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.

[Lindsay]

Because I am a thinker! I choose to believe what makes sense to me, not what someone tells me I must believe.

[Joesus]

Because I am a thinker! I choose to believe what makes sense to me, not what someone tells me I must believe.

Beliefs and thoughts arise and naturally change, which would explain the way your identification with God as you believe in it has changed, both in the spellings and acronyms.
God as you have exemplified it, is a reflection of personal opinion and belief. That which you respect in your acceptance of others is mixed with those you have no respect for and ignore. God in everything then is both likable and an irritation.
This does little to satisfy a desire to find something consistent within the inconsistent, other than possibly to label God as the inconsistency within humanity.
God as a pretense to identification then is ignored in favor of the egoic ideal to surround ones self with the limitations of personal realities, to focus on the temporary rather than that which may be eternal. The experience of a constant which supersedes life and death as we label it between our experience of birth and death as electrical impulses of the material brain.

It's nice to think I like this and I don't like that, and to possibly focus on what you like, and if you're lucky escape that which you do not. But then as perceptions of reality change and your likes and dislikes change, you would have to rearrange your schedules and identities with the changing personal opinions of the change. It would much simpler to find something more reliable than the changing reflections of the ego to call God unless you like to juggle God within the changing beliefs and opinions.

Smoke and mirrors is sometimes an entertaining experience to the mind but when you really need something you can count on that won't change or disappear, opinion and belief won't satisfy the heart.