Does It Matter? 2 - open for debate, all welcome

[Storm]

I posted this in the Paganism DIR, but I'd also like to have a debate on the topic.

Please read and discuss the article Dancing with the Gods, by Eric S. Raymond. It's a bit long, but very good. An exceprt:

All the Gods are alive. They are not supernatural; rather, they are our inmost natures. They power our dreams and our art and our personalities. Theurgy and ritual can make them stronger, more accessible to the shaman. They can be evoked in a human being to teach, heal, inspire, or harm. Occasionally they manifest in spontaneous theophanies; the result may be religious conversion, creative inspiration, charisma, or madness.

Magic is loose in the world. It is not the magic of fantasy -- no would-be violators of the laws of physics need apply. Real magic acts in and through human agents. The two forms of practical magic are healing and divination. Healing works because human minds have more control over their bodies than we normally think; divination works because humans know and perceive more than they are consciously aware of.
​

The question I wish to discuss is: Does it matter whether God(s) are supernatural beings or aspects of our own minds?

 

[Magic Man]

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you posted this, too. I posted my response over there. Basically, I said that people realize, or make real, these gods and goddesses by imagining them. There is a difference between perceiving my computer and perceiving a goddess, but to people sho believe in gods and goddesses, there is not a practical difference.

 

[doppelganger]

All the Gods are alive. They are not supernatural; rather, they are our inmost natures.​

Which, in a sense, makes them "supernatural" because our innermost works are not directly observable despite their powerful magical effects on the reality we experience.

They power our dreams and our art and our personalities. Theurgy and ritual can make them stronger, more accessible to the shaman. They can be evoked in a human being to teach, heal, inspire, or harm. Occasionally they manifest in spontaneous theophanies; the result may be religious conversion, creative inspiration, charisma, or madness.

I agree with all of that.

Magic is loose in the world. It is not the magic of fantasy -- no would-be violators of the laws of physics need apply. Real magic acts in and through human agents. The two forms of practical magic are healing and divination. Healing works because human minds have more control over their bodies than we normally think; divination works because humans know and perceive more than they are consciously aware of.

I would add a third type of practical magic: black spell casting or harmful/negative magic, which can be used by a master magician to twist people's will.

The question I wish to discuss is: Does it matter whether God(s) are supernatural beings or aspects of our own minds?

Whether one concludes it matters, matters a great deal, if you know what I mean. It's the difference between being a slave to my symbols, and being the master of my destiny.

 

[Storm]

Whether one concludes it matters, matters a great deal, if you know what I mean. It's the difference between being a slave to my symbols, and being the master of my destiny.

Could you expand?

 

[doppelganger]

Could you expand?

There are two very different modes of interacting with mythology that are like night and day. If one is caught up in the ontological/metaphysical "truth" of the mythology, and bogged down with questions of "belief in" whether certain thoughts represent things that "exist" one is enslaved to symbols, and will be subject to the mastery of others. If one is aware of the source of the magic in symbols, one can become one's own master.

 

[Storm]

There are two very different modes of interacting with mythology that are like night and day. If one is caught up in the ontological/metaphysical "truth" of the mythology, and bogged down with questions of "belief in" whether certain thoughts represent things that "exist" one is enslaved to symbols, and will be subject to the mastery of others. If one is aware of the source of the magic in symbols, one can become one's own master.

Thank you. I agree entirely. :yes:

 

[Storm]

More specific questions, to kick-start discussion:

For convenience, I will refer to the concept of the gods existing as aspects of one's own mind and/ or aspects of the collective (sub)consciousn as "thought forms."

Is there a functional difference between honoring a given God as a thought form, and worshiping said deity? If so, what?

Believers: If it were proven that your God is "only" a thought form, would that affect your beliefs? How?

Non-believers: How would it affect your opinion of religion/ believers if it were proven that deities are thought forms?

 

[tomspug]

I would say this instead:

"All the gods are dead. They are not supernatural; rather, they are our inmost desires. We feast on them, and yet they do nothing to free us from the real, the physical, and the eternal. We attribute them that which is not deserved; the things we ought to admire about men."

If there really was a God, it would be a God that by no thought of man would be conceived or changed.

 

[Storm]

I would say this instead:

"All the gods are dead. They are not supernatural; rather, they are our inmost desires. We feast on them, and yet they do nothing to free us from the real, the physical, and the eternal. We attribute them that which is not deserved; the goodwill and strength of men."

If there really was a God, it would be a God that by no thought of man would be conceived or changed.

Coming from you, Tom, this is quite a shock. You do realize that my question pertains to your own God-concept as well, don't you?

 

[tomspug]

Coming from you, Tom, this is quite a shock. You do realize that my question pertains to your own God-concept as well, don't you?

Absolutely. Which is why I don't adhere to my own God-concept (I can't help but have one) but instead believe in the unending incomprehensibility of the One true God. All the dreams and schemes of man are worthless without God revealing Himself by his own means.

 

[Storm]

Absolutely. Which is why I don't adhere to my own God-concept (I can't help but have one) but instead believe in the unending incomprehensibility of the One true God. All the dreams and schemes of man are worthless without God revealing Himself by his own means.

So, if it were proven that Christ is purely mythical rather than historical, you would continue to worship Him?

 

[Storm]

Shameless bump

 

[Wandered Off]

For convenience, I will refer to the concept of the gods existing as aspects of one's own mind and/ or aspects of the collective (sub)consciousn as "thought forms."

What's a collective subconsciousness?

Is there a functional difference between honoring a given God as a thought form, and worshiping said deity? If so, what?

Actual afterlife consequences may be a difference, but I guess that's not really a functional difference. For me, it reduces the element of fear and external judgment when I realize that it's really my own conscience rather than some angry super being preparing to mete out punishment and judgment.

Non-believers: How would it affect your opinion of religion/ believers if it were proven that deities are thought forms?

None, as that is my current belief anyway.

 

[Storm]

What's a collective subconsciousness?

Collective Subconscious Wiki
Jungian Archetypes are one manifestation.

Actual afterlife consequences may be a difference, but I guess that's not really a functional difference. For me, it reduces the element of fear and external judgment when I realize that it's really my own conscience rather than some angry super being preparing to mete out punishment and judgment.

Well, that's good!

None, as that is my current belief anyway.

Cool.

You didn't give me much to debate!

 

[Wandered Off]

Collective Subconscious Wiki
Jungian Archetypes are one manifestation.

Sounds like a thought form...

 

[Storm]

Sounds like a thought form...

Jungian Archetypes? They are, by the definition in play for this thread.

 

[tomspug]

So, if it were proven that Christ is purely mythical rather than historical, you would continue to worship Him?

It's not really a question worth asking since it's a fact that Jesus Christ at the very least existed. Besides, the topic was about God-concepts, not Christ (Christ being an extension rather than the whole, and human).

The God I follow ISN'T a concept or an idea, that's what I'm trying to say. He is literally beyond comprehension.

 

[Magic Man]

It's not really a question worth asking since it's a fact that Jesus Christ at the very least existed. Besides, the topic was about God-concepts, not Christ (Christ being an extension rather than the whole, and human).

The God I follow ISN'T a concept or an idea, that's what I'm trying to say. He is literally beyond comprehension.

So, it does matter to you whether or not your god is more than a concept or idea?

 

[logician]

It's not really a question worth asking since it's a fact that Jesus Christ at the very least existed. .

Really, prove it. While you're at it prove that Horus, Mithras, and Osiris existed, since they basically were the same person as Jesus.

 

[tomspug]

Really, prove it. While you're at it prove that Horus, Mithras, and Osiris existed, since they basically were the same person as Jesus.

OK, you know that the idea that Jesus didn't exist is a view that a MINISCULE amount of historians have, right? There's a difference between being skeptical and being stubborn.