Do you believe in God and why

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, Hummin said:

Do muslims have a stronger identity than any other religions? 

That's interesting, I've noticed something similar too.

However, i guess it can be explained, perhaps it's just " historical reasons ".

[Red Phoenix]

12 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

If the universe is first and foremost consciousness and if form is just an attribute of consciousness, wouldn't it mean that solutions are present at any time?

They wouldn't have to be discovered from nothing, but somehow simply be accessed. 

What I'm trying to say is, if morphic fields exist, they exist as always complete, irrespective of time and space. That means that the idea of "before a certain event" and "after a certain event " are meaningless and have no influence on the integrity of the morphic field. In your example, the answers of the crossword puzzle are already present in the field and simply have to be accessed. The more people access this info, the easier it becomes for others to do so as well. It is not the people who put that information in the morphic field.

 

Am I missing something? 

Imo knowledge/consciousness grows through experience in the material world.

So you are correct that it are not the people that put the information in the morphic field, but the morphic field represents the collective experience of every living being.  

Does the morphic field already contain the experience of what is still to come?  That's an interesting question, but I tend to think that it does not and that that is the 'meaning of life' providing experience that expands the universal consciousness.

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Does the morphic field already contain the experience of what is still to come?  That's an interesting question, but I tend to think that it does not and that that is the 'meaning of life' providing experience that expands the universal consciousness.

I would take no chances, and say that both hypothesis are true, once one gets rid of the dualistic vision. 

It's like saying " nothing new under the Sun " or " everything changes "

Apparently conflicting statements, but both true imho.

[Hummin]

20 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

That's interesting, I've noticed something similar too.

However, i guess it can be explained, perhaps it's just " historical reasons ".

It can be out of same reason, there is a place for men like Putin and Trump to lead people. Both of them attracts people out of same reasons, and people need strong leadership and guidance even there is some strong signal it could be challenging to have such people in the lead. 

[Rimmer]

Troll post removed

[Sunmaster]

34 minutes ago, Hummin said:

It can be out of same reason, there is a place for men like Putin and Trump to lead people. Both of them attracts people out of same reasons, and people need strong leadership and guidance even there is some strong signal it could be challenging to have such people in the lead. 

Reminds me of a great discussion between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris. Peterson argued for religion as a medium for archetypical structures, which are necessary for the individual to interpret reality. Harris on the other hand is convinced that we can dismiss religion altogether because we can interpret reality solely through facts and that religion is counterproductive in this endeavour, because it's weigted down by so much outdated dogma.

 

https://youtu.be/jey_CzIOfYE

 

My take is that both views are valid. I think it depends on the individual's (and as an extension on the society's) developmental stage, whether religion is useful or is actually hampering further development. 

Getting rid of religion altogether to rely solely on facts to make sense of reality would leave a sort of 'power vacuum' for people who rely on such a structure.

At the same time, I don't think we can ever get rid of archetypes in the pursuit of truth.

 

The solution therefore is to provide a framework that makes use of archetypes AND is free from unnecessary and outdated religious dogma. A system that puts the individual at the center and provides the tools to explore the relationship between the individual and his inner reality. A system that doesn't demand blind obedience and is not based on faith alone. That would provide clear and practical truth to all the stages of development, be it for the pre-modern, modern and post-modern man. 

That would be a new philosophy (I rather not call it religion) for the 21st century. 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Sunmaster

[Hummin]

32 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Reminds me of a great discussion between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris. Peterson argued for religion as a medium for archetypical structures, which are necessary for the individual to interpret reality. Harris on the other hand is convinced that we can dismiss religion altogether because we can interpret reality solely through facts and that religion is counterproductive in this endeavour, because it's weigted down by so much outdated dogma.

 

https://youtu.be/jey_CzIOfYE

 

My take is that both views are valid. I think it depends on the individual's (and as an extension on the society's) developmental stage, whether religion is useful or is actually hampering further development. 

Getting rid of religion altogether to rely solely on facts to make sense of reality would leave a sort of 'power vacuum' for people who rely on such a structure.

At the same time, I don't think we can ever get rid of archetypes in the pursuit of truth.

 

The solution therefore is to provide a framework that makes use of archetypes AND is free from unnecessary and outdated religious dogma. A system that puts the individual at the center and provides the tools to explore the relationship between the individual and his inner reality. A system that doesn't demand blind obedience and is not based on faith alone. That would provide clear and practical truth to all the stages of development, be it for the pre-modern, modern and post-modern man. 

That would be a new philosophy (I rather not call it religion) for the 21st century. 

As well successful dictators embrace religion, not to forget. Sorry short answer out on a mission embracing the day

[Red Phoenix]

22 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Reminds me of a great discussion between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris. Peterson argued for religion as a medium for archetypical structures, which are necessary for the individual to interpret reality. Harris on the other hand is convinced that we can dismiss religion altogether because we can interpret reality solely through facts and that religion is counterproductive in this endeavour, because it's weigted down by so much outdated dogma.

 

https://youtu.be/jey_CzIOfYE

 

My take is that both views are valid. I think it depends on the individual's (and as an extension on the society's) developmental stage, whether religion is useful or is actually hampering further development. 

Getting rid of religion altogether to rely solely on facts to make sense of reality would leave a sort of 'power vacuum' for people who rely on such a structure.

At the same time, I don't think we can ever get rid of archetypes in the pursuit of truth.

 

The solution therefore is to provide a framework that makes use of archetypes AND is free from unnecessary and outdated religious dogma. A system that puts the individual at the center and provides the tools to explore the relationship between the individual and his inner reality. A system that doesn't demand blind obedience and is not based on faith alone. That would provide clear and practical truth to all the stages of development, be it for the pre-modern, modern and post-modern man. 

That would be a new philosophy (I rather not call it religion) for the 21st century. 

Hi Sunmaster,

Great post, thank you!

Personally, if there were only 2 choices, I would opt for the 'religion' option like Jordan Peterson advocates, exactly because of the 'power vacuum' that would attract people to the ersatz of a materialistic ideology and its devastating effects on the human spirit (like we have seen in communist China, and other regimes that deny the spiritual cravings of people). 

I actually just read a substack article by N.S. Lyons, which addresses the same issue and wanted to post it here later, but might as well do it now in the wake of your post.

The interesting thing being that till recently Lyons was an intellectual agnostic with little interest in spiritual matters but the events of the last years did drag him 'kicking and screaming' to fundamentally reassess his beliefs and the need for a spiritual revival.

Like Jordan Peterson he sees a role for the Church in that journey, and although I am definitely not a fan of organized religion I can see its usefulness as a stepping-stone to the Third Way you wrote about in your post.

Attached the link to N.S. Lyons' article

https://whatweneednow.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-todays-upheaval-and-its

and would be interested to hear your - and other Forum members - comments on it.

[Sunmaster]

1 hour ago, Red Phoenix said:

Imo knowledge/consciousness grows through experience in the material world.

So you are correct that it are not the people that put the information in the morphic field, but the morphic field represents the collective experience of every living being.  

Does the morphic field already contain the experience of what is still to come?  That's an interesting question, but I tend to think that it does not and that that is the 'meaning of life' providing experience that expands the universal consciousness.

This is a very interesting point and something I'm still trying to wrap my head around.

Is there a non-dual force or consciousness that is perfection of infinite Being-ness, that is the source of everything else, where nothing can be added or subtracted? Does the material world, along with individual consciousness and self-awareness emerge from this cosmic consciousness as imperfect (dualistic) agents? I tend to believe so.

The question then is, what can we possibly add to this already perfect cosmic consciousness? And, is there a meaning to our efforts? 

My intuition tells me that IF there is a lack of some kind, then it's a condition of the manifest, material world only. 
But more and more I feel that the idea of something missing, something that will be reached sometime in the future, is simply an illusion. This imperfection is an illusion strictly bound to the material world, which is illusion itself. The perfection of the cosmic consciousness is the only intrinsic truth, ...a true universal  constant. 

Or not...
 

[mauGR1]

36 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Attached the link to N.S. Lyons' article

https://whatweneednow.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-todays-upheaval-and-its

and would be interested to hear your - and other Forum members - comments on it.

Read the article, and agree with every word.

I wonder if he's reading R.Steiner, because these visions ( in Steiner's lectures) have been proposed some 100 years ago.

Btw, he made very clear that a "revolution " must be peaceful and bloodless, otherwise it will fail.

In other words, only love can save us. ( he often mentions the love of Christ, but the word "Christ" is not very popular these days.

..oh, and it may take a few centuries, so no need to hurry too much ????

[Sunmaster]

6 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Read the article, and agree with every word.

I wonder if he's reading R.Steiner, because these visions ( in Steiner's lectures) have been proposed some 100 years ago.

Btw, he made very clear that a "revolution " must be peaceful and bloodless, otherwise it will fail.

In other words, only love can save us. ( he often mentions the love of Christ, but the word "Christ" is not very popular these days.

..oh, and it may take a few centuries, so no need to hurry too much ????

The sooner the better. I think there is a great urgency for change actually, especially with the upcoming technological tsunami that is AI. 
AI is probably the biggest innovation since the internet was invented and will probably surpass it and will be adopted by the masses at a much faster rate than any technology so far.

Will a man made AI include all the blind spots and moral shortcomings we have? Will it be able to rise above them on its own? Will it become, by virtue of its own development, a new lighthouse that guides us toward the next step in mankind's evolution? What place will religion have in this new landscape? What about spirituality?
I think these and many more questions are worth exploring.

 

[Sunmaster]

A very interesting podcast with Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI and creator of chatGPT.
 

 

[Red Phoenix]

1 hour ago, mauGR1 said:

Read the article, and agree with every word.

I wonder if he's reading R.Steiner, because these visions ( in Steiner's lectures) have been proposed some 100 years ago.

Btw, he made very clear that a "revolution " must be peaceful and bloodless, otherwise it will fail.

In other words, only love can save us. ( he often mentions the love of Christ, but the word "Christ" is not very popular these days.

..oh, and it may take a few centuries, so no need to hurry too much ????

I have read this interview with N.S. Lyons three times and like yourself I agree with every word he said. And his analysis is spot on that what we are experiencing in these crazy times is a spiritual crisis. 

https://whatweneednow.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-todays-upheaval-and-its

 

 

 

[Red Phoenix]

13 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

Read the article, and agree with every word.

I wonder if he's reading R.Steiner, because these visions ( in Steiner's lectures) have been proposed some 100 years ago.

A very relevant and thought-provoking quote for our times by visionary mystic Rudolf Steiner:

 

Edited April 29, 2023 by Red Phoenix

[mauGR1]

14 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

The sooner the better. I think there is a great urgency for change actually, especially with the upcoming technological tsunami that is AI. 
AI is probably the biggest innovation since the internet was invented and will probably surpass it and will be adopted by the masses at a much faster rate than any technology so far.

Will a man made AI include all the blind spots and moral shortcomings we have? Will it be able to rise above them on its own? Will it become, by virtue of its own development, a new lighthouse that guides us toward the next step in mankind's evolution? What place will religion have in this new landscape? What about spirituality?
I think these and many more questions are worth exploring.

 

I'm not excited about AI.

I remember reading a book from I.Asimov, in the story, a sort of artificial intelligence takes complete hold of power, and the humans become slaves.

Like all technology,  of course, we have to discriminate between a good or a bad use, so moral principles can do a lot of good in this case.

Yet, as it has already been discussed, there must be a fine balance between the needs/rights of the masses and the needs/rights of the individual, so, it's a long way.

[Hummin]

4 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

I'm not excited about AI.

I remember reading a book from I.Asimov, in the story, a sort of artificial intelligence takes complete hold of power, and the humans become slaves.

Like all technology,  of course, we have to discriminate between a good or a bad use, so moral principles can do a lot of good in this case.

Yet, as it has already been discussed, there must be a fine balance between the needs/rights of the masses and the needs/rights of the individual, so, it's a long way.

For everything new, I guess there have been said the same, but on this one, I completely agree with you. Scary, but I comfort my self, how much damage can they do in 20 - 30 years? 

 

Im not happy they spend so much resources on moon and mars projects either, and believe we are scammed to believe that is for the best of humanity. 

 

So many things we are brainwashed to accept, and why do we accept it? We are merely paying for all this, and what is the benefits for us? 

[mauGR1]

16 minutes ago, Hummin said:

For everything new, I guess there have been said the same, but on this one, I completely agree with you. Scary, but I comfort my self, how much damage can they do in 20 - 30 years? 

 

Im not happy they spend so much resources on moon and mars projects either, and believe we are scammed to believe that is for the best of humanity. 

 

So many things we are brainwashed to accept, and why do we accept it? We are merely paying for all this, and what is the benefits for us? 

As much as i understand the desire of the ruling elites to control humankind, i think the people ( especially the young) have better to wake up quickly. 

Internet and smartphones have done an incredible damage in just 10 years or so, but most people don't want to hear that.

 

[Hummin]

2 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

As much as i understand the desire of the ruling elites to control humankind, i think the people ( especially the young) have better to wake up quickly. 

Internet and smartphones have done an incredible damage in just 10 years or so, but most people don't want to hear that.

 

True, very true and a sad fact

[mauGR1]

1 hour ago, Hummin said:

True, very true and a sad fact

Sometimes one can feel sad indeed, when confronted with injustice, i think no one is immune. 

Perhaps having faith in something is not a stupid idea after all, and there's plenty of choice. 

[Hummin]

29 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Sometimes one can feel sad indeed, when confronted with injustice, i think no one is immune. 

Perhaps having faith in something is not a stupid idea after all, and there's plenty of choice. 

Not a popular vote, but I wrote this in the Monarchy thread

 

 

[connda]

17420 posts and 581 pages to the thread.  Mods - Is this a record?  That's pretty amazing. 

[mauGR1]

10 minutes ago, connda said:

17420 posts and 581 pages to the thread.  Mods - Is this a record?  That's pretty amazing. 

Yes, it's the record for TVF, i think.

[save the frogs]

On 4/28/2023 at 3:36 AM, Red Phoenix said:

Rupert Sheldrake - one of my heroes - was also intrigued by that often reported phenomenon of inventions/breakthroughs being done simultaneously by persons not in contact with each other. 

you may find this silly , but here goes.

michael jackson, you know the "beat it" guy?

he said he worked his ass off to write songs ... because if he didn't, then quote "the song would go to Prince".

in other words, he believed the songs were not coming from him directly, but coming from "the ether" or whatever.

 

[save the frogs]

On 4/28/2023 at 9:14 PM, mauGR1 said:

I remember reading a book from I.Asimov, in the story, a sort of artificial intelligence takes complete hold of power, and the humans become slaves.

or the opposite could happen.

in some ways, we are already enslaved by having to work long hours to pay the bills.

and expending way too much time and energy just for meeting our survival needs.

this leaves little time for cultivating the intellect, cultivating the imagination, creativity. 

so if AI does all the menial work, future generations may be very different from us as they have time, to quote bill Hicks, to "explore inner space". 

the human being may possibly be a very different creature in 200 years because of AI. 

 

 

[mauGR1]

10 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

or the opposite could happen.

in some ways, we are already enslaved by having to work long hours to pay the bills.

and expending way too much time and energy just for meeting our survival needs.

this leaves little time for cultivating the intellect, cultivating the imagination, creativity. 

so if AI does all the menial work, future generations may be very different from us as they have time, to quote bill Hicks, to "explore inner space". 

the human being may possibly be a very different creature in 200 years because of AI. 

 

 

Perhaps your vision is more optimistic than mine, and i can't blame you for that.

Perhaps, like many of my generation, i have always been a bit suspicious about technology and its frankly irresponsible development. 

In western countries, we are already " slaves " of technology in some way or another, and i don't think that's very good for the intellect, the soul and the spirit. 

[save the frogs]

5 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

In western countries, we are already " slaves " of technology in some way or another, and i don't think that's very good for the intellect, the soul and the spirit. 

Well, there's another very complex issue that I'm not sure we should be optimistic about ... merging man with AI ... ie Elon Musk Neuralink.

That concerns me ... I personally will be too old anyway ... but that has the potential to "atrophy" human beings ...

 

But currently, I do not see myself as a slave to technology at all. 

I barely stare at my smartphone or spend time on what I consider wasteful apps like Facebook. 

There's a lot more information readily available online that was not available in the past ... this is not enslavement if you know how to use it to your benefit. 

Internet forums are enslavement? You can easily connect with others.

You can utter blurbs that are read by many people, so you can get your message out there easily.

It depends how you use these technologies.

[FritsSikkink]

On 8/21/2021 at 7:26 PM, Sparktrader said:

Is it? What proof have you got on god?

 

What proof have u got on 97%? Google? Debunked in 2013.

 

It was 1%. Obama claimed it was 97%. Proven liar.

Here 50 proofs on god (that it is nonsense): God is Imaginary - 50 simple proofs 

[mauGR1]

10 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

That concerns me ... I personally will be too old anyway ... but that has the potential to "atrophy" human beings ...

That's more or less the point I'm trying to make, if you have read "1984" or "Brave new world ", you know what i am talking about. 

I also find the internet very useful in some way, and if you are aware of the potential dangers of enslavement to technology, that's ok, but it's a fact that a lot of people, perhaps the majority, are not very much aware.

Btw, i am not adverse to technology in general, but surely it should be used with an eye for the common good, and one eye for the good of the planet. 

[save the frogs]

57 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Here 50 proofs on god (that it is nonsense): God is Imaginary - 50 simple proofs 

Proof #39 - Jesus was a jerk.

The Bible suggests the earth was flat?

• Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor.

[Sunmaster]

4 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

Here 50 proofs on god (that it is nonsense): God is Imaginary - 50 simple proofs 

The only nonsense I could detect is this very article, written by an ignoramus with zero knowledge of the subject he tries to discredit. Bottom shelf stuff....and I'm being very generous.