdan

I think I got it. I was just pointing out the value of humility. When someone does what I believe to be a good job I say “You did a good job” not "praise the Lord.

Understanding how we interact helps keep the ego in check so the pendulum doesn’t swing to far the other way. I’ve met some arrogant pricks, haven’t you?

Sure I have. The old adage, “Too much of anything is never good” has always rung true to me. However, that doesn’t mean pride is bad (as the bible says). Pride is very valuable.

[Kalhoun]

@cosmosdan

I do believe that love can be a consistent truth for all of us. It’s a matter of trying to shift out the things we mistakenly perceive as love, from true love. It’s been part of the human equation for quite some time. Kept poets and songwriters trying to express it.

Does that help?

I’m not sure there can be a mistake in the perception of love, except within the individual, and I’m not even sure of that. I hate when the concept of “love” breaks into these conversations because it really can’t be described in a way that is understandable or correct to everyone. I agree it’s a part of the human equation, but the word itself is too vague to be of any value as far as a mutual understanding among men goes.

[Kalhoun]

@cosmosdan

No foolin? Changing how we feel is consistent with the intellectual approach?

I’d be interested in how you see that.

I think I know what he’s saying. We all know that intellectual input has an effect on how we perceive other things in the world. God belief isn’t (or shouldn’t be) exempt from that process.

[cosmosdan]

@Kalhoun

Sure I have. The old adage, “Too much of anything is never good” has always rung true to me. However, that doesn’t mean pride is bad (as the bible says). Pride is very valuable.

Is the pride of the bible the same as the pride we’re talking about now? How would we know?

I don’t agree with those who interpret it so literally that they can’t celebrate any accomplishment. Like most things, it’s balance. Having an awareness of our interdependency and how the interaction all works helps keep egos in check. I was the lead singer for a few bands but I always realized it was a team effort and having a good team was essential to enjoy the ride.

[Kalhoun]

@cosmosdan

Is the pride of the bible the same as the pride we’re talking about now? How would we know?

I don’t agree with those who interpret it so literally that they can’t celebrate any accomplishment. Like most things, it’s balance. Having an awareness of our interdependency and how the interaction all works helps keep egos in check. I was the lead singer for a few bands but I always realized it was a team effort and having a good team was essential to enjoy the ride.

Agreed. But this isn’t exactly something that is lost on the masses. We all know we’re interconnected. That’s how humans function and with the exception of the mentally infirm and the occasional, certifiable egomaniac. Are there variations between the two extremes? Certainly. That’s what makes it interesting.

I haven’t heard the biblical use of the word “pride” defined differently than we define it today. I’ll assume they defined it the same way we define it now, unless someone has information to the contrary.

[Johanna]

@lowbrass

Hmmm…this seems to be straying very far from the original topic. I find the use of the word “infinite” to describe an emotion to be an odd usage of the word, and no I don’t think I’m discounting any valid definitions of “infinite” other than those definitions that would constitute religious jargon. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say now, or how it relates to any point I made.

I explained this above. I can restate it if you like.
Not the feeling itself, but the sense that it is growing stronger and can keep getting stronger. Not just any old feeling-- hunger, thirst, horny, tired, angry, bored, anxious are all feelings too, but they’re not what I mean. The sense of the sacred is a feeling with a recognizable quality all its own: one of its characteristics is a sense of one’s own self in union with the universe or something all-encompassing, or in the presence of such, or in communication with such. Ways I’ve found to access that feeling include compassion, love, beauty. Mechanisms for helping bring it about that we’ve discussed here include music, poetry, yoga. (Personally, my favorite is dance. A favorite of many people is sex.) When the feeling of the sacred increases so strongly that it becomes overwhelming, it seems like it could keep increasing and never stop. This gives the perception that one is in contact with a source of the sacred feeling, a source that can keep giving more and more of it and never stop.

Here I’m not using any religious jargon. Unless the meaning of the word “sacred” in plain English is unknown to you, in which case I’m afraid you’ll have to take for granted that other people share similar experiences in common and that a consensus exists to call this experience “sacred.” I’ve read countless accounts of people experiencing the sacred in daily life with no reference to any deity or religious practice.

This suggests that “sacred” covers both what we call religion and a wider area of human experience. It still comes down to religion being a subset of possible worldviews, such that it’s possible to build a coherent worldview including ethics without religion. I have no problem with that at all. The only remaining questions seem to be the bafflement of religious thinkers at the existence of nonreligious thinkers, and vice-versa. I don’t find that very interesting, sorry.

[Johanna]

@Johanna

a sense of one’s own self in union with the universe or something all-encompassing

*Maybe “deity” is a subset of the large and vague term “all-encompassing.” Humans like to put faces on things.

[Johanna]

@Kalhoun

I appreciate your non-dogmatic view of these things more than you know. However, the definition of sacred overwhelmingly leans toward the religious, so I won’t use that word to describe the feeling I get when I feel connected to The Big Picture and the human condition. It confuses things.

I’d be interested in knowing how you do like to talk about that feeling.

I applaud the pagans who question whether or not they’re communicating with deities and I’m glad you get a positive result via the rituals. But if it doesn’t matter whether deities exist or not, why would someone include them in the mix? I don’t see the value in that.

I think humans just like to put a face on things. It’s like poetry.

I know what infinite means, in the non-mathematical sense. I use it all the time when employing hyperbole. I can’t locate where you used it (actually, I thought it was Fessie who used it). But I’m sure I read it as “endless” the same way that I would use it when exaggerating to make a point.

OK.

See, I think that’s why it bothers me that you use it. I think you look at life and the human experience similarly to the way I do, except that you use some language that would lead most people (cough) me (cough) to believe otherwise. For purposes of communication, these words aren’t working. If you take those words away from the christians (for purposes of this discussion) how do they communicate what they believe? For all practical purposes, they own the words. There are other words for the rest of us that would get the job done in half the time.

BaLOney the Christians own those words. They took those words from the Pagans before them. Our religious language is made of words that the pagan Anglo-Saxons, Romans, and Greeks used before the Christians took over. In the field of comparative religion, a term like “sacred” is used in a universal enough sense that it can apply to all religions and outside of religion as well. If it weren’t for universal terminology used in studying religions, the field of comparative religion wouldn’t even be possible.

You understood where I’m coming from once we talked it over. I understand you too. Sometimes to understand each other we just need to talk it over for a while, instead of taking words like banners or symbols. Bottom line, we both have human hearts and if we listen to one another enough I believe understanding is always possible.

I never perceive goodness to be infinite. It ebbs and flows with everything else. Certainly I appreciate when goodness is on a roll, so to speak, but I don’t get the ultimate source perception.

<shrug> OK, you don’t. And I do. Maybe such a difference can be explained by the ways that neurons fire in our brains. For me practically everything in life is filled with a sense of the numinous. I can conceive of going through life without it–but such a deprivation would be horrible and depressing for me. I’m happy the way I am, I guess that’s the only answer to your question of why would I be this way. Who really knows why anyone is the way anyone is? Sometimes the only answer is “I just am this way, that’s all.” I look to brain function because I can’t think of any other explanation.

Kalhoun, I just want to say thanks to both you and lowbrass for talking this over with me with respect. I believe interfaith dialogue is vital in today’s world, likewise we need more respectful dialogue between religious thinkers and atheists. I think that just by listening to one another and staying open to the other person, we can cherish our common humanity more than any ideology or belief.

[lowbrass]

@cosmosdan

Interesting difference.

I may prefer blue and you may prefer red. That would be true. We would both recognize blue as blue and red as red. That would be a consistent truth that all people share. {except for the colorblind, but you get my drift}

I do believe that love can be a consistent truth for all of us. It’s a matter of trying to shift out the things we mistakenly perceive as love, from true love. It’s been part of the human equation for quite some time. Kept poets and songwriters trying to express it.

Does that help?

But you changed the question. I didn’t say agreeing what colors are is a subjective matter. I said which color is your favorite is a subjective matter. One can certainly measure light wavelengths objectively and agree on their definitions. And we can objectively agree that love exists, but not that love is the most important thing, because what is important to a person is a matter of opinion. I would consider the idea that love is the most important thing to be wisdom, but not objective fact. I’m sure there are some people who believe something else might be more important.

[lowbrass]

@Johanna

I explained this above. I can restate it if you like.
Not the feeling itself, but the sense that it is growing stronger and can keep getting stronger. Not just any old feeling-- hunger, thirst, horny, tired, angry, bored, anxious are all feelings too, but they’re not what I mean. The sense of the sacred is a feeling with a recognizable quality all its own: one of its characteristics is a sense of one’s own self in union with the universe or something all-encompassing, or in the presence of such, or in communication with such. Ways I’ve found to access that feeling include compassion, love, beauty. Mechanisms for helping bring it about that we’ve discussed here include music, poetry, yoga. (Personally, my favorite is dance. A favorite of many people is sex.) When the feeling of the sacred increases so strongly that it becomes overwhelming, it seems like it could keep increasing and never stop. This gives the perception that one is in contact with a source of the sacred feeling, a source that can keep giving more and more of it and never stop.

Here I’m not using any religious jargon. Unless the meaning of the word “sacred” in plain English is unknown to you, in which case I’m afraid you’ll have to take for granted that other people share similar experiences in common and that a consensus exists to call this experience “sacred.”

“Sacred” in plain English means “devoted or dedicated to a deity or to some religious purpose; consecrated.” Honestly, your use of that word doesn’t add any meaning for me. It just seems circular. You’re describing a religious feeling as religious. And to get back to the original discussion, I have certainly had sublime feelings from music (music happens to be my career); I just don’t think it follows that something very very strong is necessarily infinite. If I think of a really, really big number, say a billion digits, it’s still not infinity - it’s just an incredibly big number. Imagine that the furthest distance you ever traveled was a mile. Then one day, you traveled 1,000 miles. You might think that was close to infinity, since up to that point, you hadn’t traveled anywhere near that distance. But of course you would be unaware that the universe encompasses billions and trillions of miles, and more. So you have no point of reference in that case to conclude that you were approaching infinity. Likewise, you might have a feeling that’s much stronger than any feeling you’ve had up to that point, but that doesn’t mean it’s infinite.

The only remaining questions seem to be the bafflement of religious thinkers at the existence of nonreligious thinkers, and vice-versa. I don’t find that very interesting, sorry.

Why would you be sorry about that? You’re not required to find anything interesting that you don’t want to.

[Kalhoun]

@Johanna

I’d be interested in knowing how you do like to talk about that feeling.

Passionate. Fervent. Excited. Sometimes addicted. I prefer to use words that describe my feeling toward the object of my emotion rather than using words to describe the object itself. After all, it is MY interpretation. Not everyone will see, say, Carlos Santana’s guitar work the same way I do (though if that’s the case, they’re probably dead) .

I think humans just like to put a face on things.

I can see that for some people.

It’s like poetry.

I love the part that art plays in your faith. I believe it is the ultimate expression of humanity in all it’s shades and far more communicative than a religious text could ever be. (signed – Kalhoun, who believe it or not, is a big fan of religious art)

BaLOney the Christians own those words. They took those words from the Pagans before them. Our religious language is made of words that the pagan Anglo-Saxons, Romans, and Greeks used before the Christians took over. In the field of comparative religion, a term like “sacred” is used in a universal enough sense that it can apply to all religions and outside of religion as well. If it weren’t for universal terminology used in studying religions, the field of comparative religion wouldn’t even be possible.

They took 'em, alright. They’ve got a *death grip * on 'em! What ever was a couple thousand years ago ain’t how it is today. My online dictionary defines sacred as:

1. **devoted or dedicated to a deity ** or to some religious purpose; consecrated.

2. entitled to veneration or religious respect by association with divinity or divine things; holy.

3. pertaining to or connected with religion (opposed to secular or profane): sacred music; sacred books.

4. reverently dedicated to some person, purpose, or object: a morning hour sacred to study.

5. regarded with reverence: the sacred memory of a dead hero.

6. secured against violation, infringement, etc., as by reverence or sense of right: sacred oaths; sacred rights.

7. properly immune from violence, interference, etc., as a person or office.

I’ll give you #4…if I squint my eyes a little. Numbers 5, 6, and 7 don’t apply to this conversation at all. As I said, while there may be old definitions or other definitions, the overwhelming vibe of the word “sacred” is religious.

You understood where I’m coming from once we talked it over. I understand you too. Sometimes to understand each other we just need to talk it over for a while, instead of taking words like banners or symbols. Bottom line, we both have human hearts and if we listen to one another enough I believe understanding is always possible.

I agree. But on its face, without follow-up discussion, there is a gap in understanding. I don’t always have a weekend of leisurely message board exchanges to drill down into someone’s make-up (but I’m glad I did ). WooHOO for teh internets, huh?

<shrug> OK, you don’t. And I do. Maybe such a difference can be explained by the ways that neurons fire in our brains. For me practically everything in life is filled with a sense of the numinous. I can conceive of going through life without it–but such a deprivation would be horrible and depressing for me. I’m happy the way I am, I guess that’s the only answer to your question of why would I be this way. Who really knows why anyone is the way anyone is? Sometimes the only answer is “I just am this way, that’s all.” I look to brain function because I can’t think of any other explanation.

I wouldn’t want to go through life without a sense of intense wonder and awe about our world. It is what makes life worth living. That there are people (on these very boards :eek: ) who don’t like music in any form, who don’t read fiction, and seemingly don’t enjoy the non-scientific side of life, just blows my mind. But, to each his own and all that.

It may be a combination of brain function and life experience. It could be any number of things; but I believe without a doubt that all the good and all the bad in this world is of this world. (This viewpoint subject to change without notice.)

Kalhoun, I just want to say thanks to both you and lowbrass for talking this over with me with respect. I believe interfaith dialogue is vital in today’s world, likewise we need more respectful dialogue between religious thinkers and atheists. I think that just by listening to one another and staying open to the other person, we can cherish our common humanity more than any ideology or belief.

That’s what I’m talking about! See? We’re clickin’ over here! I’m glad we could do this without it getting ugly, too. I’m working at toning down my approach to these conversations. Evidently I’ve made some progress!

[cosmosdan]

@lowbrass

But you changed the question. I didn’t say agreeing what colors are is a subjective matter. I said which color is your favorite is a subjective matter. One can certainly measure light wavelengths objectively and agree on their definitions. And we can objectively agree that love exists, but not that love is the most important thing, because what is important to a person is a matter of opinion. I would consider the idea that love is the most important thing to be wisdom, but not objective fact. I’m sure there are some people who believe something else might be more important.

I understand what you said. I was trying to explain my own view.
The difference is that I do believe there is an ultimate truth about love. Something that is true and consistent for all people.

1 Cor. 13 has a pretty good description of it.

People may indeed believe that other things are more important. They also disagree about what is or isn’t love. Romantic love, love for our family, love for our fellow man. IMHO personnel progress and growth and by association societal progress and growth are tied to discovering what is true about love.

I asked you a question a few posts back about changing how we feel being part of the intellectual process. I’d be interested in your thoughts on that if you have time.

[cosmosdan]

@Kalhoun

That’s what I’m talking about! See? We’re clickin’ over here! I’m glad we could do this without it getting ugly, too. I’m working at toning down my approach to these conversations. Evidently I’ve made some progress!

I second Johannas sentiment. I think discussions about our differences are very helpful. I appreciate the time and effort you and lowbrass have put in.

[I_Love_Me_Vol.I]

@Kalhoun

I hate when the concept of “love” breaks into these conversations because it really can’t be described in a way that is understandable or correct to everyone.

Just like the word “God”. That’s why I prefer to think of the word “God” just as I think of/process/use the term “x”. That is, as a variable.