Which scenario makes sense to you?

by Sirona 7 Replies latest jw friends

  • Sirona
    Sirona

    Scenario One: "In the mechanistic view of nature, everything is an artifact made by a boss who has many different names. In the western view, the boss is called God.

    This God is often depicted as a white-bearded male who roams around the sky creating the natural world. In this theory, the world is a construct and God the constructor. This biblical God is paternal, authoritarian, beneficent and, in many ways, tyrannical. He keeps track of all things and knows precisely what everyone does and when his laws are being broken.

    One of the operatives of this theory of nature is the idea of punishment for ones sins. This God/Father holds us accountable for transgressions. The transgressions are judged by various interpreters of his laws who throughout history have claimed access to the divine. Essentially, the universe is a monarchy, God the king and we the subjects. All subjects are considered born with the stain of sin as a part of their nature and therefore untrustworthy.

    This theory of nature makes many people feel estranged, creating an attitude of separateness from the boss. The more we feel separated from this God, the more we feel the need to create some way of feeling worthy. So we create an idea of our importance based on externals and call it "ego".

    Reliance on ego ultimately leads to more separation as life becomes a contest and a competition with designated others. But the sense of estrangement is partially assuaged with an ego-directed attitude of "us against them". People are categorised and evaluated on the basis of "egonomics", which includes appearance, tradition, language and physical characteristics.

    I believe that the most troubling thing built into this theory of nature is the impact it has on our ability to operate from a strong position of self-trust. Once convinced that you are untrustworthy and basically a sinner, you are quite lost. If you are untrustworthy how can you trust in even your untrustworthiness? You can't!

    Everything becomes subject to doubt when God is a vindictive boss. This leads to the confusion of doubting everything because our opinions, feelings and beliefs are untrustworthy. In this scenario, one cannot even maintain trust in God because of basic mistrust of ourselves. And not trusting in that God may be breaking on of his laws. Its a no-win situation.

    Scenario Two:. Second theory: Nature as Spontaneous and Nonjudging

    In this spontaneous view, God is universal intelligence flowing through everything, inspiring the natural process to unfold. The emphasis is on awareness of divine nature in everything rather than managing and controlling the natural world. The life force is nonjudgemental and is responsible for all creation.

    In this theory, nature is an unforced unfolding of life forms and here is no "boss". Rather than learning to manage and control the natural world, the impulse is to trust it. God, in this theory, loves all things.

    Human being are an aspect of God and are, therefore, carriers of divinity. Generally, in this theory, human beings are considered the highest level of life form. Trusting this most evolved natural human includes trusting the paradox of behaviour described as good and bad, selfish and unselfish, greedy and generous in the same manner as we respect other life forms by trusting their processes.

    There is no need to invent an ego that is separate from the divine if our basic human nature is trusted. If we trust ourselves, we know how to avoid interfering with nature and how to live in harmony. When we know God as unseen, loving and accepting powerat the heart of everything, allowing us to make our own choices,then God is a trusted part of our nature.
    ....
    The need to straighten out nature shows distrust. But when we relax and embrace the infinate variations of the universe, we are allowing the divinity of nature to flow and unfold through our life. We have tuned in to the divine." taken from "Manifest Your Destiny" by Wayne W Dyer, pgs 21-23.

    Which do you agree with most? Or are you atheist?

    Sirona

  • metatron
    metatron

    I love 'Manifest your Destiny'. It suggests a pantheistic Creator to me.

    Some of that manifestation stuff works.

    metatron

  • Simon
    Simon

    Put me down as an atheist - I believe that everything just obeys natural laws (eg. of physics).

  • glitter
    glitter

    I'm an atheist. Or I believe in God but just think he's really horrible and I really hate him (if the Bible is true) and I don't see why he should be worshipped anyway. So I'm not sure - I'm 99% atheist.

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Sirona,

    An interesting post.

    Perhaps #1 is just a means of trying to interpret #2 against a backdrop of the needs of a particular society, at a particular time. At the root of science and nature is a mystery, a 'Great Mystery'. Religion seems to spring from the desire to interpret this mystery, but it will always be interpretation as who knows the truth that lies beneath? Society needs a protective morality to flourish in order for it to survive, it also needs a means of enforcing this morality for the greater good of its citizens This morality becomes embedded in the interpretation of the 'great mystery' but then seems to move to answer what cannot be answered.

    Religion is not all bad. For example, denying the Darwinian ethos of 'survival of the fittest' would be foolish. Nature is a long term nightmare of untimely death where all creatures feed on others to live, and those that kill quicker and neater survive the longest. IMHO one of the most socially disastrous events of recent history was discovering the truth of the Darwinian theory. Society has not been elevated by this discovery, and yet it is truth that cannot be denied. Religion combats Darwinism, and in doing so attempts to elevate thinking beyond the mere 'survival of the fittest' reality, which as we may remember lay at the foundation of the destruction of millions of lives by National Socialists in WWII.

    Where religion fails is that it often demands that people accept what is plainly scientifically unsound, and in doing so tries to qualify the 'Great Mystery' in terms that can only work within a local historical, and often geographic setting. The scientific discoveries of past twenty years for example, has debunked many of the Golden Calves of religion, but religionists are very slow to let go of their dreams. Perhaps, for the sake of the welfare of society this change should only be a gradual one.

    Best regards - HS

    Edited by - hillary_step on 27 August 2002 19:27:1

  • Double Edge
    Double Edge

    You're only suggesting two scenerios, one as being absolute? Why not a scenerio 3 or 4 or 5 or 25, etc. etc. etc. I don't think 'man' can ever accurately , in this life, define 'God'.. Put me down as not an atheist because of undeniable experiences that tell me otherwise.

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    HS

    but religionists are very slow to let go of their dreams. Perhaps, for the sake of the welfare of society this change should only be a gradual one

    It is gradual. Religionists let go, one at a time, when they die.

    Sirona

    I tend toward the second scenario, but hs has added some interesting thoughts. Maybe it's not that simple. Societies based on the most accurate world view should bring positive results, over the long term. The greatest world powers for the last 2000 yrs have been christian (rome, britain, US). These powers developed the justice system and modern science that has been intrumental at the removal of much suffering and backwardness, as the US continues to do today. The suffering and backwardness, strangely enough, located at the present time in india and china. Though this isn't totally consistent, as during and after the middle ages, the arab world was much more highly developed than the west. Just some thoughts.

    SS

  • Francois
    Francois

    I am a proponent of #2 in its broadest definition.

    And, for Simon, I wonder what natural laws manifest in the outworking of altruism?

    -francois

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit