Are you walking in faith? - Page 3

Good post, and interesting info. I know next to nothing about world religions and it's nice to have my interest piqued in something i haven't given a whole lot of thought too. I'm really liking this idea that the Universe and God are the same, and it is certainly a lot more palatable to me than the jealous, humanesque God that I read in the Old Testament. Didn't Jesus say something like, "lift a rock, i'm there, split wood, i'm there, etc." (uh, gospel of thomas maybe?) a little smaller scale than the expanses of the Universe, but the same ideas as what you're saying about God in Islam.

Yes, and who or what created the sperm and the egg and the atoms, and who formed these to become you? I find it quite crazy not to believe in God.


But that's the crux of the matter, the God of the judeo-christian-islamic persuasion claims to have been eternally there, to never had a beginning and never an end. The only immortal, eternal, entity that is the only One able to create things out of nothing, that is allpowerful and allknowing.

There is no way to logically prove God's existence, but there is also no way to logically prove God's nonexistence. Nonetheless I think it has much more sensibility and way better arguments to believe in God than not.


But at some point of time, it has to be that dramatic, nothing, then something, death then life... to think and believe that that dramatic happening happened without divine intervention, would be the same as to believe a snowy winter can turn into spring without the temperatures gettin higher, or flowers or trees growing without water, light and oxygen.

Everything that happens or changes, needs something before it to cause that happening and change and therefore at some point of time there has to be something that brought it all into existence. I call that thing God.

Now God would have to be able to create something out of nothing, so He has to have divine powers, but theoretically there could be more than one God, but since the laws in this universe are universal and pretty reliable and constant, one can assume that there is only one God.

And since God is only one, God has to be eternal and immortal, otherwise there would be needed another God who created the God we are talking about, and it would be two, and the one before Him would have to be.. making the numbers of gods necessary indefinite, and the universe would be in complete chaos..

Nightcrawler

unless each God had total jurisdiction over the universe he created.

And, it took 10000+ years of human civilization contemplating "God" for you to arrive at your understanding of God, in which time, every notion of God has been overturned and ridiculed by greater human thinking and understanding of Science.

Chart that (Gods influenece over human understanding) over time, and you will see that God (call it faith) has been in decline, ever since the notion of him was contemplated, while human knowledge, has been rising ever since the first human became self aware.

Project that another 10,000 years, and all todays notions of god, will be as silly as thinking Mithra literally killed a Bull to save mankind, or Isis literally sat on an placeholder of Osiris' cock to become pregnant.

Whereas we once had faith, that things exist because of God, we are turning that into knowledge of understanding the reality of what these icons mean. - Mithra killing a bull is knowledge of the Science of the Earths wobble as it spins round the Sun wobbling around the galazy - When the story was created, the educated people had the 'knowledge' of precession, and the ignorant had 'faith' that there was this Guy who killed a bull. Same underlying truth, different states of faith vs knowledge. No-one still thinks that there was literally a magical Bullfighter, we all know the knowledge.

So in the future, the same will happen as it always has, the ignorant become wise (perhaps im too optimistic!). The stories of Jesus will be understood from a position of 'knowledge' rather than 'faith', and mans conception of God will have progressed to a state where as we see God today, will appear naive and ignorant - But the underlying truth will always be true, and still the same.

So the 'eternal' question, is why do we want to remain ignorant, when we know the walls of security are going to come crashing down. It's inevitable my dear Smith.

That is an infalliable belief, and hence its popularity I suspect. But in principle, Islam allows for a pantheon of gods underneath God -- demigods and such all simply aspects of the one God, but nevertheless worshipable in their own right -- much like the Saints of Christianity except under a Singular god and not the triple threat...

This is clearly in error. It is man who believes that such a God has been eternally there. God does not speak to people.

I agree.

Quite the awesome post, Mark.

Bravo! Bravo!!!!

The tears, they burn!!!!!!

Good argument, but if each God had total jurisdiction over the universe he created or the gods formed a unified will to act in this universe as one will, or there is really only one God, does make no difference for us, in effect it would be for us in this universe one God!

Nightcrawler

How do you know? Do you have any proof that God doesn't occasionaly inspire people or even talk to them?

Nightcrawler

But that's exactly what the Quran teaches against, the Quran clearly condemns the worship of saints, angels, demons, lesser gods...

That's one of the most important messages of the Quran, that God is one, and that only He should be worshipped, thanked and called for help and forgivance.

Nightcrawler

Imo, this is a reductionist devaluation of the Qur'an which is one of the most beautiful and profound metaphysical and spiritual systems ever known. I am not saying what you say is not true - just that it is oversimplified and somewaht strips the subtlety.

This is the shahada:

There is no God.......

except for God.

It is affirmation and negation - a juxtaposition of positive and negative, affirmation and denial. Your interpretation does not show any of that.

As you may know, this can also be translated as there is no reality except God or even no 'Truth'.

No reality except reality.

It is a complex metaphysical mystical system not a fundamental absolute tenet.

Yet one could point to a passage in the Qur'an that permits worship of specific idols as I'm sure you know. How do you explain this?

I know how I do but I was wondering how it fits into your view?

Could you please quote that passage, so that I know what we are talking about, as I'm currently unaware of it?

Nightcrawler

Sure, it is Sura Al-Najm - The Star (Q.53):

"Have you thought of Allat and al-'Uzza and Manat the third, the other...
These are the exalted Gharaniq, whose intercession is hoped for."

That would allow these individuals to PROVE his existence, which as a faith-based entity would cause the whole godly charm of a deity to disperse.

Yes, they were mentioned as an example for what the Meccans falsely believed in, here is the same passage a bit more complete:


Nightcrawler

How so? The prophets and messengers who claimed that God inspired them and Moses even that He talked directly with him, how should they have proven God's existence beyond doubt.

Sure they could have proven God's existence for those who were directly living near the prophet and messengers, but the rest the descendants and the farther away people don't have that direct witnessing and experience and would have to relie on faith.

Nightcrawler

Proof is proof is proof. I can prove a mathematical therom, and that proof will work for all time. If there is sufficient evidence of a conversation between a deity and a sheep then that evidence will be sufficient for all time.

Who cares what the Quran, or Bible, or Old Testament 'teaches,' since they were all written by man. If man is a product of god's existence then man, every one, should know what god wants and what he doesn't. And every man having only the thoughts allowed for by god should be able to do only the things god wants him to do (especially if god is everything)...

What about free will? If "God" thought it was worth it to give humans free will, to make their own choices (good or bad), then those choices not one person, but those that person comes into contact with. Apparently,He has the power to make us do what he wants, but apparently doesn't because he wants us to choose on our own.

Would humans rather "God" interfere with free will and prevent bad things form happening, or let humans have choices, and let them live according to those choices?

I don't think you can honestly believe in God with any intellectual rigor and believe that we have free will.

*Shrug* Well, that's your opinion and I respect that.

(I've never believed someone had to be atheist in order to be intelligent.)

And, actually I mostly agree with your signature.

I never implied that you couldn't be intelligent and believe in God -- just that you can't be intellectually rigorous and believe in both God AND Free Will...

Ah, okay. I understand. My apologies.

That's not strictly true though, it all depends on the religious framework (or none) which one operates in.

Perhaps you are talking of the Christian paradigm which states man has free-will (in Islam there is no will other than that of God)?

In certain Gnostic sects for example, God has no knowledge of humanity which were created by a rival being who was jealous of God and wished to usurp Him and were given free will for this purpose.

This rival being then masqueraded as the real God and convinced humanity he was the only one - he is held to be the being featured in the Old Testament reveling in death and murder - whereas he was more a kind of 'devil'.

This view explains a lot of the problems with God and 'good' and 'evil' in the world as well as the depredations of followers of this pretend God even to this day (but that's another story).

The point is that this is one view where it is possible to believe in God and free will.

Do you believe in free-will? I seem to remember you've implied you don't, and i'm not entirely convinced there is free-will, but i've not fully got my head around it?

I don't as it happens. Was just pointing out that it is possible to believe in it and God at the same time - though not from a traditional Judeo-Christian pov of course.

so, if you'll explain, are you coming at this from a philosophical POV or a scientific one?

Certainly i've read enough hypothetical scientific reasons why we might not have free-will, but probably not enough from a philosophical POV, why it might not exist.

Personally, coming from an Islamic viewpoint as I do, the philosophy behind it is that God is the totality of everything. He alone exists.

So if you buy into this (as I do ) then certain questions arise: if God created the Universe then how can He be a totality? That would mean that there is God and a universe - two things.

This cannot be in terms of the belief that God is one so it must be that the division between God and the universe, and between God and me, is an illusion.

Once you realize this then it becomes a 'path' where the aim is to dissolve that illusion. What the Sufis call fana - ie to realize that there is no distinction between you and God.

If this is the case and if it is possible (for argument's sake) then there is only one existent will: God's. We just need to realize this. Not only is free-will an illusion but WE are an illusion.

Any religion that does not take this into account will run aground in a morass of speculation to try to account for it. but it can never be done.

For example, how can a good, loving God who knows everything create a universe where sin would enter and death and horrors be manifest? The answer is usually that HE didn't He created man to have free-will and they chose this. Shifting the blame on to man - but it won't fly.

It is far more logical - and spiritual as well as far, far harder to achieve - to realize that we are all illusions and underneath it all we are all the same manifestation of God with no division: you, me, Bush, Israelis, Billy Graham, Mulla Omar, Fellows and Mr Cuilla - all the same, all an equal manifestation of God's (or if you prefer, the power and energy behind all existence) will with no independent existence of our own.

Playing out the script till we mature enough to transcend it.

This is a religious view but it occurs to me you wanted a more secularist one. we can do that too but perhaps it would bore anyone still following this.....

no, the religious view is fine. It's the same spiritual view as how I see the scientific one.

Maybe for instance, what I see as the original singularity, the entirity of the universe, with any concept of anything outside it - void, null, undefined, inexistant - is the spiritual equivalent of God.

As to my relation to the singularity, being a part of it, to the Islamic view in God, we are all part of, not existing seperate from it.

As for the singularity not existing anymore because of the expansion, as I have said in my crazy-theories, this is an illusion, because i think everything can be viewed still as existing as a singularity, and it is just an impression we have that there is size and time because we are travelling slower than light.

In my view, the 'creation' is the act of taking the 'quantum elements' of the singularity (which if left alone would always be travelling at the speed of light) and slowing them down as to make an illusion of size and time from the reality of everthing existing as a singularity or God.

So from this, as we know that from entropy, that time is equal both forward and backwards, which is nicely explained if time is just an illusion - all forward events cancel all the backward events to give a sum of 0 (meaning time is an illusion) then all events are already played out - because everything that ever has or will happen took "0" seconds, and we are just witnessing them as 'we' travel through them, an effect manifestated because of the 'creation' event.

So from this POV there is no free-will.

BUT, I have coined a new term - "Beautiful truth" defined against "Literal Truth"

Now, before you start throwing "Fundie" labels around

What the question is, is whether God or my view is a 'beautiful' truth, or whether the 'Literal truth' would someday show that idea to be wrong.

Then of course, if we are "playing out the script until we have matured enough to transcend it", how could we ever transcend it if becoming mature enough is already pre-decided by the script were playing out?

I agree with all this completely - except the bit above

The 'beautiful truth' btw is a stroke of genius and I may plagiarize it!

Re the above quote: I think you may be confusing absence of free-will with pre-destination. the two are - or can be - very different things.

For example: I get up in the morning and I feel ok. there is a ring at the bell and I open the door. It is a fundie loaded with Chick comics and he proceeds to harangue me mercilessly and tell me I am going to hell where I will burn in torment forever.

He kind of zones out and cannot hear what I am saying - that I must go, have an important appointment etc - so I tell myself I WILL NOT lose it, I WILL keep calm, I WILL feel good.

However, as his abusive rant continues and becomes ever more irrational I see he is starting to glaze over. He moves things on to the personal level and slowly I start to lose it. Petrified, I slam the door in his face and sink to the floor on the other side shuddering and sobbing with relief as thudding and frothing noises volubly emanate from the outside hallway noxiously accompanied by a blood-curdling litany of Old Testament quotes which are indistinguishable amongst an alien strangulated choking sound - all except for a single solitary phrase which sounds chillingly like 'Lord, smite the viper'.

Clearly (and this is real life example believe it or not) despite all my intentions to not feel certain things, to keep calm, I am powerless. Utterly powerless in the face of everyday events. This is what I mean by lack of free-will. It is not pre-destined that a fundie will knock on your door (though it is very likely given the ubiquity of organizations that specialize in this activity) and it is not pre-ordained that you will react in a certain way. It is just how it is. You react from what you are.

Re God: imo nothing is pre-ordained. God does not have to 'map things out'. He is not a fundie and this is literalist thinking. What I mean is that if everything is the will of God then it doesn't matter much what happens - it is all good.

It is us that makes the divisions, He doesn't - so in a way it is a false question as questions of pre-destination always centre around 'good' and 'bad' outcomes. Think about it. Someone is 'predestined' for either heaven or hell, this good outcome or this bad outcome. It's rubbish - if everything is God's will then there is no need for predestination - it is win/win.

Also I would say that this area of lack of free-will is also the whole point of religions in the first place and impinges on the question of 'sin'. This is why literalists are hot on this - of there is no free-will there is no sin and no sinners. in their view they need sinners to control minds so there must be free-will to them - really it is far from what Jesus, Buddha and Muhammad taught and you can find many examples in all these Holy books to support this view.

The people who excised and altered the Scriptures were in many cases stupid (that's why they did what they did) and as such could not understand subtlety - which is why the original teachers talked in parables, to preserve knowledge from people like them for people like us - and they missed many of the real bits in their efforts at a literary 'Inquisition' to compliment the actual one and unknowingly left many real passages in.

Funny really.

But is it ?

We would clearly want to believe - infact the ramifications of not believing it would be quite dangerous - that we lose our free-will to act out our own choices under the circumstances of events - in this case you have 'lost control of yourself' as you put it to me the other day.

But what if the universe or God was playing out a script that you have no control over? What if it was predestined that a fundie would knock on your door? What if your reaction of loosing control was predestined? - just an illusion of losing control because having control was never a property of yourself that was yours to lose in the first place?

Maybe free-will, control, predestination, fate etc are beautiful truths we construct to shield us from an unknown literal truth...

In such a case I would say that a God that constructed such a pre-destiny - and it is philosophically a possibility - would not be a 'just' and 'good' God. Though again, as you can see, these are divisions I create myself.

But you are right - all truths, beautiful or not, are constructs by ourselves for some purpose. Perhaps to hide something, perhaps for other reasons. I am arguing that there is only one truth, reality, God or whatever you want to call it and that we are all it and all part of it.

You are totally correct. So is Cuilla and Mr Whisker. Even Frank. All utterly correct and everything we all say is the truth.

The problem is not whether we are right or wrong. The problem is that we perceive a difference and this causes conflict. In another sense I am part of the problem by saying there is a problem - there is no division at all.

We just can't get anywhere by logic in this. That's why the great Scriptures are illogical - and why literalists try so hard to force logic and structure (ie security) into them.

Traditional spiritual methods often make use of 'nonsense': Zen koans and Mulla Nasrudin's sayings would be examples. Also some Bible stories. One must transcend the rational mind - some people here on these very forums have achieved that so it must be possible

But we don;t need all this sophistry, there is an even simpler approach: if the multiple universe or parallel existence theories are true then there are clearly existences where no fundies knock on your door, a hundred thousand do (armed with Bibles that squirt anti-sinner gas if they shout 'John 3:16") or where no fundies have ever existed (please God, I should be there it's been an administration error....)....

If this is the case then the pre-destination question is moot anyway - all outcomes and possibilities exist as a totality.

and I disagree entirely.


hmmm. i tend to agree, that there must have been a nothing -> something. i imagine "it" all began in a vast, eternal vacuum, a lack of all matter and a lack of God. for me, its simpler to believe that simple matter blinked into existence, rather than a complex being who possessed domain over all and everything that just as suddenly emerges. God, by definition, is a complex thing. How does complexity suddenly come from nothing? What created God?


thats interesting. one of my buddies, a very devout christian, said basically the same. at some point stuff happened or was suddenly created, and it was God who enabled that. This, as an idea, is easier for me to swallow [if i temporarily ignore the 'who created god' question]. From there, how do we get a God who cares enough about one tiny planet of millions at some random position in one of the millions and billions of galaxies across the span of the universe, without a huge amount of arrogance. and from that, its extremely difficult for me to believe that this idea of a God is anything like the christian God I've gathered from sunday school (whom, I gather, is similar to or the same as the God of the Koran). But, it plagues me to think about how God itself would have been created, and to have powers beyond the natural.

Why can't the universe or at least the energy within it have existed for all times?

Why call upon an infinite deity creating the universe when the entire universe can have existed for all time?

Having read Brian Greenes' Fabric of the cosmos about a year ago, there is a hyphothesis of how a universe can pop into existance from virtually no more than 20kg of matter.

Of course that doesn't explain where the 20kg came from originally, or why it happened, although you might find some luck if you understand the clash of the branes, and get your head around how matter and antimatter can annhilate leaving more matter. Its all possible under the known frameworks we have.

I saw the results of an experiment on Gold ions last year too, that suggest the framework that String-theory sits on, is along the right lines.

But the point is these things aren't complete mysteries, and people have been working on them for decades, whether they're right isn't known, but they hang suspended on frameworks of physics that are know to be correct, and its just a matter of time before they have the technology to get the results.

Don't hold you breath for string theory to supplant anything. It just doesn't predict things that haven't been predicted...

Yet and still God is referred to as "he" with no qualifications as to how God can be "he" and still be "everything". Simply contradictory.

Secondly, that Islam recognizes a devil, having inherited it from those religions that came before it, disqualifies the suggestion that Muslims (even Sufis) can claim that "evil" behavior is the sole responsibility of the individual. In Ifa (the traditional religion of the Yoruba) there is no devil, therefore in it's idea that "evil" is the responsibility of those who do it, there is no devil in the philosophy to mess it up.

There is no devil in Judaism (and although I have had this discussion with sego here before, the modern concept of Judaism hold that the individual is responsible for his actions etc etc)...