Rick Asks About Unitarians and Unitheism, Are They Similar? If So, In What Ways?--FREEDOM & FAITH IN ACTION Options

[Lindsay]

Rick, I have a great respect for the Unitarian philosophy of religion: Here is a brief outline. Perhaps we could invite a unitarian to join the dialogue here.

http://web.mac.com/mgienke/iWeb/BSEUnitari...%20beliefs.html

BTW, over the years, I have been invited to speak at several Unitarian churches in the Toronto area. I usually use the topic: WHY I COULD BE A UNITARIAN, BUT I AM NOT.

My short answer is: Because the United Church of Canada is so inclusive in matters of theology and faith that I have all the freedom of belief I need within it. The UCC is more into orthopraxy (the practice of agape/Christian/Love--Like the Democrats are supposed to be, Rick) than in orthodoxy
=======================================================

Meanwhile, Check out: http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthrea...32917#Post32917

There I am carrying on a lively dialogue with several atheists/agnostics in a thread by Socratus. I think he is a physicist and a Russian Orthodox. The following is the latest post I made to his thread.

Where and Who is God ? .......

Good dialogue, everyone. If the following comment on the topic is a repeat, I apologize:

Socratus, I know you mean well in raising this question, but, for me, it is a question that I, as a unitheist, would never ask. http://www.unitheist.org

IMO, GOD is not a some 'who' who exists some 'where', like you and I exist. For me, to think of divine Being, the infinite and eternal Now in this way, is to create an idol with the mind.

When Richard Dawkins asks theists: "What and where is your evidence for 'God'" he is asking the same kind of question we have as the title of this topic. In effect he is asking: "Who is, and where is, your God? Introduce me!"

If he asked me this, my answer would be: "Richard your question is like that asked by very young children: 'Daddy! Mommy! If God made us and the world, who made God?'

"Children need to be more mature before they can even ask mature questions and understand mature answers. I trust you are mature and know what I mean when I say: GOD, like the whole of Nature, or Reality, is the every Who and the every Where in which you and I exist.

"Now, as a mature thinkers, surely we can turn on all our physical, mental and spiritual senses. Therefore, to you I say relax, enjoy--and as the scientist you are--continue to help all of us explore this self-evident panentheistic truth. If you prefer to call this truth Nature and/or Reality, go ahead. In addition, I like to use the succinct term GOD. I give you the same freedom of the use of language that I ask of you."
========================================================================

If anyone has Richard Dawkins e-mail, I would love to hear his response to the above.
BTW, I firmly feel that we all have the right to define GOD, God , god, whatever, ion our own terms.

[Hey Hey]

Here's some light reading for you Lindsay, to take your mind off the dwindling congregations:

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/200...now_youre_1.php

[Lindsay]

Here's some light reading for you Lindsay, to take your mind off the dwindling congregations:

http://scienceblogs.com/cognitivedaily/200...now_youre_1.php

Dwindling congregations? Not the one I attend. My long experience is as follows: I have found that churches with ministers who have something inspiring and challenging to say, where the music is enjoyable and the programs reach out to serve the whole community are well attended.

Those with dull dogmatic preachers, with services filled with nothing more than meaningless rituals and with no programs of public service deserve to dwindle. If this describes your church, sorry to hear this. If you don't attend church, how would you know which is which?


BTW, I have no problem, not believing in the 'god' Dawkins describes on page 21: "... a superhuman, supernatural intelligence who deliberately designed and created the universe and everything in it including us."

I gave up believing this when I discovered that my father was both Santa Claus and the Devil--depending on his mood. Thank GOD, he was mostly in a good mood.

BTW 2, reading Dawkins makes me wonder if he has ever glanced at the great work of the process philosopher and mathematician, Alfred North Whitehead who was also a process theologian, and a panentheist--God as one in the whole process of evolving.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/whitehead/
====================================

In his intro to this great Forum, Shawn puts it thus:

Philosophical Motivation
The world is our creation, it is a thing created by mind, it is a mental construct. This is what BrainMeta seeks to communicate to others, so that they may open their eyes to this fact, so that they may go on to create something more than what is, and to instill the world with new and greater meaning. Too many today do not appreciate the essentially 'constructive nature' of reality. It is all a mental construct. We are deceived by the fact that we are humans with human consciousness.... we rarely venture outside the realms of our human consciousness, and thus we see the world with human eyes. Naturally, the vast majority of people are blind to this because humans are predisposed and 'programmed' to construct the world in human terms.
================================

In thinking about how to define God, I see that, in a way, it's like defining Truth..... it's one of those nebulous concepts that can easily elude one's intellect and it's mode of verbal communication.

Spinoza's God: one substance, whose essence necessarily involves existence, and who has infinitely many attributes and modes (of which consciousness and extension are but two modes). Spinoza's God is the God that Einstein professed to believe in (though Einstein's authority alone should not be sufficient grounds for accepting Spinoza's God). Spinoza's God is not an anthropomorphic-conception, but rather constitutes a physical/metaphysical Totality of which everything that exists, or can exist, must be a part of.....

.... It is this notion of God as Totality that I believe in. Not only does it satisfy my intellect, but also satisfies my more spiritual side. Whether this Totality is a Totality of Being, a Quantum Mechanical Totality, a Totality of Consciousness (or Absolute Mind), or any other Totality, is rather a moot point. Evidently, consciousness comprises at least part (and is probably involved with all) of that Totality.

Through the experience of transcendental/mystical/expanded states of consciousness, we enter into higher modes of Being and into a more complete Totality.... thus do we obtain knowledge of the divine firsthand, by entering into it, by becoming it.

Those lacking such divine experiences usually try to explain them away as hallucinations or delusions.

Those having such experiences require no further explanation and already know where I'm coming from.

This vast immeasurable Totality, we are all a part of it. We do not yet see or experience this Totality in it's entirety, but there is a time for that.... or at least that is one of the ideals I aspire to. ...
===========================================================

To the above, and more, I say: AMEN!!!

WANT TO READ MORE OF WHAT SHAWN SAYS

http://brainmeta.com/index.php?p=god

[code buttons]

.... It is this notion of God as Totality that I believe in.

What if everything, Totality was all inside your head?