Will God become unnecessary and evolve out of cultural existence?
Immortalist
Five types of primitive hunter-gatherer supernatural beings: elemental
spirits, puppeteers, organic spirits, ancestral spirits, and the high
gods. These primitive gods were not always worshipped but treated as
we would treat other human beings. In these societies the Shaman was
the "first step toward an archbishop or ayatollah" who had contact
with these otherwise hidden forces and could help focus their powers
to heal, protect, and provide.
As small tribes grew into larger societies the chiefdom was the next
evolutionary stage where there was a need for a "structural reliance
on the supernatural." Chiefs in these agricultural societies were
conduits through which divine power entered the social scale down to
the lesser folk. If things went well for a society then the chief was
doing a good job. Superstition reigned in these days.
With the arrival of the city-states, kings needed divine
legitimization and used the gods to solidify their rule over the
people. The king was now the conduit of divine power. The character of
the gods could differ between city-states, but many of them demanded
human sacrifices or else there was chaos. Along with this development
came moral obligations, which if they were not met caused sickness and
death. In these city-states there was competition between rival cities
and along with them rival gods. This had a tendency for these
polytheistic people to elevate their god above others, which was a
step toward monotheism.
Then the emergence of Abrahamic monotheism. In decoding the biblical
texts behind what we see on the surface is a different story of Yahweh
who was just one god in a pantheon of early gods. Yahweh starts out
with a body, for instance, and was given the people of Israel to rule
over by Elyon, the highest god in the pantheon. Originally Yahweh was
probably one of the Canaanite deities, he argues. When it comes to the
Israelites themselves, from archeological evidence they look more and
more like Canaanites who originally worshipped Baal and Asherah,
rather than some people who invaded Palestine after leaving Egypt.
...this Hebrew god evolved into a monolatry, which was a "way station
on the road to full-fledge monotheism." Monolatry didn't deny the
existence of other gods, it just affirmed that Yahweh was the highest
of those gods in the pantheon. This was achieved mostly by King
Josiah, who sought to solidify his reign and centralize worship in
Jerusalem. Josiah even had his reforms written in much of the book of
Deuteronomy.
When Judah was carried away into captivity by the Babylonians the
exiled Jewish theologians made the most of their disaster. ...they
thought about such a complete and utter disaster and why they came to
the conclusion that Yahweh was the one and only God. If it was
Yahweh's will to bring the mightiest empire of their day to so utterly
destroy them for their sins, as they did, then Yahweh was bigger than
they had ever thought. A god who governs the actions of the greatest
known empire is a god who can govern history itself...
But this God of theirs was not yet thought of as a good God. That was
the next evolutionary stage to take place
...the same evolutionary trend in Islam. First Allah transcended
tribal distinctions, as Yahweh did before him. Then he acquired the
multinational perspective of an empire, even to the point when in
places the Koran grants the possibility of salvation to people
"outside the fold."
In our day we've reached a stage in history where the movement toward
moral truth has to become globally momentous." In short, God has some
"some growing to do,"
This evolved god seems to be an abstract god just the source of the
moral order...
God will become unnecessary and will evolve out of existence in the
human mind...
http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-God-Robert-Wright/dp/0316734918/
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x195lt_devo-jocko-homo_music?from=rss
tooly
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:77f6da4e-f7c0-4222...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
I think a bigger question is how do we keep our innocense [to that degree
that life remains worth the living]. Problem here is that only those who
have lost it can understand the 'gravity' of the situation. There may or
may not have been a soul, but there is definitely emptiness that knows no
bounds.
Immortalist
>
> >http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x195lt_devo-jocko-homo_music?from=rss
>
> I think a bigger question is how do we keep our innocense [to that degree
> that life remains worth the living].
Is this similar to asking a teenager if life means anything after
finding out Santa Claus was just an urban myth passed down through
time and turned into a dogmatic lie fed to children because it is
better for them to believe such non-sense?
tooly
> >http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-God-Robert-Wright/dp/0316734918/
>
> >http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x195lt_devo-jocko-homo_music?from=rss
>
> I think a bigger question is how do we keep our innocense [to that degree
> that life remains worth the living].
>>Is this similar to asking a teenager if life means anything after
>>finding out Santa Claus was just an urban myth passed down through
>>time and turned into a dogmatic lie fed to children because it is
>>better for them to believe such non-sense?
No.
Obviously, you have not lost your innocense. There is a hole so deep, one
can never recover from. Many here play around it, thinking they are so adept
that they 'know'. It is hard to describe such emptiness. It is a darkness
over the core of what was once robust and alive, but now garnered in death's
embrace while still awake. It is life forsaken.
Sir Frederick
Despite any reality of what you speak,
'we' are the fantasy folk. We need only practice
any story 'religiously' for several months, and said
story becomes fundamental in 'our' experienced
reality. Perhaps it is time for some new meaning giving
stories. In the meanwhile 'we' have the old.
Reality be damned!
turtoni
> Reality be damned!
What reality!
FUCK 'EM ALL.
heh heh heh. ;-)
thomas p.
"tooly" <rd...@bellsouth.net> skrev i meddelelsen
news:Oje4m.19452$he4....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
It is your fantasy.
tooly
"thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4a51eeb0$2$56779$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
Actually, there is some truth to what you say here. I have always said that
'perception is our reality' (and what else is fantasy except pure
perception). We've had threads before that came upon the idea that there is
a subjective reality and an objective reality. I believe it was surmised
that we can never KNOW the objective reality, but only attempt to align our
subjective perception to it as time goes [and it evolves as our knowledge
grows]. From there I suppose several philosophies abound as to how we may
or may not know the objects around us that we align that subjective reality
etc.
Sir has broadcast the idea that we exist upon stories in our brains to give
us meaning and some direction and anchor to a very "hubriated" (sic)
egotistical sense of BEing. He goes further to compare us to cockroaches
and other minimal lifeforms as the bare essential of life's meaning...as
walking goo that has no merit. He is probably right, but I don't think any
thinking creature, and even Sir, can really let such perception sink in
totally to become the 'reality'. We often talk big, but live little.
My label for 'stories' is that of 'illusions'. I think we exist succinctly
tied to this world on the basis of 'perspective' that grows what are
essentially 'illusions' when compared to this obscur 'objective reality'
that, I for one, believe we can never fully know. What is 'up' and 'down'
for example, are important as to how we walk, run, and climb...how we
'orient' ourselves in this world to survive, yet does not exist 'objective'
to ourselves. From the moon, what is 'up' here is 'down' there etc and so
on. In fact, there is NO up or down. That's a literal example of something
that becomes far more abstract and subliminal, but is essentially
'illusions' by which we grow....and our existence is pervase with them.
I have submitted that I think these illusions are, at least to some minimal
capacity, necessary for our survival as thinking creatures. The reductive
qualities of observing our existence from 'objective reality' simply devoid
us of what I've borrowed as 'getaltive psychological energy' with which to
'move' in life. If we uncover too many of our illusions, we grow 'empty'
inside...with no meaning, no purpose by which to move, and more importantly,
by which to surmount the necessary energies to 'successfully' navigate the
destructive forces of all that exist around us that stand to kill us. Our
illusions, again some minimal level of them, are necessary to our survival.
As we destroy our illusions, I argue that we grow empty...we lose our
'innocense' to this world where once we may have grown vital and robust with
simple notions of what and who we were.
It wasn't meant to be this way though [as nature designed] IMHO. This
emptiness is promulgated by our arrogance whereupon, intelligence reaches
for the stars but does not have the real capacity to understand just where
it leads. Again, IMHO. We think we can travel space someday and populate the
universe or something. Perhaps we can, who knows. But as we progress
beyond our capacity to have wisdom to what we do, well...losing that
innocense is a horrible thing.
I mean, it makes all endeavor meaningless. So...why do it? Why expend the
energy? At best it reduces life to a few material delights...but those
become old soon enough as we get jaded from addictive behaviors trying to
regain our innocense and joy of simple 'BEing'.
My fantasy? Sure...why not. But I'd reterm it as 'My Hell'. I'm calling
back to others that they not make it theirs too.
Sir Frederick
Good response!
Now 'we' need to meet some 'real' 'little green men' and compare
notes, for 'they' are in the same 'pickle'. Some good stories/illusions
would come out of that! (The BORG will not do, nice try though.)
If not that, 'we' must confabulate some new stories/illusions
on 'our' own. Every new religion and its doctrine has come out
of the science of that time, as filtered by the fevered brain of the
founders. I keep looking for 'our' present day 'prophets'.
(And here, Scientology, will not do, nice try though.)
In the meanwhile the old stories/illusions are practiced.
I practice one such, though it is heavily filtered by my own
'fevered brain'.
Deceit works, even self deceit, even fantasy.
thomas p.
>
> "thomas p." <gud...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4a51eeb0$2$56779$edfa...@dtext02.news.tele.dk...
>>
>> "tooly" <rd...@bellsouth.net> skrev i meddelelsen
>> news:Oje4m.19452$he4....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
>>>
>>> "Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:62061da9-6eb1-4c1c...@p18g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
>>>> >http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-God-Robert-Wright/dp/0316734918/
>>>>
>>>> >http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x195lt_devo-jocko-homo_music?from=rss
>>>>
>>>> I think a bigger question is how do we keep our innocense [to that
>>>> degree
>>>> that life remains worth the living].
>>>
>>>>>Is this similar to asking a teenager if life means anything after
>>>>>finding out Santa Claus was just an urban myth passed down through
>>>>>time and turned into a dogmatic lie fed to children because it is
>>>>>better for them to believe such non-sense?
>>>
>>> No.
>>> Obviously, you have not lost your innocense. There is a hole so deep,
>>> one can never recover from. Many here play around it, thinking they are
>>> so adept that they 'know'. It is hard to describe such emptiness. It
>>> is a darkness over the core of what was once robust and alive, but now
>>> garnered in death's embrace while still awake. It is life forsaken.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It is your fantasy.
>
> Actually, there is some truth to what you say here. I have always said
> that 'perception is our reality'
I am not a bit surprised that you "always said that 'perception is our
reality". It also makes any discussion with you completely pointless.
snip
tooly
"rc" <rebel...@ftfreedom.org> wrote in message
news:qko455tl1vm1e266p...@4ax.com...
> lost" is quickly approaching! As a child grows and becomes a young
> adult and sheds childish things, so too is it our time to grow from
> child to young adult. This isn't a bad thing, because "innocence"
> also means (to have to some degree) ignorance. It is this ignorance
> that will be left behind. And in 1,000 years, the gate to 'what once
> was" will be opened again and the people of _that_ time will be
> allowed to decide whether to return to their ignorance or continue
> into the future with all that they have learned.
Best of luck on your own practiced stories rc as Sir suggests, :). I detect
you trying to keep a positive light on things, which is good...but perhaps
still a matter of your own innocense. That's ok too.
If one studies microslides of pond scum, they will see little creatures
swimming around totally oblivious to the world you and I live in. It may
seem to be a jump in associable logic, but I see this as representitive to
what we must be like...looking back upon ourselves from some 'super world'
that we perhaps are oblivious to...or as a trending super consciousness,
compared to this objective reality that we can only approach but never
reach, we become little more than pond scum creatures. After having studied
such microslides, objects like 'trees' became something else in my vision of
life...for in the microworld, these creatures swim in and around debri that
is sludgy scum to us, but perhaps structures like 'trees' to them [in a
relative way]. I remember reading Henry David Thoreau in high school, where
he wrote poetry to nature, much of which he beautifies things like 'trees'
and forests. This comparison brought me to realize that subjectively, we
exist in a world of great beauty, rife with meaning and purpose, with
spiritual beings like angels and gods and profound beauty; but OBJECTIVELY
with the modern sobered mind, looking back upon our world as we might the
pond scum under a microscope, what our world really is, is a bunch of
organic debri floating around randomly as a giant cesspool.
Which view is correct? Thoreau's or the Cesspool?
And thusly the idea of 'perception' takes on greater meaning [why thomas p.
dismissed it so easily is curious?] as vantage point of vision. I think to
struggle to keep one's vision of life more than debri in a cesspool, it will
require some measure of illusion making [or belief in stories] to maintain a
certain justification of view. But then, that's ok when one realizes that
we can never KNOW objective reality completely, meaning we will always be
redundant to our own imagination no matter what. That in itself frees us up
to remain believing...in something [not sure what, but cesspools or worlds
of poetry are both imaginative; it might become simply a choice]. .
It gives new meanings on some old stories for example, perhaps designed to
keep our consciousness anchored to this world [but failing in design as of
late] in a positive way. I mean...think about it...objective reality =
cesspools and DNA goo while subjective reality can = beautification of our
world inspiring the likes of poets, artists, and priests.
But objectivity is the backbone of science and the rational mind and the
modern paradigm the world operates upon. And thusly, our conundrum in
today's world I think, as we gravitate to the PERCEPTION that our world is a
cesspool and we little more than pond scum as a meaning of life.
Objectivity, taken to levels of what I call today's super rational mindset,
is actually a form of alienation from our own world. Again, I use Josef
Mengele as poster child for the modeled mind this creates. It can engender
real evil in our midst IMHO. Comments?
thomas p...when is reality not a product of our perception? I didn't
understand your position.
Marshall
>
> After having studied
> such microslides, objects like 'trees' became something else in my vision of
> life...for in the microworld, these creatures swim in and around debri that
> is sludgy scum to us, but perhaps structures like 'trees' to them [in a
> relative way].
First there is a mountain. Then there is no mountain. Then
there is a mountain again.
> I remember reading Henry David Thoreau in high school, where
> he wrote poetry to nature, much of which he beautifies things like 'trees'
> and forests. This comparison brought me to realize that subjectively, we
> exist in a world of great beauty, rife with meaning and purpose, with
> spiritual beings like angels and gods and profound beauty; but OBJECTIVELY
> with the modern sobered mind, looking back upon our world as we might the
> pond scum under a microscope, what our world really is, is a bunch of
> organic debri floating around randomly as a giant cesspool.
>
> Which view is correct? Thoreau's or the Cesspool?
The two views are equally correct.
A small suggestion: don't read Thoreau for the poetry. That's
like going to see a Jessica Alba movie for the acting.
Marshall
ZerkonXXXX
> God will become unnecessary and will evolve out of existence in the
> human mind...
Well some one has "some growing up to do". God is a form of function. God
always has been, always will be forever and ever and more as long as
humans are around because, you see, humans are this function.
No old men in the clouds? No problem, how about an insane guy who wears
one glove? No bible, hey no problem, here are the papers of science
studies funded by a pharmaceutical corporation rushed to the masses
dumbed down, then dumbed down again, 'reworked' and published in "Science
Today" and the New New York Times, and the New Wall Street Journal
gobbled up by the true believers in the capital 'S' science who are told
to, yes, drink the KoolAid.. "Thou shalt not" .. becomes "You will...".
Clergy? Anyone with a TV show. High priests of the inner temple? Check,
the innately virtuous rich. Amazing grace? Money. Sacraments? Things of
Money. Martyrs? easiest of all, "me me me meeeee"!!
Their god is dead, long live m(in)e.
John Jones
On the other hand, culturally enforced ignorance of the depth of human
experience might evolve away, and then we might find the true source of
these other-world experiences, as many already have.
Bill M
"John Jones" <jonesc...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:h30bv6$ajb$4...@news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-God-Robert-Wright/dp/0316734918/
>>
>> http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x195lt_devo-jocko-homo_music?from=rss
>
> On the other hand, culturally enforced ignorance of the depth of human
> experience might evolve away, and then we might find the true source of
> these other-world experiences, as many already have.
Only in your dreams!
John Stafford
> On the other hand, culturally enforced ignorance of the depth of human
> experience might evolve away,
Have you not noticed that your view of reality posits a great deal upon
imposing the class of 'objects' upon that which cannot be such except in
our mind which is an impoverished desert.
The BORG
But the concept will not.
If God = food, water, matter, and has control over
life/death, circumstance and destiny, for each and every
human, then it is more likely that humans will become more
aware of some kind of power and intelligence and control and
not less.
If this does exist, humans must a) become aware of it and
for some b) become more aware of it.
And they will become more aware that any religions or
stories on Earth of the existence of this, are incorrect and
false views.
Some enlightened humans know already of the universal and
cosmic existence of some kind of all encompassing love, all
forgiving in nature.
But not a persona or character as described in any religions
of Earth.
More a form or essence, vast and unavoidable.
And no comprehension of, only the impossible nature and that
with this knowledge of this all encompassing love you then
know there are no fears of any kind, be they religious or
otherwise. There there are no such things as punishments or
bad places as talked of in human religions.
Which can be only a good thing.
But humans are only just beginning to be aware of this.
And only very few enlightened humans know of this.
The rest argue and bicker and squabble among their various
religions or atheism and have no knowledge of this which is
something far greater than any word such as "God" could
explain, describe or encompass.
The BORG
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:77f6da4e-f7c0-4222...@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com...
walterimlenz
> ...
At least there isn't necessarily an evolvement from more concrete to
more abstract in religion. Buddhism has been very abstract at first,
and became concrete (with many Gods) later. - Often there is a kind of
interplay between more concrete and more abstract deities. (The
Olympic gods vs. the fate, the Christian God vs. Jesus and the saints,
the Hindu Gods and the Brahman, the Tao and the Taoist deities). I can
confirm that in Germany at least the God of the official Protestant
church has become very faint, but at the same time more people believe
in esoterism, angels, neo-pagan gods etc.
Therefore the mentioned tendency should be no reason for too much
optimism.
Walter Imlenz
John Jones
see new post
Shrikeback
> God will become unnecessary and will evolve out of existence in the
> human mind...
What do you mean, "BECOME unnecessary," paleface?
Shrikeback
> On the other hand, culturally enforced ignorance of the depth of human
> experience might evolve away, and then we might find the true source of
> these other-world experiences, as many already have.
The true source being our imaginations?