On 29 Nov 2013, at 21:14, Samiya Illias wrote:
On 29-Nov-2013, at 10:34 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
On 28 Nov 2013, at 15:29, Samiya Illias wrote:
Bruno wrote: 'I was of course alluding to the greek
(neo)platonists. They did invented the God used by both the
abramanic cultures (even if terribly deformed, notably by the
abandon of science about it, and the use of authoritative
arguments, by Christians, Muslims, and perhaps by the Jewish (with
Maimonides, to some extent).
It is not because we have found strong evidence that the Earth is
NOT flat, that Earth has disappeared. We just correct our theory
of Earth. Why couldn't we do that with the notion of God?'
------------
The God of Abrahamic faiths is the Deity.
It is preferable to bet so. OK.
We believe that He is the only God from time immemorial.
Hmm.... OK. But he might have "encounter" by Indians, Egyptians,
and many others.
Only God can be God, the rest are not god in the absolute sense of
the word.
OK. But the rest can be aspect of God, or related to God in some ways.
All prophets preceding Abraham also spoke of the same God.
Unfortunately, over ages most belief systems degenerate into a
pantheon of gods 'in the image of humans'.
As far as I know, they might be intermediate gods and goddesses,
and many things. But the big one is one, OK.
The problem is that the big ONE has no name, and humans keep
invoking it or even acting in his name, which is blasphemous. The
problem is in the idolatry of text and syntax, and being sleepy on
the semantic or meaning.
That is why we use the term Allah which translates to the Deity.
However, God informs us that all beautiful names belong to Him, and
introduces Himself variously as the Beneficent, the Merciful, the
Mighty, the Seer, the Knower, the Hearer, the Aware, the Loving,
the Forgiving, Accepter of Repentance, the Stern in Punishment, the
Bountiful, the Able, the Sublime, the Absolute, Lord of the Throne,
and so on.
If comp is true, you might become inconsistent (with all my respect,
and with assuming, I insist, computationalism). by asserting such
truth. Only God can inform us, and there is no intermediate.
So either your are half-enlightened and refer to an experience which
is non communicable, or your refer to experience by others, and it
might not hemp in spreading the possible truth.
The God I believe in is the majestic, indescribable, unimaginable,
majestic Creator and Sustainer of everything.
Yeah ... I might relate. (I am not entirely sure the term "creator"
is a not a bit misleading, though).
How?
Because I am still not sure that the ultimate pouter God is a person,
that it has some will, and that it can create something.
I know very few things ....
Unfortunately, instead of focussing on and understanding God's
message of love and justice, people misunderstand the warnings of
not qualifying for Heaven and blame / reject a God who warns of
Hell as the consequence of injustice.
Injustice and dishonesty leads to catastrophes. But is not the
warning of "God" private? can we really tell this to others, like
if few words could really help, and not confuse.
God has given all humans a conscience and a moral compass.
Not just the humans.
Moreover, He has sent prophets and scriptures throughout the ages.
I don't know. Some prophets might be half enlightened persons talking
to much.
I believe that most religions started of as monotheist but morphed
into a pantheon when people started adding to religion, for whatever
reasons.
I am not sure. People have divinized what they don't understand,
through their human interpretation. thunder looks like the sky is
angry, so there is God who is angry. To my knowledge the zoroastrians
and Egyptians might have developed the idea of a unique God. God was
one before that, of course, but the human have divinized its
manifestations before grasping its "existence and unicity", with the
price of losing all possible names for It.
When "hell" becomes a metaphysical or theological punishment, how
can someone do the good, for the good, and not by fear of the bad?
Well, God knows better how to warn. What little I understand from my
study of the Quran is that there is a balance of glad tidings and
warnings. Moreover, guidance is granted by Allah to those who are
willing to be guided. There is no compulsion in religion.
OK.
We have been given this life (respite) according to a decree that
went before that humans will be given a chance to prove themselves,
and no injustice will be done to anyone on the Day of Reckoning of
humans.
We can hope this, and I think that is even reasonable with some
axiomatic of "God"; but again, in science, we must be aware that it
might be wishful thinking, and we must be aware of the possibly
misleading character of that wishful thinking (even if eventually some
wishful thinking might be at play at some fundamental level, like with
the Löbian formula for the machines).
With comp there is something like a non communicable moral law,
which asserts "don't ever do moral", which is non communicable, but
still accessible as true from the first person point of view of the
machine. We have to trust Conscience or God in that matter, somehow.
If you mean conscience and morality is inbuilt and an intrinsic
quality, yes I agree.
Rejecting God won't make any difference to God or His plan. We
need Him and His guidance, not the other way round!
Nobody rejects God, I think. People rejects this or that
representation of God and the norm and moral often associated with
It, which have been imposed to them by tradition/coercion. That's
not a problem, and participates to the faith. They look behind the
names, and wake up from the hypnotic repetition of sentences and
words.
I agree, as long as they seek a better explanation instead of
rejecting theism.
People always reject the good and the truth when it is imposed by
others. And that, paradoxically enough, is a good thing (I think).
Once a religion is institutionalized, it will confused people, unless
the institution do arts and poem, celebrate beauty and joy, and avoid
arguments and truth. Like Alan watts, the priest function can survive
if the priest can blink.
But some identifies the unique God and this or that representation,
and so believes that they reject all notions of God, to directly
bet on another one unconsciously, and abandon the honest spiritual
inquiry, which requires an humble doubting third person attitude in
those matter.
I agree.
That's more grave because that lead to 'authoritative
arguments' (the worst) in both science and religions. It is all
good for the bandits and credulity exploiters.
Yes, true.
OK, nice. An authoritative argument in "exact non human science" will
lead to a catastrophe tomorrow, and we can survive. An authoritative
argument in "human science" can lead to millennia of suffering and
confusion. We must be more rigorous in theology than in any other
science. The taoists are right (with respect to comp + some
definitions) on this: those who know remain silent. If they taught, it
is only by by exemplary practice. They trust the "big thing" for doing
the communication, at the right moment.
Bruno
Samiya
Bruno
Samiya
Sent from my iPhone
On 28-Nov-2013, at 6:52 PM, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
I was of course alluding to the greek (neo)platonists. They did
invented the God used by both the abramanic cultures (even if
terribly deformed, notably by the abandon of science about it,
and the use of authoritative arguments, by Christians, Muslims,
and perhaps by the Jewish (with Maimonides, to some extent).
It is not because we have found strong evidence that the Earth is
NOT flat, that Earth has disappeared. We just correct our theory
of Earth. Why couldn't we do that with the notion of God?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com
.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-
l...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
