Do You Find Ietsism a Likely and/or Plausible Belief?

[sew.excited73]

Ietsism is definitely where I'm at. But to explain exactly how that infinite realm operates is not knowable in the life here on Earth. Benevolent omnipotent God's I've ruled out for good reasons. Design is not an option because that implies that life is a carefully thought out plan which it is not.

A dimension of reality that has systemic non living intelligence that is far from perfect, and forms life, and posseses life qualities is where I'm at. I do not think everything comes from an infinite living mind, but life can only come from other life type qualities and things.

Otherwise to be a physicalist naturalist I'd have to accept that life on Earth is just a blind physical hiccup; mind from mindlessness, qualities of being without intentionality. Essentially a non special nothing burger, or the rarest of miracles. To be a naturalist is to say that life is nonsensical and deeply absurd.

Yes, I don’t think anyone would want it to be a ‘non-special nothing burger’!

And I don’t think it is either… but…I could very well be wrong and the hiccup, how immensely unlikely in my opinion, could still be true, even if we don’t like it, I am afraid, because it might not care what we think… And it might just be the one and only miracle atheists actually do believe in -LOL

 

[sew.excited73]

According to my beliefs, God is a being with a personality but this does not imply that God is a human or a physical form.
I believe we can know some of the attributes of God through scriptures, but we can never know the Essence of God, i.e., God's intrinsic nature.

While the Baháʼí writings teach of a personal god who is a being with a personality (including the capacity to reason and to feel love), they clearly state that this does not imply a human or physical form.[2] Shoghi Effendi writes:

What is meant by personal God is a God Who is conscious of His creation, Who has a Mind, a Will, a Purpose, and not, as many scientists and materialists believe, an unconscious and determined force operating in the universe. Such conception of the Divine Being, as the Supreme and ever present Reality in the world, is not anthropomorphic, for it transcends all human limitations and forms, and does by no means attempt to define the essence of Divinity which is obviously beyond any human comprehension. To say that God is a personal Reality does not mean that He has a physical form, or does in any way resemble a human being. To entertain such belief would be sheer blasphemy.[15][16]

God in the Baháʼí Faith - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I never thought of it that way!
I have however played with a slightly similar idea, that when we die our consciousness together with all other ‘dead’ consciousnesses goes back to where we originate from, to form part of God perhaps? Much like ‘a cell in a body’- kind of system… the ‘body’ of God, if you like, but not a physical body. It’s hard to explain, I hope I worded it well enough so you can grasp the concept of what I mean?

(I hasten to add that this does not make us Gods! I see that scenario as all of us originally (and eventually) merely becoming/being/having been a tiny part of the ‘thing/being/consciousness’ called God.)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I somewhat agree, but culture and respect for each others cultures also dictates use of language, including punctuation. So, I don’t necessarily do it because that is what I believe, but more because it’s the ‘done thing’ culturally and it therefore helps explain things easier. Does that make sense?

All right, fine -- you frame your language to suit your audience.

However, I cannot grasp the idea of a "god" that has no intentional impact upon the world (read "universe"). Without intention, you're simply talking about physics and cause and effect. Followers of the Abrahamic religions most certainly do not accept that notion!!

But okay, there are different religious perspectives in the world that try to accommodate the apparent lack of divine interference either on behalf or or against anyone or anything. For example:

Deism thinks a creator intentioinally set the universe in motion, but does not intervene in human affairs. This is a little hard to accept -- rather like the hobbyist who creates a fabulous model town for his electric train set, and then never bothers to turn on the train to see how it runs, but just goes away and ignores it forever. I think we'd all think that was very odd.

Pantheism (so far as I understand it) identifies God with the universe itself. In this view, God is not a personal being with intentions but rather the sum total of all that exists. The divine is inherent in nature, and there is no separate, intentional force acting upon it. This differs from the idea of a god with distinct intentions -- but it is exactly what I said: basically, equivalent to physics and ultimately understandable by science (if we survive long enough).

Some belief systems, such as certain forms of Buddhism, do not center around a god or gods with intention. Instead, they focus on principles like karma, the law of cause and effect, or the pursuit of enlightenment. In these systems, there is no divine being actively intervening in the world, and hope is derived from understanding and following natural laws or achieving personal spiritual goals. Again, how is that different from a mere physical understanding? I mean, we don't understand exactly how gravity works, but we know if we step off the cliff, we will fall down.

In some polytheistic and animistic religions, gods and spirits may have intentions and interact with the world, but their actions are often seen as unpredictable or capricious. While there is hope that these beings might help or protect, there is also an acknowledgment that they may act in ways that are not necessarily beneficial to humans. Such belief systems focus a lot of energy on trying to propitiate these gods and spirits, in the (often vain) hope that they won't hurt us too much.

Atheism, the lack of belief in gods, and secular humanism, which emphasizes human values without reliance on the divine, do not involve any belief in a god with intentions. Hope and meaning are found in human effort, reason, and community rather than in a divine being's actions. This, of course, is my stance.

 

[osgart]

Yes, I don’t think anyone would want it to be a ‘non-special nothing burger’!

And I don’t think it is either… but…I could very well be wrong and the hiccup, how immensely unlikely in my opinion, could still be true, even if we don’t like it, I am afraid, because it might not care what we think… And it might just be the one and only miracle atheists actually do believe in -LOL

I don't think it is special in the sense that there is a grande purpose to our lives. But life is inherently special in that the qualities and characteristics we have have psychophysical harmony. If mindless processes made life there'd be no harmonious function at all. There's a theistic argument for psychophysical harmony but like all arguments for God it falls short of the mark, but it establishes a good basis for my ietsism as they call it. People take synchrony and harmony in the functions of life for granted.

 

[PureX]

I accept it could be a being, but what’s different is that I would also accept God if it were not a being. I just believe there is more, something or indeed someone is not determined (yet).

I agree. But “undetermined” tends not to be very useful to me in everyday life. Unless it affords me the ability to presume as I see fit given the needs of the moment. Which I find that it quite logically does.

(Sorry I didn’t follow your second bit… can you explain in simpler terms, please, so I may understand you? )

I completely agree that the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is (from our perspective) is a great and impenetrable (transcendent) mystery. Ok, so now what? We have this great unknown that we cannot unravel, true, but we can still imagine the possibilities. And we can still hope the best possibility that we imagine is the reality of it. And why not? It could be. And most importantly, we can choose to act as if it is, because we want it to be. And in so doing we may even begin to bring it about.

 

[sew.excited73]

All right, fine -- you frame your language to suit your audience.

However, I cannot grasp the idea of a "god" that has no intentional impact upon the world (read "universe"). Without intention, you're simply talking about physics and cause and effect. Followers of the Abrahamic religions most certainly do not accept that notion!!

But okay, there are different religious perspectives in the world that try to accommodate the apparent lack of divine interference either on behalf or or against anyone or anything. For example:

Deism thinks a creator intentioinally set the universe in motion, but does not intervene in human affairs. This is a little hard to accept -- rather like the hobbyist who creates a fabulous model town for his electric train set, and then never bothers to turn on the train to see how it runs, but just goes away and ignores it forever. I think we'd all think that was very odd.

Pantheism (so far as I understand it) identifies God with the universe itself. In this view, God is not a personal being with intentions but rather the sum total of all that exists. The divine is inherent in nature, and there is no separate, intentional force acting upon it. This differs from the idea of a god with distinct intentions -- but it is exactly what I said: basically, equivalent to physics and ultimately understandable by science (if we survive long enough).

Some belief systems, such as certain forms of Buddhism, do not center around a god or gods with intention. Instead, they focus on principles like karma, the law of cause and effect, or the pursuit of enlightenment. In these systems, there is no divine being actively intervening in the world, and hope is derived from understanding and following natural laws or achieving personal spiritual goals. Again, how is that different from a mere physical understanding? I mean, we don't understand exactly how gravity works, but we know if we step off the cliff, we will fall down.

In some polytheistic and animistic religions, gods and spirits may have intentions and interact with the world, but their actions are often seen as unpredictable or capricious. While there is hope that these beings might help or protect, there is also an acknowledgment that they may act in ways that are not necessarily beneficial to humans. Such belief systems focus a lot of energy on trying to propitiate these gods and spirits, in the (often vain) hope that they won't hurt us too much.

Atheism, the lack of belief in gods, and secular humanism, which emphasizes human values without reliance on the divine, do not involve any belief in a god with intentions. Hope and meaning are found in human effort, reason, and community rather than in a divine being's actions. This, of course, is my stance.

Well laid out!

And for the sake of this thread… The ietsists, who find some believability in (almost) all those stances at one point (including atheism, in my case) or another in their lives, but are not satisfied with the entire package offered by any one existing belief.

 

[sew.excited73]

I agree. But “undetermined” tends not to be very useful to me in everyday life. Unless it affords me the ability to presume as I see fit given the needs of the moment. Which I find that it quite logically does.

I completely agree that the source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is (from our perspective) is a great and impenetrable (transcendent) mystery. Ok, so now what? We have this great unknown that we cannot unravel, true, but we can still imagine the possibilities. And we can still hope the best possibility that we imagine is the reality of it. And why not? It could be. And most importantly, we can choose to act as if it is, because we want it to be. And in so doing we may even begin to bring it about.

Yes, I tend to live that way too… ‘positive thinking’ as ‘positive thinking encourages positive actions’ and ‘positive actions make a better world for us all’ hence: your self-fulfilling positive reality.

 

[sew.excited73]

I don't think it is special in the sense that there is a grande purpose to our lives. But life is inherently special in that the qualities and characteristics we have have psychophysical harmony. If mindless processes made life there'd be no harmonious function at all. There's a theistic argument for psychophysical harmony but like all arguments for God it falls short of the mark, but it establishes a good basis for my ietsism as they call it. People take synchrony and harmony in the functions of life for granted.

Yes, and when the calculations show the chances of life as we know it to exist as it does, with intelligence etc., that‘s a lot of ‘coincidences’ too. But again, that’s just how I feel…

And then I learn about the Fermi paradox and Drake’s equation…aaaand… I am back to being a doubting Thomas again - LOL

 

[osgart]

Yes, and when the calculations show the chances of life as we know it to exist as it does, with intelligence etc., that‘s a lot of ‘coincidences’ too. But again, that’s just how I feel…

And then I learn about the Fermi paradox and Drake’s equation…aaaand… I am back to being a doubting Thomas again - LOL

I'm not big on chances or probabilities. There's definitely many fortunate occurrences happening to allow for intelligent life to exist here. It may be that it would happen the very second the window of opportunity opens up. I think the mere existence of intelligent life aside from those paradox's and equations is peculiar and intriguing. Intelligent life at all is my interest.

I'm sure in infinity there has to be aliens elsewhere though

 

[Trailblazer]

The ietsists, who find some believability in (almost) all those stances at one point (including atheism, in my case) or another in their lives, but are not satisfied with the entire package offered by any one existing belief.

That might make me an ietsist.

 

[osgart]

That might make me an ietsist.

Welcome to the club LOL!

 

[Trailblazer]

Welcome to the club LOL!

On the other hand, since I know there is more to reality than the physical universe, and I have some idea what that 'more' is, I do not exactly fit the definition of an ietsist expressed in the OP, which says "I feel there must be more to reality than the physical universe, but I have no idea what that 'more' could be."

 

[Trailblazer]

I'm not big on chances or probabilities. There's definitely many fortunate occurrences happening to allow for intelligent life to exist here. It may be that it would happen the very second the window of opportunity opens up. I think the mere existence of intelligent life aside from those paradox's and equations is peculiar and intriguing. Intelligent life at all is my interest.

I'm sure in infinity there has to be aliens elsewhere though

Given what you said I thought you might like these passages:

“As to thy question concerning the worlds of God. Know thou of a truth that the worlds of God are countless in their number, and infinite in their range. None can reckon or comprehend them except God, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.” (Gleanings, pp. 151-152)

“Verily I say, the creation of God embraceth worlds besides this world, and creatures apart from these creatures. In each of these worlds He hath ordained things which none can search except Himself, the All-Searching, the All-Wise. Do thou meditate on that which We have revealed unto thee, that thou mayest discover the purpose of God, thy Lord, and the Lord of all worlds. In these words the mysteries of Divine Wisdom have been treasured.” (Gleanings, pp. 152-153)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 151-153

“Know thou that every fixed star hath its own planets, and every planet its own creatures, whose number no man can compute.” (Gleanings, p. 163)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 158-163

 

[osgart]

Given what you said I thought you might like these passages:

“As to thy question concerning the worlds of God. Know thou of a truth that the worlds of God are countless in their number, and infinite in their range. None can reckon or comprehend them except God, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.” (Gleanings, pp. 151-152)

“Verily I say, the creation of God embraceth worlds besides this world, and creatures apart from these creatures. In each of these worlds He hath ordained things which none can search except Himself, the All-Searching, the All-Wise. Do thou meditate on that which We have revealed unto thee, that thou mayest discover the purpose of God, thy Lord, and the Lord of all worlds. In these words the mysteries of Divine Wisdom have been treasured.” (Gleanings, pp. 152-153)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 151-153

“Know thou that every fixed star hath its own planets, and every planet its own creatures, whose number no man can compute.” (Gleanings, p. 163)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 158-163

So God spans all of every existence and is not a being? Must run a very busy schedule I bet.

As for imagination and possibility I consider there might be more existences then ours. Who knows they might be totally different then this existence which many people consider to be all that there is.

 

[sew.excited73]

On the other hand, since I know there is more to reality than the physical universe, and I have some idea what that 'more' is, I do not exactly fit the definition of an ietsist expressed in the OP, which says "I feel there must be more to reality than the physical universe, but I have no idea what that 'more' could be."

I think ‘I have no idea’ might be a bit strong… it’s more like… there are so many possibilities that could be true, including some not represented by organised religion or any form of ‘organisation’ for that matter.

So, more like… too many ideas, rather than no idea - lol

 

[Trailblazer]

… it’s more like… there are so many possibilities that could be true, including some not represented by organised religion or any form of ‘organisation’ for that matter.

So, more like… too many ideas, rather than no idea - lol

I definitely agree with that, and my religion does not claim to know what those possibilities are.

I like the mystery of not knowing what's out there, and that includes not knowing much about the unknowable God.

 

[sew.excited73]

Given what you said I thought you might like these passages:

“As to thy question concerning the worlds of God. Know thou of a truth that the worlds of God are countless in their number, and infinite in their range. None can reckon or comprehend them except God, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.” (Gleanings, pp. 151-152)

“Verily I say, the creation of God embraceth worlds besides this world, and creatures apart from these creatures. In each of these worlds He hath ordained things which none can search except Himself, the All-Searching, the All-Wise. Do thou meditate on that which We have revealed unto thee, that thou mayest discover the purpose of God, thy Lord, and the Lord of all worlds. In these words the mysteries of Divine Wisdom have been treasured.” (Gleanings, pp. 152-153)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 151-153

“Know thou that every fixed star hath its own planets, and every planet its own creatures, whose number no man can compute.” (Gleanings, p. 163)

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 158-163

This reminds me of John 14:2 where Jesus said: “My father’s house has many rooms”. I think he was talking more about dimensions possibly, but could equally apply to other planets, solar systems etc.

 

[Trailblazer]

So God spans all of every existence and is not a being? Must run a very busy schedule I bet.

Baha'is believe that God is a being, but he is an unlimited being, so it is no problem for Him to maintain everything in existence.

 

[Trailblazer]

This reminds me of John 14:2 where Jesus said: “My father’s house has many rooms”. I think he was talking more about dimensions possibly, but could equally apply to other planets, solar systems etc.

Yes, Baha'u'llah and Jesus were saying basically the same thing, just worded a little differently.

 

[sew.excited73]

I definitely agree with that, and my religion does not claim to know what those possibilities are.

I like the mystery of not knowing what's out there, and that includes not knowing much about the unknowable God.

lol - I would like to know… but I have a feeling I have to die before I will know, and I am not quite ready for that just yet!