If God is real ...

[pianoperformer]

If God is real, how do you know what God is? How do you know if there is a true religion, or maybe there is none? Maybe it doesn't matter what you believe, in the end. But what if it does? What if, for example, the true God is the Christian God? How do you know, or how can you tell?

I'm taking a theology class (because it's required), and it has shown me that pure reason can't take you all the way, when it comes to theology. If there is a God, there's probably nothing anyone can do to prove it. It kind of reminds me of characters within a game learning about the properties of the game itself, but coming to the conclusion that there is no creator because they can't find him/her within the game.

I'm still undecided, but I'm faced with the question, "what if".

There are many religions out there. Even though people don't like to admit it, even the beliefs often discussed here are a sort of religion, even if it doesn't have a name, and isn't organized. One can't just select a religion and be satisfied; one has to be reasonably sure that it is true.

I'm really nervous about this thread, because I am really looking for all perspectives, and don't want people of different beliefs attacking one another, as often happens in such threads. If you're Christian, tell me why. If you're Jewish, tell me why. If you're Buddhist, tell me why. If you just are spiritual and kind of chose your own beliefs, tell me why you hold such beliefs. Tell me why you don't think you are wrong, too. Similarly, I'm going to try to remain unbiased and hear everyone's views, but at the same time I'll probably question them.

[philm]

hi pianoperformer,

Now i dont think in terms of trying to prove whether God is real or not.

For a long time i believed that a "God" was real, but over time the whole idea of this entity creating everything with some unknown Will that we should take for granted based on the words of what people told me to do. All this seemed absurd and made less and less sense especially with all the guilt and judgement embedded in religious circles and even more so if you try and make sense out of some of the madness we experience on earth.

For whatever reasons over the last 15 years or so i resonated more and more with Buddhism, which doesn't hold notions of a "God", but doesn't deny such notions either. Buddhism asserts that everything is inter-dependant and that we created our own miseries and we could reshape our experiences. In particular by letting Go. Over time whatever i have experienced seemed to be in accord with it.

However, its clear different religions are really important to different people & gives some meaning in their life so it would be really senseless and unwise to try and change their beliefs to something else as it could cause more harm to their experiencing of reality.

anyway best wishes to you pianoperformer : )

[fellowtraveler]

I don't use the G-word much because it's too strongly attached to Western organized religion. Whatever god is, you could call it Fred for all I care, at this point (although I think there is significance in the actual Utterance of a truth). If I'm asked if I believe in God, I would have to say no in most cases because they'd be usually talking about that old guy with the beard on a throne who is our Big Daddy and who is completely separate from us.

Religion = dogma, to me. If dogma = thinking and acting like everyone else, fuggeddaboudit.

The Path is universal, yet different for everyone. Therefore I don't see how a truly valid relgion is possible. Even the more enlightened spiritual ideas...none of them are going to be completely accurate for every person.

Why do I believe the things I do? Well, I have very few solid beliefs - that's why we're all here, to gather and refine our ideas. Some concepts I'm slowly beginning to grasp and are finally solidifying into beliefs - I came by those honestly. I've been told I am fairly claircognizant - the ideas I've worked out over the course of the past 50 years or so are always with me. So, when I come across a concept that rings true (and usually corresponds exactly with my own idea, conceived independently) I get a nice AHA! moment and it becomes a belief, but always subject to refinement.

Well, that and the one mescaline experience...

[pianoperformer]

fellowtraveler, that's what I mean though: how do you know that the path is different for everyone? Why is there not an objective truth; an objective path?

I just have to bring that up because you pronounced it as truth without saying why you think so. I'm pretty sure not everyone objectively agrees that there is not one true path.

Anyway, I get what you are saying. I don't know if religion is that evil, though, if one consciously chooses it. If one is just born in it and then doesn't search further, then yes I think that is wrong. If you consciously choose it, though, then no one is telling you how to think. You are actively choosing it, and gathering with others who believe the same thing. What's so wrong about that?

[NightSpirit]

When people say they don't like religion usually what they mean is they don't like what they have seen of what people do who claim to be of a certain religion.

There is a difference between disagreeing with the content in religious writings and teachings and disagreeing with the way some are living out their understanding of what the writings mean. In musical terms, it's the difference between hearing a performance of the original composition as written, an arrangement or a massacre of the piece by ignorant or sloppy musician. In seeking God, most people are blaming the composer for the faulty performers.

By studying, on my own, what is actually stated in the Bible, I came to believe what is there is true, first from a kind of resonance within my spirit, particularly in the teachings of Jesus. Then after I accepted that there is a God and Jesus was speaking about Him then my faith began to grow, through trial and error, asking and receiving answers, seeking and finding, etc. in a process that continues until now. I have not ceased to be fascinated by the mysteries and complexities and all the implications of what is written there.

[fellowtraveler]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

fellowtraveler, that's what I mean though: how do you know that the path is different for everyone? Why is there not an objective truth; an objective path?

I just have to bring that up because you pronounced it as truth without saying why you think so. I'm pretty sure not everyone objectively agrees that there is not one true path.

Anyway, I get what you are saying. I don't know if religion is that evil, though, if one consciously chooses it. If one is just born in it and then doesn't search further, then yes I think that is wrong. If you consciously choose it, though, then no one is telling you how to think. You are actively choosing it, and gathering with others who believe the same thing. What's so wrong about that?

Fuzzy logic is still logic. Me, not you.

If subatomic particles can be in many places at once or nowhere at all, and can be either energy or matter, and can instantaneously communicate regardless of space or time distance (which research apparently is showing), and since we are apparently made of these little buggers...to me that means everything is indeterminate until you get to the macro, then it's One. In our little individual, illusory expression of One, that indeterminacy tells me that there are many, maybe an infinite number, of ways to do anything, including finding our way back home.

Anywho...as I say, I go with my gut because I don't do conventional logic very well.

Now I must leave my job trailer and go inspect a bridge. We have until Tuesday morning to re-open the road so we're working 12-hour shifts on a holiday weekend. At my age I druther have the time off than the OT, but what the heck. I'll be mellow when I'm dead, as Weird Al used to say...

[Parthon]

I was raised catholic, and didn't find it particularly interesting. Then I read the bible, and while I thought it was a good book with lots of great tips, it didn't resonate strongly. Then I read the creation belief for a particular mythos:

There is that which is everything (source/god) and that which is nothing (non existance). Everything does, has, will or could exist forms up source. The opposite of source, is nothing or non existance, as nothing can exist outside of source. The two of these are not seperate, as they form the universe we live in. On the boundary between everything that exists and everything that doesn't exist, is the pattern of what actually does exist, as defined by a universe. Ours is one such universe, and it could be the only one possible, or it could be one of a near infinite number, there's no way us humans as humans could tell. This unique pattern of existance is what gives us the universe.

Why are we here? Because we are all a part of source, and the only way source can change, expand and grow is by taking nonexistance to create form and time imbued with consciousness in order to experience itself. I'm not even sure there is another purpose, because everything comes down to experience eventually.

Inside of this belief though, almost anything is possible. Any of the other religions could be true. In fact, they could all be true at the same time, because there's nothing saying that this universe is completely objective. If it is source, creating form in order to experience, then any experience could happen.

How did I come about this belief? I read it in a book one day and it just rang true for me. As I've read about other things that have resonated with me, I've adopted them into the belief, because they fit and because it resonates true.

Why don't I like organised religion? Because they take the magnificent wonder that is the universe and squeeze it down so it fits in a book, then they take this squeezed down book and claim it's the one truth. Then they create customs, traditions and behaviours for it's members. Finally, they set up institutions and structures to keep it all in place. All this is for control of the populace in order to gain money, to gain power, or to gain something else that's not their right either. It limits human freedom, which also limits human experience, and if I believe experience is what it's all about, then I won't like religion.

The closest match I could find to my belief is: Panentheism. Read about it here.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

When people say they don't like religion usually what they mean is they don't like what they have seen of what people do who claim to be of a certain religion.

There is a difference between disagreeing with the content in religious writings and teachings and disagreeing with the way some are living out their understanding of what the writings mean. In musical terms, it's the difference between hearing a performance of the original composition as written, an arrangement or a massacre of the piece by ignorant or sloppy musician. In seeking God, most people are blaming the composer for the faulty performers.

Oh, I totally agree with you. I'm trying to look beyond that.

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

By studying, on my own, what is actually stated in the Bible, I came to believe what is there is true, first from a kind of resonance within my spirit, particularly in the teachings of Jesus. Then after I accepted that there is a God and Jesus was speaking about Him then my faith began to grow, through trial and error, asking and receiving answers, seeking and finding, etc. in a process that continues until now. I have not ceased to be fascinated by the mysteries and complexities and all the implications of what is written there.

That's great. What exactly did you start to study? It's quite a large book, lol.

Although, I will admit I have read through the entire thing once, but that was a few years ago.

I'm just trying to figure all of this out. I don't think anyone denies there was a man called Jesus who lived around that time.

So the question is: did he actually do all of this stuff, or did a bunch of people, just make it up?

I guess one could say they (the apostles) made it up if one wanted to, but, they went through quite a bit for their faith (e.g., dying rather brutal deaths). Is that really congruent with someone making something up?

Well, I can't really deny that part, which is why I ask what I have asked.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by fellowtraveler

Fuzzy logic is still logic. Me, not you.

Originally Posted by fellowtraveler

If subatomic particles can be in many places at once or nowhere at all, and can be either energy or matter, and can instantaneously communicate regardless of space or time distance (which research apparently is showing), and since we are apparently made of these little buggers...to me that means everything is indeterminate until you get to the macro, then it's One. In our little individual, illusory expression of One, that indeterminacy tells me that there are many, maybe an infinite number, of ways to do anything, including finding our way back home.

No, no...those things only apply on the subatomic scale. Above that, down to the very atom, everything is very predictable according to the scientific laws already in place. I don't think one can extrapolate anything from this.

Originally Posted by fellowtraveler

Anywho...as I say, I go with my gut because I don't do conventional logic very well.

The gut can be wrong. Obviously, if there is one truth, quite a few people's guts were wrong, because people have different beliefs.

In our world, there is an objective truth. Something generally either is or is not true. I just have trouble seeing why we discard that when it comes to spirituality/religion.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by Parthon

I was raised catholic, and didn't find it particularly interesting. Then I read the bible, and while I thought it was a good book with lots of great tips, it didn't resonate strongly. Then I read the creation belief for a particular mythos:

...Snip...

How did I come about this belief? I read it in a book one day and it just rang true for me. As I've read about other things that have resonated with me, I've adopted them into the belief, because they fit and because it resonates true.

See my previous post. Why isn't there an objective truth?

Originally Posted by Parthon

Why don't I like organised religion? Because they take the magnificent wonder that is the universe and squeeze it down so it fits in a book, then they take this squeezed down book and claim it's the one truth. Then they create customs, traditions and behaviours for it's members. Finally, they set up institutions and structures to keep it all in place. All this is for control of the populace in order to gain money, to gain power, or to gain something else that's not their right either. It limits human freedom, which also limits human experience, and if I believe experience is what it's all about, then I won't like religion.

Wait, you took your beliefs from reading from a book, didn't you?

I wonder whether you also dislike science since it breaks down the universe into laws and theories. Human nature is to try to make sense of our universe, which is what both science and religion try to do.

Originally Posted by Parthon

The closest match I could find to my belief is: Panentheism. Read about it here.

I'm already familiar with it.

By the way, I'm not attacking your beliefs. Simply trying to delve a little deeper into it and why you believe in it.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

If God is real, how do you know what God is? How do you know if there is a true religion, or maybe there is none? Maybe it doesn't matter what you believe, in the end. But what if it does? What if, for example, the true God is the Christian God? How do you know, or how can you tell?

I'm taking a theology class (because it's required), and it has shown me that pure reason can't take you all the way, when it comes to theology. If there is a God, there's probably nothing anyone can do to prove it. It kind of reminds me of characters within a game learning about the properties of the game itself, but coming to the conclusion that there is no creator because they can't find him/her within the game.

I'm still undecided, but I'm faced with the question, "what if".

There are many religions out there. Even though people don't like to admit it, even the beliefs often discussed here are a sort of religion, even if it doesn't have a name, and isn't organized. One can't just select a religion and be satisfied; one has to be reasonably sure that it is true.

My perspective on religion, god, and spirituality is that rather than making a journey of picking up beliefs we should make a journey of finding ways of emptying them. I see beliefs as filters for reality. Not only that, but they oftentimes reflexively engineer the logic we use, making reason suspect as well. For example, if we presume an external universe, we can't help but come to the logical conclusion that since it is "out there" we must be "in here". What if we're wrong?

Intuition can also be distorted by belief. If we believe our intuition is given by god, we have already distorted its reality. Beliefs are like the shadows of truth. Shadows are created when light is blocked. Both logic and intuition become clear when belief is dismantled. They might even become one. Or at least, I can say, that is what appears to be true to me, the more beliefs I dismantle. Maybe I'm wrong of course. I haven't completely shed that which separates me, the observer, from thou, the observed.

The more filters we toss out the window, the more able we are to let the undistorted reality flow through. Of course, seeing one who does this, they will not appear to be belief-less, and perhaps they aren't, but they are opening their minds to new possibilities constantly. They become more emotionally "objective". They become less invested and less defensive about what others think of their perspective. When you care about knowing the truth more than what the truth ends up actually being, you are on the path.

So until we can get rid of belief entirely, we adopt the most expansive beliefs we can -- the beliefs that give us the most light (which I believe is something intuitively felt by all to some degree or another). So people turn to the beliefs of the ages. Some of them are enlightening, some not so enlightening. But its a ladder to get you somewhere. Once you're there, you can get rid of the ladder that got you up there. The truth is like a mosaic, and the pieces are found in every corner of existence. It is our job to integrate that.

There are those that are able to feel more light upon their shoulders because the sky of their consciousness is relatively free from the clouds of belief. But they can't clear our clouds for us, they can only point out the clouds. Meanwhile, we mistake the clouds for sky and think the light we feel is all the light there is.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by Anagogy

My perspective on religion, god, and spirituality is that rather than making a journey of picking up beliefs we should make a journey of finding ways of emptying them. I see beliefs as filters for reality. No only that, but they oftentimes reflexively engineer the logic we use, making reason suspect as well. For example, if we presume an external universe, we can't help but come to the logical conclusion that since it is "out there" we must be "in here". What if we're wrong?

But that's just evident from experience, I mean that the universe is external. People philosophize that it may not be so, but to me, that seems silly, and there's really no objective experience that could even hint that such is true.

Originally Posted by Anagogy

Intuition can also be distorted by belief. If we believe our intuition is given by god, we have already distorted its reality. Beliefs are like the shadows of truth. Shadows are created when light is blocked. Both logic and intuition become clear when belief is dismantled. They might even become one. Or at least, I can say, that is what appears to be true to me, the more beliefs I dismantle. Maybe I'm wrong of course. I haven't completely shed that which separates me, the observer, from thou, the observed.

The more filters we toss out the window, the more able we are to let the undistorted reality flow through. Of course, seeing one who does this, they will not appear to be belief-less, and perhaps they aren't, but they are opening their minds to new possibilities constantly. They become more emotionally "objective". They become less invested and less defensive about what others think of their perspective. When you care about knowing the truth more than what the truth ends up actually being, you are on the path.

Belief is not evil. In fact, every person believes. The question is, what to believe in? You have a belief that beliefs are bad.

Originally Posted by Anagogy

So until we can get rid of belief entirely, we adopt the most expansive beliefs we can -- the beliefs that give us the most light (which I believe is something intuitively felt by all to some degree or another). So people turn to the beliefs of the ages. Some of them are enlightening, some not so enlightening. But its a ladder to get you somewhere. Once you're there, you can get rid of the ladder that got you up there. The truth is like a mosaic, and the pieces are found in every corner of existence. It is our job to integrate that.

What are the "beliefs of the ages"? Any belief that is quite old? That doesn't narrow it down very much. Most beliefs have been around for millenia.

[Anagogy]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

But that's just evident from experience, I mean that the universe is external. People philosophize that it may not be so, but to me, that seems silly, and there's really no objective experience that could even hint that such is true.

Then that is your belief, and who am I to dispute your truths that are evident from your experience?

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Belief is not evil. In fact, every person believes. The question is, what to believe in? You have a belief that beliefs are bad.

When did I say beliefs were bad? I do recall saying, however, that beliefs were filters -- that is all.

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

What are the "beliefs of the ages"? Any belief that is quite old? That doesn't narrow it down very much. Most beliefs have been around for millenia.

Indeed. The point was that few beliefs are original. We simply choose that which works best for us, until we find something better. I'm simply saying that I, personally, feel the most light when I am free of belief. That is my opinion. Nothing more.

[NightSpirit]

Originally Posted by Parthon

There is that which is everything (source/god) and that which is nothing (non existance)

Do you really believe there is a place where there is nothing?

I know there is a theory of the "God of the gaps", the place where we don't know what exists, we frail humans have to put a God. But a place of nothing at all, no light, matter, air, atoms? Nothing? Not even thought or observation?

Please tell me why you believe that is the truth. I am not disagreeing, just never heard of the possibility and want to understand the idea then see if I can find it in the Bible.

Thanks.

[NightSpirit]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

That's great. What exactly did you start to study? It's quite a large book, lol.

More important than what I studied, I think, was the premise I was starting with in my search. I was looking for something real. I had tried church before and didn't want a repeat of basing my life on a "hope so" or "this sounds right" type of thing. My core belief was that if there is a creator and He made me with the ability speak and hear and know, then He probably should be able to know, hear and speak Himself.

I also assumed that if the Bible is true and I do what it says then something should actually happen to me. The people that wrote the Bible were inspired to record, after the fact, their account of things God had already done and said to them in their lives. If He spoke to them, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Jonah, David, Mary and Joseph, The Apostles and Paul and others, in the same ways, over the course of thousands of years then He could speak to me and that's what I wanted. I know some people don't believe it's possible.

A Christian man I knew also said God spoke to him so that's why I was looking for God in the Bible. It was like a test, really, to do what the book said and see what God did. More than just to hear God, I guess I was looking for power to influence Him since a lot of people in my family were sick and I wanted God to at least hear me for them.

"Then you will find me when you seek me with your all your heart ."" Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God." "Draw near to God and He will draw near to you." "If I regard iniquity in my heart the Lord will not hear me."
were some of the first verses that seemed to pop out at me or the one's people would bring up when I asked them how to know God.

I stopped doing the things I felt were sins. This didn't seem odd or a burden to me at the time because I wanted to see miracles. The first sign that something was different was a new sensation like God really was hearing me, kind of like the feeling you get when you think someone is watching you. I visited any and all kinds of Christian churches to see which teachings lined up with what I was getting from what I read. And about one point of confusion in debate in Christian circles, Acts 2, I asked God to teach me what it meant.

After a few weeks of studying and trying to practice what I read, I had my first experience with God at a church one night where I didn't know anyone. I posted about it at length in a conversation with Bob Who are the Christians? if you're interested and have a LOT of time to read it all. Sorry about the length but I hope it helps answer some of why I believe what I do.

I don't claim to know everything or that everything I believe is right. I don't even think all my beliefs have to always be right for me to still have a relationship with Jesus. I just know that as I sought God in the Bible then some of what happened to them also happened to me and I believe what the Bible says, that Jesus is the Son of God.

If someone is sincerely searching for the truth about God then I would think it is up to God to be sure they find that truth. The sincerity of a person's heart is not something anyone else can judge. But we all can be sincerely wrong at times. I don't always understand the thought process of what people believe but I welcome it if someone cares enough to point out a possible blind spot or what they think is a better way to me. It may just be God working through that person.

[Truthsayer]

I'm fairly new to this site and enjoy all of the discussions. My philosophy on this one is:

Ask and you shall receive an answer. Seek and you shall find "the" answer.
Whenever I am need of understanding I take my questions directly to the source and always receive my answers directly from the source. No one can tell you the truth. Their truth you may receive, but "the" truth is something one must discover for himself.

I am reminded of a serious conversation I had with the Lord about a year ago. I was pondering a very vivid dream that I had about eight years ago where I received a visit from a spiritual teacher who informed me that I "must deliver the message." I had no understanding of what this message could be.

I asked the Lord in meditation; "What can I possibly say or do that hasn't already been said or done? What can I communicate that Jesus Himself hasn't already tried to say? No one listened to Him, no one understands Him. No one understands me either. Lord, you have a very strange way of doing your work."

I sat for a few moments in silence. As I was about to get up I heard a whisper. It was soft and quick, like a breeze. All that it said was; "Keep going".

Not the answer I was hoping for, but events and knowledge obtained through unseen guidance over the next year has revealed to me some truths that have never been recorded, not even in the Bible. I am in the process of writing and publishing my findings. I now have a better understanding of what that message is and why I have been chosen to deliver it.

I went through the doubts and skepticism stages in my youth and at one point even considered myself an atheist. I am thankful that I wasn't born into a strictly religious family where Church is a mandatory part of upbringing. My mind wasn't forced closed by all of the strict rules of conduct enforced by the church which would guarantee me an eternal seat in hell if I broke them. Instead, I was free to question the true nature of God.

During my spell as an "atheist", something did not want me to give up the search. It was as if God put His arm around me and said; "Never mind that crap, allow ME to show you. Did He ever! Heaven let your light shine down!

My faith in God was not instilled in church or any other religious venue or cult. It was acquired rather mystically, through dreams, personal experience and direct communication. No one can break my faith.

[Parthon]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

See my previous post. Why isn't there an objective truth?

Hmmm, that's a tricky one. It could be because one objective truth would limit the amount of experiences humanity could have. If maximum experience is what the universe is for, having just one objective truth goes against that ideal.

Why there can't be one set of provable objective beliefs could be because they can't be proved by our current level of understanding. I would also say that science can't really prove anything that's not mathematically calculable. If you tried to use science to prove that a butterfly exists, you'd have a hard time of it.

Perhaps the one universal truth is that there is no universal truth. Nice contradictory idea though.

Wait, you took your beliefs from reading from a book, didn't you?

Yup, it's the creation myth from Demon: The Fallen, a tabletop RPG from White Wolf Publishing.

I wonder whether you also dislike science since it breaks down the universe into laws and theories. Human nature is to try to make sense of our universe, which is what both science and religion try to do.

It's not the action I have problems with, it's the purpose and results. Science tends to discover in order to expand what humans know and can do, and there's definately freedom in that. Scientists who refuse to believe in new information are not real scientists in my eyes, because science happens in experimentation and being curious, not in debunking myths and being skeptical. If we believed those skeptics - that humans could never fly, or that electricity isn't real, where would we be today?

Most religions are limiting paradigms. They may start off as a reflection on reality, but even when they are they are often soon warped into something else. They are often about limiting freedom to achieve some particular agenda.

As for Laws, I think they are a good idea in theory, but sometimes a bad idea in execution. It's an oxymoron that there's more possibility in restrictions than there are in total freedom. What a structured and law abiding society can achieve is so much more than another society without this structure, and this of course leads to new experiences.

There are some parts of religion I like though, like the Ten Commandments from many faiths. If you view them as a guideline to live life by, then you can see your life will be improved just by follow them. If everyone followed them, there would be less need for all the police the world has, and peace would be an option for the world.

By the way, I'm not attacking your beliefs. Simply trying to delve a little deeper into it and why you believe in it.

I understand.

Even though I read them in a book to begin with, I questioned and sculpted them for years. I'd be the last person to stand up and say they are true, but for me, I can't see how they can't be true.

[Parthon]

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

Do you really believe there is a place where there is nothing?

I know there is a theory of the "God of the gaps", the place where we don't know what exists, we frail humans have to put a God. But a place of nothing at all, no light, matter, air, atoms? Nothing? Not even thought or observation?

Please tell me why you believe that is the truth. I am not disagreeing, just never heard of the possibility and want to understand the idea then see if I can find it in the Bible.

Thanks.

The tricky part about the "That which is nothing" that I speak of is that it doesn't exist.

Everything that does, could or would exist is god, so the only thing that doesn't exist is non-existance itself, but if non-existance is possible then it exists and it too is part of god.

The purpose of non-existance though is to form the region of existance between everything and nothing, which becomes "something". This is where the universe, form and time exist as a reality as a possibility of existance defined by what actually does exist right now, which can only be defined by the difference between everything that could exist, and that which does not currently exist. To achieve that you need the combination of full existance and non-existance together.

Why do I believe it? It just makes sense to me. The strange nature of the universe is it's unified duality. We are all seperate, but at the same time together, apart, but the same. There was a prfound "whoa!" moment when I finally understood the concept, not mentally but almost spritually, somewhere much deeper. I would say that I connected with the belief so to speak, much like many christians would say about their beliefs. Am I open for new experiences and beliefs? You betcha! But none has resonated for my anything like this one.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

More important than what I studied, I think, was the premise I was starting with in my search. I was looking for something real. I had tried church before and didn't want a repeat of basing my life on a "hope so" or "this sounds right" type of thing. My core belief was that if there is a creator and He made me with the ability speak and hear and know, then He probably should be able to know, hear and speak Himself.

I also assumed that if the Bible is true and I do what it says then something should actually happen to me. The people that wrote the Bible were inspired to record, after the fact, their account of things God had already done and said to them in their lives. If He spoke to them, Abraham, Issac, Jacob, Moses, Elijah, Jonah, David, Mary and Joseph, The Apostles and Paul and others, in the same ways, over the course of thousands of years then He could speak to me and that's what I wanted. I know some people don't believe it's possible.

Interesting. I admit I've never thought of that.

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

A Christian man I knew also said God spoke to him so that's why I was looking for God in the Bible. It was like a test, really, to do what the book said and see what God did. More than just to hear God, I guess I was looking for power to influence Him since a lot of people in my family were sick and I wanted God to at least hear me for them.

"Then you will find me when you seek me with your all your heart ."" Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God." "Draw near to God and He will draw near to you." "If I regard iniquity in my heart the Lord will not hear me."
were some of the first verses that seemed to pop out at me or the one's people would bring up when I asked them how to know God.

I stopped doing the things I felt were sins. This didn't seem odd or a burden to me at the time because I wanted to see miracles. The first sign that something was different was a new sensation like God really was hearing me, kind of like the feeling you get when you think someone is watching you. I visited any and all kinds of Christian churches to see which teachings lined up with what I was getting from what I read. And about one point of confusion in debate in Christian circles, Acts 2, I asked God to teach me what it meant.

I've also tried many churches. It was so frustrating, because they seemed to be so different, and there are so many of them, that it seemed impossible to find one that I could agree with. A friend of mine introduced me to a Baptist church earlier this year, over spring break. I did like that one because no one was really too focused on the minutiae, but more on the big picture. They were free to choose for themselves about the little details.

Which church did you end up with?

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

After a few weeks of studying and trying to practice what I read, I had my first experience with God at a church one night where I didn't know anyone. I posted about it at length in a conversation with Bob Who are the Christians? if you're interested and have a LOT of time to read it all. Sorry about the length but I hope it helps answer some of why I believe what I do.

Thank you for the link. I did read it. It's really, touching, and inspiring. I think sometimes Christianity is discouraging and disappointing because there are so many who don't have that personal experience, but just go along with what they're told. That's really not what I want.

Originally Posted by NightSpirit

I don't claim to know everything or that everything I believe is right. I don't even think all my beliefs have to always be right for me to still have a relationship with Jesus. I just know that as I sought God in the Bible then some of what happened to them also happened to me and I believe what the Bible says, that Jesus is the Son of God.

If someone is sincerely searching for the truth about God then I would think it is up to God to be sure they find that truth. The sincerity of a person's heart is not something anyone else can judge. But we all can be sincerely wrong at times. I don't always understand the thought process of what people believe but I welcome it if someone cares enough to point out a possible blind spot or what they think is a better way to me. It may just be God working through that person.

Thank you for sharing your beliefs and how you have come about them.

As I mentioned above, I was introduced to a Baptist church a few months ago. I really did enjoy it, but unfortunately couldn't stick with it because it is at home, and I am usually about 90 miles away at college, where there is only a Catholic church (it is a Catholic university). I can't remember how I eventually came away from it agin. If you read my first few posts, I was kind of questioning everything. It annoyed me that there were so many churches; and the Catholic church really annoyed me because of all of its silly rules. I really agree with post #18 in that thread you linked to, and it portrays my frustration rather aptly.

I kind of got involved in the new-age again, (spirits, psychics, IM, you get the picture), until I realized that there was no better reason to believe that than Christianity. Indeed, perhaps less of a reason, since it is rather a new movement made up of a conglomeration of random beliefs. Sometimes I think it's a competition to find the craziest and most far-fetched beliefs and push them as undeniable truth. How many people attack organized religion as irrational, illogical, stupid, etc, only to pick something like subjective reality, IM, etc, and say that must be true? Such people are just creating their own religion.

I got rather tired of it, and then began my more skeptical stage. I thought people are mostly making up all of this stuff anyway, because people fear the unknown and need to explain it somehow.

The theology class I have to take this semester kind of snapped me out of that a bit. I was totally denying any faith at all as stupid and irrational, when the truth is we all have faith in something. No person out there has absolutely no faith.

That's mostly where I am now. I'm accepting there's probably something out there, but I'm not sure yet what it is. I'm mostly rejecting some of the ideas presented here like subjective reality, one consciousness, etc, because it really makes no sense to me and explains nothing about anything. In fact, it raises more questions than it answers, and doesn't explain how things were created or why we are here.

As much as I have probably attacked your beliefs in the past, I'm seriously taking a look at it now. I just really don't want to accept things just because a bunch of other people believe in it. I think experiences like you have had would be amazing.

Well, I admit that I've had small miracles in my life for a long time. I wrote earlier today about how things just always tend to work out. Even if something happens that seems bad at the time, it turns out to be for the best. I always seem to be living on the edge of ruin, only to be saved by some coincidence. Faith in those small miracles is how I got through the first few weeks of college last year, where I was in a totally strange and new environment. I did believe in God back then, and I felt like He got me through those first few weeks. Even when there seemed to be no money to pay for the next semester, it came around somehow, every time.

Maybe it's the seemingly harsh judgment sometimes portrayed by Christianity that I'm afraid of. Hell seems such a very cruel fate for anyone. Maybe there are things I don't know, though. maybe people are somehow given a chance. I seriously don't know. That's the one objection i have.

But seriously, I appreciate your explanation of your beliefs. It's really touched something within me, and I mean that sincerely.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

If God is real, how do you know what God is? How do you know if there is a true religion, or maybe there is none? Maybe it doesn't matter what you believe, in the end. But what if it does? What if, for example, the true God is the Christian God? How do you know, or how can you tell?

The only way I think you can know whether God exists is through life experience. I don't mean necessarily mystical experience, either. And I wouldn't trust what anyone told me. In fact, I never have.

Life is like a conversation between myself and God. It is a relationship, after all. I speak through my thoughts and behavior and God 'speaks' through the external world. To share a more intimate relationship with Him is to experience happiness, freedom and love. If I ignore Him or deny his existence, I experience suffering, isolation and anger. And I have had some very intense experiences that verify this understanding. (Please note that I am not trying to convert or convince you of anything.)

I have entertained at some point over the last twenty years every version you could think of for God, including His non-existence. The one I find most intriguing, oddly enough, is the Christian version.

The main difference between Christianity and other religions is there is nothing you have to actually do to come closer to God besides having faith. In Hinduism or Buddhism, for example, you have to become something (enlightened) through various techniques. Christianity doesn't have any techniques. You don't have to know the secret handshake, you don't have to have some amazing blissful experience, you don't have to be intelligent or wealthy. The only criteria is faith. It would seem to me that if God is real, then he would have already built the path to Him; I wouldn't have to create my own. And also that that path would be open to all people no matter what their status or intelligence.

As an aside, I think that some people are more prone to reason and others are more prone to faith. I could go through this forum and point out the people who either have very powerful faith or they are very adept at reason. I think that perhaps we are all here to learn something from each other: the skeptics and the believers.

I wrote in another thread to Bob that I have always consider myself a man of faith. But that hardly means I couldn't use a little doubt and some logic in my life.

Lastly, I commend you for putting up this topic. Thanks.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

If you're Christian, tell me why. If you're Jewish, tell me why. If you're Buddhist, tell me why. If you just are spiritual and kind of chose your own beliefs, tell me why you hold such beliefs. Tell me why you don't think you are wrong, too. Similarly, I'm going to try to remain unbiased and hear everyone's views, but at the same time I'll probably question them.

I choose my own beliefs.

There are parts & pieces (sometimes quite big parts and pieces) in every major religion that I would accept, and believe.

If God is omniscient, omni-present and all-powerful, it seems very unlikely to me that God or certain aspects of it would not have shown itself in different ways to different cultures and people throughout the history of mankind.

I mean, if I were God and I were interested in directly communicating with you little folks from time to time, why would I limit myself to one particular form called "Jesus of Nazareth" at a particular time in history; or an elephantine idol called Ganesha; or communicate through one particular type of harp-slinging, white-feathered angel only?

No, I think that if God is everywhere all the time, God must be communicating and interacting with man, in an endless variety of forms and ways.

And man must also be able to communicate with God in a wide variety of different ways. And those ways may or may not fall into the category of what is normally termed "religious".

The problem with organised religion is simply a human problem which shows up in any kind of human organisation.

In the corporate workplace, there will be politics; jostling for power; people with their own agendas; people who focus on the irrelevant things; and mindless policies and procedures inherited from the past.

This is simply human nature.

So in the religious organisation, there will also be politics; jostling for power; people with their own agendas; people who focus on the irrelevant things; and mindless cultural baggage inherited from the past.

Therefore I choose to stay away from organised religion. Not that it is completely valueless, but the positives for me are outweighted by the negatives.

Furthermore I do not believe that intermediaries are necessary. I do not believe that I need a priest, a shaman or some other religious figure to make the connection between myself and the divine.

I shall put it more boldly. I *know* that I do not need a priest, a shaman or some other religious figure to make the connection between myself and the divine.

Because I have made the connection myself, directly.

(Oh, we direct connectors are not that uncommon, really. ).

This is where you have not gone yet, pianoperformer. You still talk about using "reason" to discover God, as if he were some kind of Sudoku puzzle which you could surely solve, if you were sufficiently logical.

"Reason" has its uses. It also becomes unnecessary, when you actually know something to be true.

Of course I do not claim to know God completely. I know, however, that I have encountered aspects of God quite directly. Again, I do not think that this is uncommon, and I also think that people can have quite different, yet authentic, sorts of encounters with God.

This is one of my encounters:

“God” « The Magickal Mind

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

The only way I think you can know whether God exists is through life experience. I don't mean necessarily mystical experience, either. And I wouldn't trust what anyone told me. In fact, I never have.

Life is like a conversation between myself and God. It is a relationship, after all. I speak through my thoughts and behavior and God 'speaks' through the external world. To share a more intimate relationship with Him is to experience happiness, freedom and love. If I ignore Him or deny his existence, I experience suffering, isolation and anger. And I have had some very intense experiences that verify this understanding. (Please note that I am not trying to convert or convince you of anything.)

Interesting. But that's not to say that those who have a relationship with God never experience suffering, right?

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

I have entertained at some point over the last twenty years every version you could think of for God, including His non-existence.

Same here, except over about 8 years for me.

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

The one I find most intriguing, oddly enough, is the Christian version.

The main difference between Christianity and other religions is there is nothing you have to actually do to come closer to God besides having faith. In Hinduism or Buddhism, for example, you have to become something (enlightened) through various techniques. Christianity doesn't have any techniques. You don't have to know the secret handshake, you don't have to have some amazing blissful experience, you don't have to be intelligent or wealthy. The only criteria is faith. It would seem to me that if God is real, then he would have already built the path to Him; I wouldn't have to create my own. And also that that path would be open to all people no matter what their status or intelligence.

Hmm, I agree with that assessment.

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

As an aside, I think that some people are more prone to reason and others are more prone to faith. I could go through this forum and point out the people who either have very powerful faith or they are very adept at reason. I think that perhaps we are all here to learn something from each other: the skeptics and the believers.

I wrote in another thread to Bob that I have always consider myself a man of faith. But that hardly means I couldn't use a little doubt and some logic in my life.

True. The tough part is balancing faith and reason.

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Lastly, I commend you for putting up this topic. Thanks.

Thank you.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

I choose my own beliefs.

There are parts & pieces (sometimes quite big parts and pieces) in every major religion that I would accept, and believe.

I was like that once.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

If God is omniscient, omni-present and all-powerful, it seems very unlikely to me that God or certain aspects of it would not have shown itself in different ways to different cultures and people throughout the history of mankind.

I mean, if I were God and I were interested in directly communicating with you little folks from time to time, why would I limit myself to one particular form called "Jesus of Nazareth" at a particular time in history; or an elephantine idol called Ganesha; or communicate through one particular type of harp-slinging, white-feathered angel only?

No, I think that if God is everywhere all the time, God must be communicating and interacting with man, in an endless variety of forms and ways.

Interesting. I'm not sure I can agree, though. The major religions are rather different on many points, and those points seem non-negotiable. I mean that sure, all of them believe in a God or gods of some kind, but they are so very different in their approach.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

And man must also be able to communicate with God in a wide variety of different ways. And those ways may or may not fall into the category of what is normally termed "religious".

The problem with organised religion is simply a human problem which shows up in any kind of human organisation.

In the corporate workplace, there will be politics; jostling for power; people with their own agendas; people who focus on the irrelevant things; and mindless policies and procedures inherited from the past.

This is simply human nature.

So in the religious organisation, there will also be politics; jostling for power; people with their own agendas; people who focus on the irrelevant things; and mindless cultural baggage inherited from the past.

Therefore I choose to stay away from organised religion. Not that it is completely valueless, but the positives for me are outweighted by the negatives.

This is not how all churches are, though. I can see that point for the Catholic church, but that is neither the only church, nor does it represent all churches. When I attended a Baptist church, there were just a bunch of people gathered together in worship, happy to be there with others who believed similarly. No useless rules, formalities, etc.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Furthermore I do not believe that intermediaries are necessary. I do not believe that I need a priest, a shaman or some other religious figure to make the connection between myself and the divine.

I shall put it more boldly. I *know* that I do not need a priest, a shaman or some other religious figure to make the connection between myself and the divine.

Because I have made the connection myself, directly.

(Oh, we direct connectors are not that uncommon, really. ).

You make it sound like you are part of some elite. I know you say it is not that uncommon, but you say "we direct connectors." I think only Catholics would disagree with you. Others seem to pray directly to God.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

This is where you have not gone yet, pianoperformer. You still talk about using "reason" to discover God, as if he were some kind of Sudoku puzzle which you could surely solve, if you were sufficiently logical.

"Reason" has its uses. It also becomes unnecessary, when you actually know something to be true.

Actually, you misjudge me. I didn't say I was trying to use reason. I just want to know why people believe what they believe, or why they think another belief can't be correct. Or, if they think there is no objective truth, why they think so, when our experience says otherwise.

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Of course I do not claim to know God completely. I know, however, that I have encountered aspects of God quite directly. Again, I do not think that this is uncommon, and I also think that people can have quite different, yet authentic, sorts of encounters with God.

This is one of my encounters:

“God” « The Magickal Mind

I don't know. I'm glad you've had such an experience, but I wonder if God is so impersonal as you claim.

[mercuryrising]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Interesting. But that's not to say that those who have a relationship with God never experience suffering, right?

Of course, those who have a relationship with God experience suffering just like everyone else. And going along with this vision, we all have a relationship with God, not just the people that believe they have one.

There is a specific kind of suffering, though, that I experience when I have distanced myself from God. It is like someone you love has left you or is far away. Or like being famished. In a way, I think this is perhaps the basis of all human motivation (since it is God that animates us in the first place). Something seems to be missing inside of us and we seek to fill it. The Sufis and Sihks often use the metaphor of God being the Beloved and the believer being a lover. Life is this love affair with God.

BTW, I picked up this book called "The Reason for God" by Timothy Keller the other day. It's written by a Christian pastor and so far, I am pretty impressed with his explanations. Perhaps you would find it interesting.

[pianoperformer]

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

Of course, those who have a relationship with God experience suffering just like everyone else. And going along with this vision, we all have a relationship with God, not just the people that believe they have one.

There is a specific kind of suffering, though, that I experience when I have distanced myself from God. It is like someone you love has left you or is far away. Or like being famished. In a way, I think this is perhaps the basis of all human motivation (since it is God that animates us in the first place). Something seems to be missing inside of us and we seek to fill it. The Sufis and Sihks often use the metaphor of God being the Beloved and the believer being a lover. Life is this love affair with God.

Very interesting. Thank you.

Originally Posted by mercuryrising

BTW, I picked up this book called "The Reason for God" by Timothy Keller the other day. It's written by a Christian pastor and so far, I am pretty impressed with his explanations. Perhaps you would find it interesting.

Thanks. I found the web site, and listened to the recording about exclusivity, and thought it was really good. I'll look into the book as well. I'm sure I could scan it.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

I'm glad you've had such an experience, but I wonder if God is so impersonal as you claim.

Oh you misunderstand. I don't claim that It is necessarily impersonal. As mentioned earlier, I think that It can show itself (or aspects of itself) in an endless variety of ways; and people can connect (or attempt to connect) or perceive (or attempt to perceive) it in a wide variety of ways too.

For some people, God may be as personal as a friend next door.

One may consider one's friendly neighbourhood spirit guide to be an aspect of God too, and you know that there are ways to contact those.

Others may see God in every human being they meet.

The major religions are rather different on many points, and those points seem non-negotiable. I mean that sure, all of them believe in a God or gods of some kind, but they are so very different in their approach.

Well, as I mentioned, in all likelihood, God can and has presented (and will continue to present) Itself or aspects of itself, in many different ways.

Differences in major religions arise out of specific encounters with God, which silly Man then proceeds to record, fossilise and turn into particular practices. Then through the centuries, the original point may even get lost. Or the politics may intervene, and particular sections of the holy texts may be burned, censored, lost etc; or the followers of particular traditions may be persecuted or driven to near-extinction (eg witches).

So over time, major religions can look very different - it depends on your perspective. What intrigues me more are the similarities. These to me are indicative are the major points of truth so fundamental that just about every religion has, in their own way, stumbled on them.

1. Jesus goes into the desert for 40 days and is tempted by Satan. Buddha sits under the bodhi tree for 40 days and Mara attempts to distract him.

2. Islam says that God is ultimately unknowable, and therefore it is sacrilegious to attempt to depict him in pictures. Meanwhile, Hinduism says that God is ultimately unknowable, and at best we can know him through aspects of him; each aspect being one deity, and Hinduism being populated with 340 million deities (that's why Hindu temples have so many statutes of deities). Sounds to me like Islam and Hinduism agreed on the same fundamental fact (the unknowability of God) but simply treated the fact in different ways.



3. General concurrence of all major religions on the phenomenon of reincarnation - except for Christianity today. Plenty of historical evidence that reincarnation was accepted as true in Christianity in earlier times; prior to the Great Censorship Machine known as the biblical canon.

4. If you read this book "The Third Jesus", you'll find a very convincing explanation that Jesus was, in Eastern terms, simply an extremely enlightened person. This conclusion can in turn be flipped in two directions - depending on your starting perspectives on Buddhism / Christianity, you could say that Buddhism shows a way to gain personal salvation (through enlightenment); OR you could say that Christianity shows a way to enlightenment (with the help of an intermediary, the saviour Jesus).

I could go on, but I think my point should be clear now. There are huge similarities across different religions ..... Especially once you get past the cultural baggage.

Difficulty - there is plenty of cultural baggage, and in modern times the human race just keeps adding to it. Jesus, for example, is cited to back all kinds of opinions on all kinds of matters which he never spoke about at all - for example, abortion; gay rights; invasion of Iraq etc etc.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by pianoperformer

Interesting. But that's not to say that those who have a relationship with God never experience suffering, right?

You already have a relationship with God.

How is it possible NOT to have a relationship with something that is everywhere, all the time, all-knowing, and always has been?

The point is a more limited one - what is the nature of your relationship with God. For example, do you tend to see him as an impersonal universal force? A personal, invisible and all-powerful friend? A deity who's gonna whack you on the head and make sure you burn in hell, if you commit some sin? A strange and mysterious force which you can only catch occasional glimpses of? A non-existent concept which hundreds of millions of other huamn beings just delude themselves into believing? Etc etc.

[philm]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

You already have a relationship with God.

How is it possible NOT to have a relationship with something that is everywhere, all the time, all-knowing, and always has been?

Good point Acting Like Godot,

Ultimately though if God actually is

"everywhere, all the time" [and] "always has been"

It would be impossible to have a relationship with God.

In order to really have a relationship with God - God would need actually to really be separate and not everywhere all the time - at least with the one having the relationship.

Otherwise the concept is not real and you'd never really be having a relationship with God.

: )

[Acting Like Godot]

Right ... That's why in Jainism, for example, the believers consider themselves quite holy. Actually they see pretty much everything (including themselves) as holy, because everything, as far as they're concerned, comes from God / is of God.

You see, if you follow the reasoning far enough, questions like "What is your relationship with God" and "If God is real, how do you know what God is?" ultimately boils down to questions like:

"What is "you"?" and "What is "real"?".

The fairly inescapable conclusion is that "you" are the creator of your own "reality" ... and if "you" insist that your "reality" is in fact created by "God", well then, "you" are "God".

Remember - there is nothing you KNOW or UNDERSTAND or PERCEIVE about the universe, that is NOT your own KNOWLEDGE, UNDERSTANDING or PERCEPTION.

Since your own KNOWLEDGE, UNDERSTANDING and PERCEPTION are all processes of your own consciousness, there is nothing in the universe which is not a consequence of your own consciousness.

If there IS, by definition you cannot KNOW it.

But I digress ...

[philm]

yep, for deep thinkers, it boils down to the age old question who is me.

seriously, though i reckon the assumption, or perception, of Self 'Ownership', whats me and mine, gets us swaddling around in the mud of holy crap you can see around the planet.

: )