What is the universal God or no God?

[shunyadragon]

It is a matter of fact that the different religions over the millennia are anchored in different human perspectives, and describe the 'Source?' some call God(s) in many different cultural perspectives.

By themselves and their claims they remain irrational, illogical belief systems based on ancient scripture, and mythology of the fallible human view of the ancient past. None of the religions in and of themselves can stand alone as the universal standard for humanity from a less biased perspective that considers all religions on an equal footing.

There is evidence that cultures and religions evolve and change over time all over the world. The earliest known Neolithic religion is animism, followed by human figures described as Lords and a lineage of Divine authority extending to ancestors, and ancestor reverence or worship. Various forms of polytheism develop with earthly Lords, which evolve to monotheism, an earthly lords. The earliest cultures practiced human and animal sacrifice, which evolved into animal sacrifice only, than symbolic metaphysical forms of sacrifice. In Eurasia there are similarities between religions, but also differences mostly related to the differences cultures.

There are two ways logically and rational to explain the evidence. The first is that there are no God(s), and this reflects a natural evolution of human society in different parts of the world the same way physical evolution diversifies into different species.

The second is the view of the Baha'i Faith that God exists, God would a more universal perspective unknown to the different fallible human perspectives. The different religions of the world represent the spiritual evolution of humanity. Scriptures and beliefs represent two aspects: (1) The progressive Revelation of spiritual teachings and principles. (2) A human view of God and the Divine nature of reality reflected in the culture of the time of the Revelation. Taken together they represent an evolving spiritual nature of humanity that will continue and change in the future.

 

[Quintessence]

Should I take from above that you believe polytheism is illogical and irrational, since it is absent from your list of two options?

 

[GoodbyeDave]

The earliest known Neolithic religion is animism, followed by human figures described as Lords and a lineage of Divine authority extending to ancestors, and ancestor reverence or worship. Various forms of polytheism develop with earthly Lords, which evolve to monotheism, an earthly lords.

Unless you have acquired a time machine, any talk about "neolithic religion", which would predate writing, is pure conjecture. In fact, the whole theory of religious evolution is simply a 19th century notion based on the philosophy of Hegel and discarded by modern scholars.

There are two ways logically and rational to explain the evidence. The first is that there are no God(s)…
The second is the view of the Baha'i Faith that … the different religions of the world represent the spiritual evolution of humanity.

Actually there are three explanations. The third is that different religious experiences are all valid. To deny this is to indulge in special pleading, claiming that the experiences of your religion's founder are correct and everyone else's experiences are misinterpreted or false.

At least I can give the Baha'i faith credit for taking their belief in spiritual evolution logically and admiting the implication that it will "continue and change in the future", unlike Muslims and Christians who are quite prepared to believe in spiritual evolution provided it stops with them!

 

[Nakosis]

The second is the view of the Baha'i Faith that God exists, God would a more universal perspective unknown to the different fallible human perspectives. The different religions of the world represent the spiritual evolution of humanity. Scriptures and beliefs represent two aspects: (1) The progressive Revelation of spiritual teachings and principles. (2) A human view of God and the Divine nature of reality reflected in the culture of the time of the Revelation. Taken together they represent an evolving spiritual nature of humanity that will continue and change in the future.

Why should Bahá'u'lláh be accepted as a prophet?

 

[shunyadragon]

Why should Bahá'u'lláh be accepted as a prophet?

Maybe yes maybe no, but yes his message appeals to the universal of the relationship between the physical and spiritual evolution of humanity from the past present and future in terms of Revelation from God.

If no God then it is simply the natural physical and sociological evolution of humanity.

 

[shunyadragon]

Should I take from above that you believe polytheism is illogical and irrational, since it is absent from your list of two options?

Which pantheon of Gods would be the true pantheon of Gods that are not attached to one ancient culture or another? Maybe all or none?

 

[shunyadragon]

God is a name. When 'god' is used to describe other deities, it is because the other deities are being described, not because the word god itself, it just a description.

The greeks did this, when they encountered other gods, in other cultures, like 'so & so is Zeus', or, so & so is their zeus, etc. The Romans did the same.

The word God or Gods remain just cultural descriptive words for the 'Source' from all the different religions. The problem remains, even with Christianity, because it represent one of hundreds of cultural views of God and Revelation as do the Roman Gods, Greek Gods, Persian Gods, Zorastrian God, Hindu God or Gods.

From an objective position without bias, Christian God or Gods represent one of many world views and cultural view of what is God, Revelation or no Revelation or no God.

 

[shunyadragon]

Unless you have acquired a time machine, any talk about "neolithic religion", which would predate writing, is pure conjecture. In fact, the whole theory of religious evolution is simply a 19th century notion based on the philosophy of Hegel and discarded by modern scholars.

Not pure conjecture at all. You need not have writing. There is abundant evidence of animism in carvings and writings, and in the Orient a detailed transition in the earliest carvings to the earliest writings describing animism in terms of the pig and the dragon and other animals.

The earliest writings of the West preserve various aspects of animism and the transition to human lords and Gods, such as Gilgamesh and ancient runic Celtic and Danish literature.

Actually there are three explanations. The third is that different religious experiences are all valid. To deny this is to indulge in special pleading, claiming that the experiences of your religion's founder are correct and everyone else's experiences are misinterpreted or false.

If you read my post carefully i do not conclude that any one religion over the history of humanity is valid nor invalid. I fact in my view of the Baha'i Faith Many of the religions in the history are indeed valid for the times they were Revealed.

At least I can give the Baha'i faith credit for taking their belief in spiritual evolution logically and admiting the implication that it will "continue and change in the future", unlike Muslims and Christians who are quite prepared to believe in spiritual evolution provided it stops with them!

OK!

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Which pantheon of Gods would be the true pantheon of Gods that are not attached to one ancient culture or another? Maybe all or none?

Why not all? The fact that Apollo took an interest in the Greeks and not the Japanese is his affair, not mine to question. I know the gods I worship are real from my own experiences and I assume that the experiences of others are equally real.

 

[shunyadragon]

Why not all? The fact that Apollo took an interest in the Greeks and not the Japanese is his affair, not mine to question. I know the gods I worship are real from my own experiences and I assume that the experiences of others are equally real.

Everybody who believes in their Gods are real and others are not, or deal only with their own affairs in a diverse world of beliefs that culturally oriented to one belief system or another, contradictory and conflicting. Compared to this the belief in no Gods is a far more a non-contradictory, rational and logical option.

One side note: Greeks no longer believe in Apollo, and from my experience here and in Japan with Martial Arts by far most Japanese do not believe that the kami of Shinto are gods nor attributes of Gods nor the supernatural.

 

[George-ananda]

There are two ways logically and rational to explain the evidence.

Well, I see a the third way; Pantheism; non-dualism (God and creation are not-two). The dualistic (God(s) and creation are two) religions of the past are just best attempts to understand.

 

[osgart]

I am particulary interested in what constitutes divine nature as an aspiration. While i dont believe in any gods, i do see the need for the spiritual evolution of humanity. From what Trailblazer has shared about the Ba'hai faith i believe there are very important concepts there, and perhaps a glimmer of the divine is in a sense revealed in Gleanings. Maybe in some sense divine nature exists, i have not totally ruled that out. Either way divine nature is very real from just a conceptual standpoint i have of it.

I do not want to hang on to the mythological past myself. I find your Ba'hai perspective is different than Trailblazer's. I see past religion as entirely human based, but when i read Gleanings it talks about the days of Moses.

Does Ba'hai seek to unify and conglomerate all religions, or many?

Or, Does Ba'hai breakaway from past religions? It appears that it doesn't.

 

[Ra Daughter]

"(1) The progressive Revelation of spiritual teachings and principles. (2) A human view of God and the Divine nature of reality reflected in the culture of the time of the Revelation. Taken together they represent an evolving spiritual nature of humanity that will continue and change in the future."

I wouldn't call it progress in Revelation, but it is progressive in nature and content. "A human view of God and the Divine nature of reality" can still be fallible, imagination not based on facts. For culture to be genuine it must reflect with understanding what happened from the beginning till now to properly "evolve" as you call it. Changes in culture and worship has occurred because of different peoples on earth, and has nothing to do with the first foundation that was laid by God.

 

[David T]

It is a matter of fact that the different religions over the millennia are anchored in different human perspectives, and describe the 'Source?' some call God(s) in many different cultural perspectives.

By themselves and their claims they remain irrational, illogical belief systems based on ancient scripture, and mythology of the fallible human view of the ancient past. None of the religions in and of themselves can stand alone as the universal standard for humanity from a less biased perspective that considers all religions on an equal footing.

There is evidence that cultures and religions evolve and change over time all over the world. The earliest known Neolithic religion is animism, followed by human figures described as Lords and a lineage of Divine authority extending to ancestors, and ancestor reverence or worship. Various forms of polytheism develop with earthly Lords, which evolve to monotheism, an earthly lords. The earliest cultures practiced human and animal sacrifice, which evolved into animal sacrifice only, than symbolic metaphysical forms of sacrifice. In Eurasia there are similarities between religions, but also differences mostly related to the differences cultures.

There are two ways logically and rational to explain the evidence. The first is that there are no God(s), and this reflects a natural evolution of human society in different parts of the world the same way physical evolution diversifies into different species.

The second is the view of the Baha'i Faith that God exists, God would a more universal perspective unknown to the different fallible human perspectives. The different religions of the world represent the spiritual evolution of humanity. Scriptures and beliefs represent two aspects: (1) The progressive Revelation of spiritual teachings and principles. (2) A human view of God and the Divine nature of reality reflected in the culture of the time of the Revelation. Taken together they represent an evolving spiritual nature of humanity that will continue and change in the future.

That's a very reasonable statement. I read that Joan baez called herself a friend of the bahi I think that's a good way for artists to deal with that quality of experience that is called religious and at the same time not be drawn Into the chaos directly that any social group creates regardless. Dylan is similar.

 

[siti]

There are two ways logically and rational to explain the evidence. The first is that there are no God(s), and this reflects a natural evolution of human society in different parts of the world the same way physical evolution diversifies into different species.

The second is the view of the Baha'i Faith that God exists, God would a more universal perspective unknown to the different fallible human perspectives. The different religions of the world represent the spiritual evolution of humanity. Scriptures and beliefs represent two aspects: (1) The progressive Revelation of spiritual teachings and principles. (2) A human view of God and the Divine nature of reality reflected in the culture of the time of the Revelation. Taken together they represent an evolving spiritual nature of humanity that will continue and change in the future.

I wanted to say there is a third way but @George-ananda beat me to it.

Just wanted to add that perhaps, on an evolutionary view, it would be more appropriate to make "God" the undefined "goal" rather than the ineffable "source"? Undefined, yes, ineffable, yes, but not because it is too great for the human intellect to assimilate, but because it (God) hasn't got there (supreme divinity) yet - perhaps it never will - perhaps divinity is an asymptote towards which nature (at any level) may (or may not) be tending at any point in its evolution.

 

[shunyadragon]

I am particulary interested in what constitutes divine nature as an aspiration. While i dont believe in any gods, i do see the need for the spiritual evolution of humanity. From what Trailblazer has shared about the Ba'hai faith i believe there are very important concepts there, and perhaps a glimmer of the divine is in a sense revealed in Gleanings. Maybe in some sense divine nature exists, i have not totally ruled that out. Either way divine nature is very real from just a conceptual standpoint i have of it.

I do not want to hang on to the mythological past myself. I find your Ba'hai perspective is different than Trailblazer's. I see past religion as entirely human based, but when i read Gleanings it talks about the days of Moses.

From the Baha'i perspective there is the cyclic progressive Revelation throughout the history of humanity, and there is always the human element, one human element is mythology, corruption of religion, and Creating God(s) in their own image, which is a mixed bag. The spiritual evolution of humanity also occurs in the minds of humans, and the spiritual attributes of God, spiritual laws and teachings.

Does Ba'hai seek to unify and conglomerate all religions, or many?

Or, Does Ba'hai breakaway from past religions? It appears that it doesn't.

Actually neither, the Baha'i Faith is part of an organic spiritual evolution and change that is taking place in humanity. There is not a deliberate breaking away nor a conglomeration of religions. In fact it appeals to a more simplicity as far as God, and the nature of the relationship with humanity, the afterlife, and Revelation. God is simply the One undefinable unknowable 'Source' that progressively Reveals spiritual teachings and laws relative to the time of maturity of humanity. The knowledge of science also evolves over time, and is in and of itself a form of Revelation of the physical nature of Creation. Creation and Revelation are indeed one in the nature of our physical existence and spiritual existence. One thing is constant is change. What was will never be again, despite our nostalgia for the past. As Seals and Croft sang; 'We may never pass this way again.'

The view of the after life is the journey through many worlds guided by the spiritual attributes of God acquired on the journey, There is no heaven nor hell nor the illusion of the hope of coming back again and again and again ad infinitim.

 

[Lyndon]

Any Bahais I know do not deny an afterlife.

 

[shunyadragon]

I wanted to say there is a third way but @George-ananda beat me to it.

Just wanted to add that perhaps, on an evolutionary view, it would be more appropriate to make "God" the undefined "goal" rather than the ineffable "source"? Undefined, yes, ineffable, yes, but not because it is too great for the human intellect to assimilate, but because it (God) hasn't got there (supreme divinity) yet - perhaps it never will - perhaps divinity is an asymptote towards which nature (at any level) may (or may not) be tending at any point in its evolution.

This is a little confusing. Yes God is not defined nor specifically described, except for the attributes of God in Creation, and Revealed through Revelation progressively the attributes of God. God is eternal and Creation is eternal with God, a reflection of God's attributes. There is no past point nor future point it is an eternal process. We are a part of many worlds and universes of this eternal Creation both spiritually and physically.

Calling God a "goal" is unclear. No, humans cannot intellectually assimilate nor encompass God even as a concept.

 

[shunyadragon]

Any Bahais I know do not deny an afterlife.

The Baha'i Faith does not deny the after life, nor did I indicate this, but simply describes it as a journey through many worlds guided by the spiritual attributes of God. Our sincerity in this life and the acquisition of spiritual attributes are what guides us beyond this world. Materialism in many forms and clinging to the past are burdens in our journey. There can be an intimate relationship and communion between souls in this world and the many worlds beyond this world.

An interesting read is the 'Seven Valleys and Four Valleys.'

 

[Ra Daughter]

"God is simply the One undefinable unknowable 'Source'"
****************************************************************************************************************

Not the same God I know and worship fortunately who is quite definable and knowable. I suppose I'm on the wrong thread, but it's interesting to see what other people believe.