A Question (or two) for Atheists..

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
I just don't see how atheism advances spiritual progress, in the domain of infinite potential and possibility that is the unconditioned ground of all being and becoming.

Can you define for me what a spirit is? And, you as a spiritual person, how do you progress spiritually and how do you know you have progressed spiritually? Is there a confirmation? Where do spirits come from? Where do they reside? What do they look like?

reply to post by Hydroman

Is there a confirmation?

The confirmation is on a spiritual level.
You are looking for confirmation in the material world
and you will not find it there.
The spirit is those intangible things, things that need to be experienced.
Someone could tell you about their own spiritual experience but it is not
the same as having that experience yourself.
If you were to take that journey, it is best to have a goal, and my recommendation
would be to seek Jesus to contact and to have as your guide in self improvement.
That's what it is all about, how to be a better person to those around you.
To make this material world we all have to live in, a better place.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
The confirmation is on a spiritual level.
You are looking for confirmation in the material world
and you will not find it there.
The spirit is those intangible things, things that need to be experienced.
Someone could tell you about their own spiritual experience but it is not
the same as having that experience yourself.
If you were to take that journey, it is best to have a goal, and my recommendation
would be to seek Jesus to contact and to have as your guide in self improvement.
That's what it is all about, how to be a better person to those around you.
To make this material world we all have to live in, a better place.

What is the spiritual level and how do you know. How does one contact Jesus and does he contact you back?
If the spirit is intangible things, what is the difference between intangible and something doesn't exist?

reply to post by Hydroman

What is the spiritual level and how do you know. How does one contact Jesus and does he contact you back?
If the spirit is intangible things, what is the difference between intangible and something doesn't exist?

Your thoughts exist but you can't see it.
I suppose you can use something like a CAT scan and see that there are some neurons working but the thought itself is something only you can see. You are conscious of it because it is a product of your consciousness.
The spirit level is when your consciousness is processing a specialised type of thought that does not have pictures that represent physical things.
How I know is like the saying Jesus told the devil, "Man does not live on bread alone. . .".
Some people who have had a vary trying time from basically birth, such as myself, have had to be in that realm of the spirit in order to be alive, now. It may be that you have never experience life-threatening situations and have never felt the intervention of God. For you, it may be harder to give yourself into the hands of something you do not see, because what you see has always been sufficient.
Like Jesus said, easier for a came to pass the eye of the needle than a rich man to enter heaven.
A rich man would think they had all they needed.

Jesus removed himself from this physical world
to place himself in the realm of the spiritual.
He did this to be easily found, so there is no
special thing you have to do, other than
that frame of mind you would be in to be
seeking him, in the first place.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
The spirit level is when your consciousness is processing a specialised type of thought that does not have pictures that represent physical things.

Can you give an example?

Originally posted by jmdewey60
Jesus removed himself from this physical world
to place himself in the realm of the spiritual.
He did this to be easily found, so there is no
special thing you have to do, other than
that frame of mind you would be in to be
seeking him, in the first place.

Which is....?

double

reply to post by Hydroman
These are esoteric subjects and can not be adequately described.
I tried to put it into a way that could lead you if you really wanted to discover the truth of things.
It is something you must do yourself, since it is not possible to explain in an accurate way since language is developed for dealing with the material world.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Hydroman

 

These are esoteric subjects and can not be adequately described.
I tried to put it into a way that could lead you if you really wanted to discover the truth of things.
It is something you must do yourself, since it is not possible to explain in an accurate way since language is developed for dealing with the material world.

I was a christian for over 20 years, and spent a lot of time praying and seeking, many times in tears. Yet, now I'm an atheist.

As you can describe what you are talking about, how am I supposed to believe it is even real? As language is developed for dealing with the material world, what is developed for dealing with the spiritual world and how do you know this for a fact? How do you know it isn't all in your head?

reply to post by Hydroman


If you were to view Christianity through the evolutionary lens I've attempted to describe, then you might have a newfound understanding and appreciation for it's significance.

I've suggested that by "spirit" we are referring to a universal spirit of the universe as the inner being of reality and existence or the vitality intrinsic to life, something very highly evolved in the personal experience of a human being as a person.

"God is spirit and truth who seeks worshippers who worship in spirit and in truth." (Jesus to the woman at the well). "I tell you a time is coming, and indeed it is already here (his own testimony) when people need no longer worship in the temple or on the mountain."

Understanding Jesus' reframe of "God" here to the Sameritan woman is a very good clue as to what is meant by God as spirit of the universe who is intimately accessible for those comitted to truth and reality, and to the heart of things ie: the will of God, which is the will to love.

What we're talking about here is an appeal to reason, based on the evidence all around us in the form of our own inclusion, and then an introspection which might be thought of in terms of a supra or ultra-rationalism (a quantum jump in awareness) but one which is never divorced from reality, truth, and the spirit of life. At the point of ultra-rationalism, I am referring to the felt experience of gnosis, which yes, exceeds the capacity of language to describe, but which is nevertheless a knowledge that can be communicated, up to a point.

reply to post by Hydroman

. . . how do you know this for a fact?

It is only anecdotal evidence.
As for proof, you can read the words of Christ as recorded in the Gospels.
The spirit is a language unto itself.
I understand what you are saying about having tried to have an experience with God, because I have heard the same story from a lot of people.
You may be looking for something dramatic.
I have had those dramatic type experiences and it could be because I had friends who were, without realizing it, invoking demons (as an example)
Like I said earlier, the main purpose for this spiritual connection with Christ is to help you be a better person, for example being sympathetic to others, and not so out for just what seems to help you, even if it means less for someone else.
If you were brought up Christian, God may not think it so necessary to give you a revelation of the historic form of Jesus. That would have been something you were already familiar with and had that picture in your normal consciousness.
What may be missed and is the spiritual revelation suited to your personal experience, could be something where you can just be quiet and this prompting would be there, to do the right thing when it came time to make a decision in day to day living. I'm giving this as an example, not knowing what you have to face on a regular bases.

religions evolve along with language, mathematics, science, and everything else we've come up with to try and understand our world..

when did religion start to become science? was it when we recognized that there were seasons, or when we started to count the days and observe the stars, or when math was used to imperially predict coming events?
what about engineering and the arch seen in the top of a cave?

was it the concept recognition of the strength in the shape or the mathematical development that made it science or engineering?

was it influences of ideas of ‘scientific method’, or social upheaval caused by ideas of 'evolution’ verses the ‘religious state,’ that caused science to be classed as a distinct division?

what about ‘communication’ and the incredible advancements created by a bigger pool of ideas and the ability to spread these ideas across more informed people in a shorter time?

i suggest that science has diverged in little steps. just as each religion holds common belief threads that diverge and re-converge with common miracles and character actors with similar names etc.. science has also separated into groups with different scales of measurement and different jargon languages while holding true to fundamental core beliefs. each group having its own specialist; a social development of the high priest, if you will..

many of our scientific models stem from ideas with religious origins and parallels, yet this does not mean those original ideas are still relevant..

I think what I'm trying to say here, in poing those questions in the OP, is that man, as a phenomenon, in perfection, is God, as the highest expression and reflection of the eternal Godhead, aleady, or at least in potentia, and that certain enlightened Godmen like Jesus of Nazareth, Christified come to represent (however they are mythologized) the Cosmogenesis of God as Sprit and Truth in human form, to serve as a model of what it"s like to be both fully human AND fully divine as sacred beings or as "children of God" (Godhead).

Why deny us that inheritance in eternity born of a preconcieved, a priori, even a contemptuous bias? That's absurd and not the least bit helpful to our cause of our continued spritual and psychological growth and well being.

As i've intimated already the hard atheist position may very well repretent not only a stumbling block, but worse, the missed opportunity of all time, from age to age in eternity, a real tragedy imho to, in the final analysis, at the end of the day, kill the only remaining chance for a happiness and a peace capable of being known while surpassing all understanding.

Surely what Jesus is telling us is that the highest will of God is love, and that there are certain things that are worth dying for and that must be adopted and fully realized without any compromise whatsoever. For me this is a great relief but never a misguided one, and therefore it becomes the object of my innermost heart's desire, which is to love and be loved, unconditionally. And to "grok" of this most fully is to "eat" the word or the logos while at the same time evaluating it or tasting it by gnosis or own own inner felt experience.

reply to post by NewAgeMan


What you ARE saying is actually, that you discard the categorically NO (to 'god') from some atheists and exchange it with your own categorically theist YES.

There is no grokking done here, only preaching.

reply to post by bogomil


Or no possibility for consideration, or understanding.

reply to post by bogomil


Respectfully, what he is doing here is not much different from what I've seen you doing in other threads.

You say (in a more aggressive way) 'Consider the possibility that God doesn't exist' to theists. NewAgeMan says (in a more philosophical way) 'Consider the possibility does exist' to atheists.

While I tend to say 'Consider the both the possibility that God does exist and does not exist', to both sides.

In the end, we're all bashing our heads against the wall. The man that sees only the light is as blind as the man who only dwells in darkness.

Originally posted by Glass

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by NewAgeMan

 

You are presenting 'gnostic atheism' as your shadow sparring-partner, and your arguments demonstrate your own inclination towards 'gnostic theism'.

By ignoring the much more common 'agnostic atheism', you have orchestrated a scenario, where you (badly disguised) can rehash 'intelligent design' and other theist oddities.

But I'll join you in your cosmetic 'maybes' and say: "MAYBE it was the flying spaghetti monster what did it"

I see absolutely nothing in the OP's post relating to intelligent design.

Quote from OP:

["Why, if non locality and evolutionary theory must be adopted as fact, must we exclude, a priori, the most fundamental parent-child type relationship (Abba?) when in truth we as human beings are the manifest variable of the supreme value?"]

reply to post by bogomil


In this quote he is merely asking why it is accepted that evolutionary theory somehow rules out the possibility of a divine source.

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by bogomil

 

Or no possibility for consideration, or understanding.

Semantic juggling with 'gnostic' and 'agnostic' positions is meaningless, and only leaves the impression of....semantic juggling.

Originally posted by Glass
reply to post by bogomil

 

In this quote he is merely asking why it is accepted that evolutionary theory somehow rules out the possibility of a divine source.

[" when in truth we as human beings are the manifest variable of the supreme value"]

Please notice "in TRUTH" and "the MANIFEST".