Not sure if this is the right forum, but--maybe we can talk about Spinoza and his concept of God for a while

[lewisnotmiller]

I wonder if Spinoza or Einstein prayed.

Spinoza...perhaps, at some point in his life. After all, I prayed at one point, and his upbringing was basically a traditional Jewish one, including studying sacred texts, etc.
Later in his life, he moved away from anything much resembling monotheism of any type. In modern terms we'd perhaps call him a pantheist. Suffice to say, his God wasn't a personal God, and beyond that lack of personal connection, his God wasn't one with a will or a purpose.
So, if he prayed, I would strongly suspect it would be to remind himself of his place in the world, to be humble, or to otherwise balance himself. He didn't think there was anything to pray TO, even if he did think there was something to pray ABOUT.

 

[metis]

So, if he prayed, I would strongly suspect it would be to remind himself of his place in the world, to be humble, or to otherwise balance himself. He didn't think there was anything to pray TO, even if he did think there was something to pray ABOUT.

The first part, yes; the second part, not necessarily. "Contemplative prayer" generally includes meditation, and Spinoza did believe that there were some rights & wrongs that spun out of his pantheistic/panentheistic approach.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

The first part, yes; the second part, not necessarily. "Contemplative prayer" generally includes meditation, and Spinoza did believe that there were some rights & wrongs that spun out of his pantheistic/panentheistic approach.

Hmm...I'm far from an expert on him, so just asking this from curiosity, but I didn't think he would be believing in the intercessory powers of prayer, but instead seeking clarity on his own actions via the meditative qualities of it...not from an external party, but from himself. Of course, to some degree that would include the universe itself, due to his beliefs, but still...

 

[metis]

but I didn't think he would be believing in the intercessory powers of prayer, but instead seeking clarity on his own actions via the meditative qualities of it...not from an external party, but from himself. Of course, to some degree that would include the universe itself, due to his beliefs, but still...

Exactly.

 

[YoursTrue]

Spinoza...perhaps, at some point in his life. After all, I prayed at one point, and his upbringing was basically a traditional Jewish one, including studying sacred texts, etc.
Later in his life, he moved away from anything much resembling monotheism of any type. In modern terms we'd perhaps call him a pantheist. Suffice to say, his God wasn't a personal God, and beyond that lack of personal connection, his God wasn't one with a will or a purpose.
So, if he prayed, I would strongly suspect it would be to remind himself of his place in the world, to be humble, or to otherwise balance himself. He didn't think there was anything to pray TO, even if he did think there was something to pray ABOUT.

I haven't read all of Spinoza's writings, in fact very few of them, can't say I understand them, but then again, it's probably like trying to understand Einstein, although I have read some things about him. I wonder if he ever wrote that he prayed, maybe to an essence? The God I worship and love is one with a purpose, and that purpose makes me very happy. I also know that He cares for me and others in a personal interest. But, of course, that does not speak for Spinoza. When I was younger, I would have found Spinoza's ideas untenable, and that's even when I did not believe in God.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I haven't read all of Spinoza's writings, in fact very few of them, can't say I understand them, but then again, it's probably like trying to understand Einstein, although I have read some things about him. I wonder if he ever wrote that he prayed, maybe to an essence? The God I worship and love is one with a purpose, and that purpose makes me very happy. I also know that He cares for me and others in a personal interest. But, of course, that does not speak for Spinoza. When I was younger, I would have found Spinoza's ideas untenable, and that's even when I did not believe in God.

I've read about Spinoza more than I've read Spinoza first hand, so not so different. I would bother trying to understand Einstein, I just don't have the theoretical grounding required.
I think that is really the biggest difference between Spinoza's God and the Christian God though...that personalm intercessionary God with will and purpose is a vastly different proposition to Spinoza's concepts of a divine material.

 

[CorrectiveLens]

Here is a perspective no one ever thought of, not even me.
God the Father has god-like qualities such as being everywhere at once, knows what everyone is thinking and feeling, can do anything, knows everything including past, present, and future, has always existed, and can create realities in His mind. That is how He has all those qualities. Our reality is in the mind of the Father.
The beginning of our reality started when the Father placed a living being in it, with his own mind, heart, and soul, and through which he would be able to interact to create our reality. The vehicle for this interaction is His Holy Spirit.
Isaiah 63: 9-10 In all their affliction He was afflicted, and the angel of His presence saved them; and in His pity He redeemed them; and He bore them, and carried them all the days of old. But they rebelled, and vexed His Holy Spirit; therefore, He was turned to be their enemy, and he fought against them.
In this scripture Isaiah is stating that the Holy Spirit is the angel of God's (the Father's) presence. Where His Holy Spirit is, the Father is. The Holy Spirit is a portal that the Father can send (like angels) to indwell living beings for the purpose of communicating, speaking through, educating, empowering, and interacting with them bodily, mentally, and spiritually.
The Father fills this living being with His Holy Spirit so that this living being is filled with His presence and together they create our reality. Our reality was created by the Father through this being. That is what is meant by the expression "sitting on the right hand of the Father". This being was the first and only being formed from the Father and he is the temple of the Father in our reality. That is why this being is the offspring of the Father and is referred to as the only begotten Son of God, and the image of the invisible God, because the Father's presence (His Holy Spirit) resides in His Son. The Father loves His Son and the Son loves the Father and obeys Him. The Son's will might differ from the Father, but the Son subjugates His will to the Father's. The Father created all things in our reality through His Son and for His Son. All things created are placed by the Father under the Son's feet. I believe that makes the Son Lord of all creation, the father of all creation, as well as the God of all creation, but the Father is the one God of all, including His Son.

 

[CorrectiveLens]

John 3: 34-35 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God; for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.
John 14: 23-24 Jesus answered, and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, amd make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings; and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's, who sent me.

 

[YoursTrue]

I've read about Spinoza more than I've read Spinoza first hand, so not so different. I would bother trying to understand Einstein, I just don't have the theoretical grounding required.
I think that is really the biggest difference between Spinoza's God and the Christian God though...that personalm intercessionary God with will and purpose is a vastly different proposition to Spinoza's concepts of a divine material.

I'm trying to figure out molecules and atoms and dna, I can read about them, but don't understand exactly how scientists arrived at their conclusions, including charts about them, so I doubt I'd understand Einstein's theories and ponderings right now. I can't even figure what he figured, how and why. Maybe one day I'll understand more, but probably not now. Regardless of that, however, is the difference of thought about God, who while not fully comprehensible by humans can still be understood and appreciated.

 

[metis]

I've read about Spinoza more than I've read Spinoza first hand, so not so different. I would bother trying to understand Einstein, I just don't have the theoretical grounding required.
I think that is really the biggest difference between Spinoza's God and the Christian God though...that personalm intercessionary God with will and purpose is a vastly different proposition to Spinoza's concepts of a divine material.

Correct, but where there is a connection is that Spinoza believed that Jesus' teaching on love and compassion for all was the ideal that we all should subscribe to.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Correct, but where there is a connection is that Spinoza believed that Jesus' teaching on love and compassion for all was the ideal that we all should subscribe to.

Almost like Jefferson?

 

[YoursTrue]

Almost like Jefferson?

oops -- allow me to mention the following.
I believe from my study of the scriptures and from my personal understanding and experience that there is a God who cares.
John 8:44 - “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."
OK, so now, now, I've been reading some of the book about Stephen Hawking, and a most truly beautiful poem by Yeats is prefacing the book. "Sailing to Byzantium." Brought tears to my eyes. Because -- no matter how brilliant we are, or talented, we all face death. And few like the idea.
Take care, and I enjoy reading your posts. (So far... ) Now I'll have to look at Jefferson's beliefs I suppose.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

oops -- allow me to mention the following.
I believe from my study of the scriptures and from my personal understanding and experience that there is a God who cares.
John 8:44 - “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."
OK, so now, now, I've been reading some of the book about Stephen Hawking, and a most truly beautiful poem by Yeats is prefacing the book. "Sailing to Byzantium." Brought tears to my eyes. Because -- no matter how brilliant we are, or talented, we all face death. And few like the idea.
Take care, and I enjoy reading your posts. (So far... ) Now I'll have to look at Jefferson's beliefs I suppose.

I'm enjoying the discussion too!
Jefferson was a deist, at a time when deist beliefs were somewhat in vogue. So, quite different to Spinoza, in that he did believe more in a separate Creator being, but he also didn't believe in a God who would intercede in human affairs.
He did see Jesus as being a model for good behavior, and broadly speaking was aligned with Christian morality (of course, I'm generalising).
And that was kind of the sense in which I was drawing a parallel with Spinoza. Both seemed to approve of the basic morality and teachings of Jesus, neither seemed to think God would intercede, but more that it was on humans to independently strive for these ideals. Their actual God beliefs were quite different (and different again from both yours and mine) but in that they seem common to me.

Jefferson is an interesting guy in many ways, so if you have time, definitely worth the investment. But in case you don't, this is a quick link that helps identify what I mean in a very basic, general way.

Jefferson Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[YoursTrue]

I'm enjoying the discussion too!
Jefferson was a deist, at a time when deist beliefs were somewhat in vogue. So, quite different to Spinoza, in that he did believe more in a separate Creator being, but he also didn't believe in a God who would intercede in human affairs.
He did see Jesus as being a model for good behavior, and broadly speaking was aligned with Christian morality (of course, I'm generalising).
And that was kind of the sense in which I was drawing a parallel with Spinoza. Both seemed to approve of the basic morality and teachings of Jesus, neither seemed to think God would intercede, but more that it was on humans to independently strive for these ideals. Their actual God beliefs were quite different (and different again from both yours and mine) but in that they seem common to me.

Jefferson is an interesting guy in many ways, so if you have time, definitely worth the investment. But in case you don't, this is a quick link that helps identify what I mean in a very basic, general way.

Jefferson Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thanks. You are very kind.
Insofar as God intervening in human affairs, I believe the term Armageddon may be appropriate, as well as the occasion when Jesus is said to have been on a cliff and had a conversation with the devil, who offered him all the kingdoms of the world if only Jesus would do one act of worship to him. Jesus did not say, No, you don't have dominance over all the kingdoms of the world. He told Satan to get away from him. The point is that Jesus did not say, "No, you don't have rulership over the kingdoms of the world."
So, I sum this up by saying that as I see things now, Thomas Jefferson will be resurrected and hopefully enjoy life as described at Revelation 21:1-5.
Have a good evening, lewisnotmiller.

 

[CorrectiveLens]

Spinoza describes God as a mindless substance of which our universe exists, but living creatures are too complicated to think that they naturally exists. He tries to explain God in terms of the perspective of an atheist. He does not believe in the Bible, miracles, or the supernatural. His material is all speculative and not worth reading. If God is a thinking being, He would want to interact with humans who have a God sense, unlike all other animals. He reveals Himself to us as well as His plan for us through the inspired Word of God, the Bible. This inspiration comes from His Holy Spirit, which acts as a portal through which God interacts with His creation. Check out my posts # 107 and 108 on this thread.

 

[metis]

Almost like Jefferson?

Good connection!

BTW, I took a tour of Montpelier back in the 90's and was so amazed at to how intelligent and diversified he was. I believe he detested slavery but knew that he couldn't afford to give his slaves up for financial reasons.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Spinoza describes God as a mindless substance of which our universe exists, but living creatures are too complicated to think that they naturally exists. He tries to explain God in terms of the perspective of an atheist. He does not believe in the Bible, miracles, or the supernatural. His material is all speculative and not worth reading. If God is a thinking being, He would want to interact with humans who have a God sense, unlike all other animals. He reveals Himself to us as well as His plan for us through the inspired Word of God, the Bible. This inspiration comes from His Holy Spirit, which acts as a portal through which God interacts with His creation. Check out my posts # 107 and 108 on this thread.

Not atheistic, I think. But not theistic either.

 

[metis]

Not atheistic, I think. But not theistic either.

Yes. Many accused him of being an atheist, but the relativity is that he was a pantheist/panentheist.

 

[YoursTrue]

Spinoza describes God as a mindless substance of which our universe exists, but living creatures are too complicated to think that they naturally exists. He tries to explain God in terms of the perspective of an atheist. He does not believe in the Bible, miracles, or the supernatural. His material is all speculative and not worth reading. If God is a thinking being, He would want to interact with humans who have a God sense, unlike all other animals. He reveals Himself to us as well as His plan for us through the inspired Word of God, the Bible. This inspiration comes from His Holy Spirit, which acts as a portal through which God interacts with His creation. Check out my posts # 107 and 108 on this thread.

If God is a mindless substance, I guess some might think it's like mutations -- brains pressured to think that there is a God after billions of mutations, and there is more to life than going back to substance without thought or knowledge forever. What do you think?

 

[CorrectiveLens]

His material is all speculative and not worth reading or talk about. I'm out of this thread.