Topic: The Official Thread of God

"The God of Abaham can be loved, or feared, as a father, sometimes his forgiveness, sometimes his anger being the dominant aspect. Inasmuch as God is the father, I am the child. I have not emerged fully from the autistic wish for omniscience and omnipotence. I have not yet acquired the objectivity to realize my limitations as a human being, my ignorance, my helplessness. I still claim, like a child, that there must be a father who rescues me, who watches me, who punishes me, a father who likes me when I am obedient, who is flattered by my praise and angry because of my disobedience. Quite obviously, the majority of people have, in their personal development, not overcome this infantile stage, and hence the belief in God to most people is the belief in a helping father--a childish illusion. In spite of the fact tha this concept of religion has been overcome by some of the great teachers of the human race, and by a minority of men, it is still the dominant form of religion.

"Inasmuch as this is so, the criticism of the idea of God, as it was expressed by Freud, is quite correct. The error, however, was in the fact that he ignored the other aspect of monotheistic religion, and its true kernel, the logic of which leads exactly to the negation of this concept of God. The truely religious person, if he follows the essence of the monotheistic idea, does not pray for anything, does not expect anything from God; he does not love God as a child loves his father or his mother; he has acquired the humility of sensing his limitations, to the degree of knowing that he knows nothing about God. God becomes to him a symbol in which man, at an earlier stage of his evolution, has expressed the totality of that which man is striving for, the realm of the spiritual world, of love, truth and justice. He has faith in the principles which "God" represents; he thinks truth, lives love and justice, and considers all of his life only valuable inasmuch as it gives him the chance to arrive at an ever fuller unfolding of his human powers--as the only reality that matters, as the only object of "ultimate concern"; and, eventually, he does not speak about God--nor even mention his name. To love God, if he were going to use this word, would mean, then, to long for the attainment of the full capacity to love, for the realization of that which "God" stands for in oneself."

--Erich Fromm

I was raised in a devout Catholic family, but, try as I might, the Holy Spirit never came down from the heavens and confirmed faith in this conception of God to me. I stumbled across this passage while reading a book by Fromm a few days ago, and I think it's the best explanation of what I'm left with concerning the idea of "God."

I think all of you who actually believe all the fairy tales of religious dogma are nuts. So I figured I'd post this, because I think it's a good passage that gets at my conception of "God," and give you a chance to explain yourselves. Agree or disagree as you will.... tongue

[I wish I could obey forum rules]

2 (edited by avogadro 17-Oct-2008 20:37:00)

Re: The Official Thread of God

very interesting post.

i mostly agree with "he does not love God as a child loves his father or his mother; he has acquired the humility of sensing his limitations, to the degree of knowing that he knows nothing about God. God becomes to him a symbol in which man, at an earlier stage of his evolution, has expressed the totality of that which man is striving for, the realm of the spiritual world, of love, truth and justice. He has faith in the principles which "God" represents; he thinks truth, lives love and justice, and considers all of his life only valuable inasmuch as it gives him the chance to arrive at an ever fuller unfolding of his human powers"

i was raised Catholic too, and i dont think theres an emphasis on Justice. Love and Truth sure, but religiously the only talk of justice is that God's idea of justice is different then man's and i think is more an explanation on why bad things can happen and not a central idea of faith. and really religion only about a part of Truth. not the scientific truth, but the metaphysical truth.

Re: The Official Thread of God

that passage seems very silly.  Both points are actually part of the same thing.  The only deference is that you want to take the same values and morals of religion and translate them to a "Godless" existence in which man created the idea of truth, love, and righteousness.  which is just a denial of the truth of the world.  The problem with it is that it doesn't actually establish laws and limitations aside from those that the individual sets up for himself.  You have to see where that ends up.  People see interpret right and wrong differently.  Therefore, the idea that man could have expressed any uniform idea of what we are striving for.  It's impossible and quite foolish wink

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.
                                          Thomas Jefferson

4 (edited by [RPA]Sir SupAll 18-Oct-2008 04:39:32)

Re: The Official Thread of God

"None of us know our end, really; or what hand will guide us there.  A king may move a man.  A father may claim a son.  That man can also move himself and only then does that man truly begin his own game.  Remember, howsoever you are played or by whom, your soul is in your keeping alone; even those who presumed play you be kings or men of power.  When you stand before God you cannot say that 'I was told by others to do thus' or that 'virtue was not convenient at the time'.  This will not suffice.  Remember that."

------

"I put no stock in religion.  By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of God.  I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers.  Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves and goodness.  What God desires is here (mind) and here (heart).  And what you decide to do every day you will be a good man - or not.

Re: The Official Thread of God

Fromm does one of the best afterwords I've seen on Orwell's 1984, he's magic with words smile

> Justinian I wrote:
> Ouro,
Even though you were the first one to arrive at the scene who clearly pwned Einstein and showed how biased he is, you are an outright arsehole.

6 (edited by V.Kemp 18-Oct-2008 08:53:59)

Re: The Official Thread of God

Soth, you just managed to miss the single biggest thing Socrates tried to get people to realize. "Both points" are not the same thing. One accepts the limitations of our knowledge and the other does not. For instance, what it goes on to say accepts the limitations of our knowledge and you do not. You do not accept that you do not know. You jumped right into a claim that this meant "godlessness" just after the passage explains why this is the highest form of monotheism. Then you went on to some sort of utilitarian judgement that this couldn't make sense because it doesn't lead to a direct system of science or math to determine justice.

I should dig through the book for references to history that are examples of the things that we really do find man strives for. Then maybe you'll see that it's getting more at the fundamentals than what specific ways you 'strive' to fulfil your basic human needs. You are impossible and quite foolish. tongue

I like those, Sir SupAll.

[I wish I could obey forum rules]

Re: The Official Thread of God

Having "matured" to the point we "accept our personal limitations", we are wonderfully prepared to admit the highest good is a just society, admit we're not going to lead that society, and with proper "humility" and "social virtue" obey the Fuhrer and the mob as if they were God.

The core joke of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is that of course no civilization would develop personal computers with instant remote database recovery, and then waste this technology to find good drinks.
Steve Jobs has ruined this joke.

Re: The Official Thread of God

That mature humility includes the awareness of the limitations of all of man, The_Yell. Doesn't that seem to suggest the need for MORE checks and balances, perhaps a democratic system, instead of empowering one not so mature and humble?

Are you suggesting that only by empowering someone with the backing of GOD can we resist a fuhrer and the mob? tongue

Those passages are about accepting what really can be "known" of "God" and accepting this to hold a more mature understanding of God. While this doesn't lead us to some ultimate divine knowledge in thought like a Gnostic would claim, I doubt there are any Gnostics in here. OR ARE THERE.

Ultimately they're about right acts as love of God, not some piece of knowledge we can never have.

[I wish I could obey forum rules]