Why Believe????

[iBrian]

No problem - and trust me, I appreciate the immensity of what you mean about investing so much time and money into a project. My novel writing has been 8 years and 750,000 words in the making! I'm sincerely confident that I can get into traditional publishing with my current work, because I finally got around to trying to understand what every stage in the process of publishing (and, not least, the market) actually demands.

From what I saw of your work there was a lot of information, but it was hard to see the lines of reasoning being followed. For example, I figure that somewhere you're making a Christi vs Dionysios comparison - but I couldn't quickly locate it. Or am I forcing my own interpretation there?

 

[Iacchus]

Hello again,

I'm going to begin by mentioning chapter 5, as this was the main experience that ties everything together. Basically everything stems from this one experience. The first three chapters, including the page on About the Cover, speak about the lineage of The Church, beginning with the Church of Adam and its progression to the Christian Church which, contrary to what most people believe, ended in 1757 (in accord with the book of Revelation), as proclaimed by the renowned Swedish scientist, theologin and, mystic, Emanuel Swedenborg. While throughout these first few chapters (as well as throughout the book) I make references to Dionysus and his possible affiliations with Christ. I've also made references to this lineage (as well as to the base fourteen system below) in the thread The Church of Man.

Chapter 4 involves the magazine I found (of erotic origin) which was delivered to my doorstep on the 14th day of the 14th month which, happened to be St. Valentine's Day. It was delivered by some young boys (i.e., cupid) who came upstairs and knocked on my door before running away. From this I derived the base fourteen numbering system, based upon the fourteen images of one woman in particular, and the fourteen women's names I associated with them. Indeed it's a very inuitive system in nature. While come to find out later, there were the fourteen Athenian women -- The Gerarai -- who, along with the Queen of Athens, celebrated in the worship of Dionysus. The whole thing will just blow you away!

Thus having established the woman's will (or fourth aspect) in chapter 4, it seems fitting that it lead into chapter 5, which describes The Advent of the New Church, similar to Revelation chapter 12, which describes the woman clothed with the sun who gives birth to the man-child (signifying the birth of new doctrine). So basically this is what chapter 5 represents, in accord with The Advent of Dionysus.

Chapter 6 is kind of a hodge-podge of sorts, containing a lot of symbolism and ideas I had been working on when I was developing my ideas. It begins with The Seal of God, the symbol that coincides with the rebirth experience in chapter 5. It's not to be overlooked! While chapter 7 is based upon the fourteen sexual positions developed in accord with the fourteen Gerrai. And, since the number seven, according to what I've defined by the fourteen Gerarai, represents "The Marriage," also, that which is "Holy and complete," I deemed chapter 7 would be the appropriate place to discuss this.

Chapter 8 speaks of the number 479 and the vision of the badge I received from work, being strung up to the top of a pyramid. The number 479 also corresponds to the name Dennis (my name) and, to the name David. It also represents the highpriest, which is why I've included it in chapter 8, as it involves circumcision (on the 8th day), and in general a "mystical unveiling."

Chapter 9 discusses my former mentor Roy Masters and some of the falsities associated with his organization, the Foundation of Human Understanding (which led to the shattering of my beliefs mentioned earlier). And, as it's illustrated in accord with the Native Americans which, in accordance with Sagitarius -- The Archer, and "9th sign," the whole thing seems to be right on target, and thus fitting to discuss it in chapter 9. And, aside from the fact that "a bow" is associated with the Native Americans, it also signifies "doctrine" -- i.e., in the "spiritual sense."

Chapter 10 continues with my idea about the grafting of the English walnut tree to the black walnut tree in chapter 1. Where the English walnut represents Great Britain, and hence the 5th Church, in succession to the Christian or 4th Church; whereas the black walnut tree, a tree indigenous to North America, represents the United States, and hence the 6th Church. All of which is portrayed (as well as foretold) by Israel adopting the two sons of Joseph -- "Ephraim and Manasseh" -- in the book of Genesis. It should also be noted that the numbers 5 and 6 add up to 11 and, that 56 and 65 add up to 121 which, is also 11 x 11. And so it was, Joseph was the 11th son of Israel.

Well I didn't quite mean to be so verbose here, so I'm going to continue on with a second post, to make it easier on the eyes.

 

[Iacchus]

Here we are again,

Chapter 11 is primarily auto-biographical, and is used to express the twenty year period -- and hence Odyssey -- of how I came about discovering my spirituality. This is why I've illustrated it in accord with Odysseus, and indeed, it seemed like I was in a power struggle against the god Poseidon. All of which became highlighted by the experience I had when completeing the part about Polyphemus (with this part extending down to the part about the First Residence). There's also a similarity here to Revelation 11, which speaks about the Two Witnesses, which are preliminary to the establishment of the New Church in Revelation 12.

Hence we have chapter 12, which speaks of the development of the New Church in Southern Oregon. And, similar to the Seven Churches of Asia, I took the configuration of the seven major cities in the area (all somewhat rural and small town) and laid it over the Seven Churches of Asia, and it's nearly an exact fit! (except the Southern Oregon area is about half-scale). While this is essentially where Roy Masters has relocated his church, The Foundation of Human Understanding, from Southern California. And indeed many people have moved to the region with "spiritual inclinations." So it's definitely a happening place! (or so it was).

Chapter 13 is similar to Revelation 13, which speaks of the persecution of the New Church by the beast out of the sea and the false prophet. And while most people aren't aware of this, the dragon, the beast out of the sea and the false prophet are all representative of the Church of the Reformed in Emanuel Swedenborg's day -- aka, The Reformation. And indeed I portray Roy Masters as a modern day Martin Luther, while bringing up my ten points of contention against his church (as the beast out of the sea had ten horns on its head), most of which have to do with the relationship between men and women.

So the book is about Dionysus? And yet, except for chapter 5, I really don't go into too much depth about Dionysus (although his presence is fairly well perceived). This is why I created chapter 14, for although the book is more about my own personal experience, and the projections derived therefrom, I really felt the need to be more inclusive about Dionysus. So hopefully this will help clear up any loose ends. And make no bones about it, the book was written specifically with Dionysus in mind.

Aside from the fact that I thought the book was finished at chapter 14, things just kept coming up to prolong it. With the main issue being, if in fact Dionysus does exist, then where is the love of his life, Ariadne? For indeed, the story is nowheres near complete without Ariadne. This is primarily what I've been working on since 1997, and is what chapters 15, 16 and 17 begin to explore (although work on chapter 16 has been suspended). While here I've added an extension to chapter 4, to explore some of these developments with respect to the Israelite Church (the relationship between Israel and his four wives).

Boy that was a long write! I didn't expect it to take me most of the day to do it but, I finally got it done. I think this should really help as far as your summary goes. I hope so! Also, I'm thinking about posting this on my overview page which, shouldn't pose a problem with you should it? Since I posted it on your forum first? I hope not!

 

[Iacchus]

From what I saw of your work there was a lot of information, but it was hard to see the lines of reasoning being followed. For example, I figure that somewhere you're making a Christi vs Dionysios comparison - but I couldn't quickly locate it. Or am I forcing my own interpretation there?

Yeah, my line of reasoning does tend to bounce around a bit, although as I mention in chapter 14 ...

Although my book is about Dionysus, indeed it speaks of his very advent (or second coming), my intent was to present the events that have occurred in my lifetime, as well as my viewpoint, which accompanies it. And as his myth was developed thousands of years ago, when he first appeared, plenty has already been said. Hence I was more preoccupied with drawing a parallel, with his myth the closest approximation to my story, and the best vehicle for conveying it. Indeed there's a real connection to be made. It therefore seems fitting that I begin writing about Dionysus here, at the end of the book.

I know that when people read the title -- The Advent of Dionysus -- they probably expect to find themselves surrounded by the persona of Dionysus, rather than someone's personal viewpoint and projections. And yet I don't know if there's any better way to go about it? Also, when I began developing my ideas, I was working with more than one thing at once, and wasn't really so concerned with how it would come together as book, but rather treated each idea separately, as if it were its own discipline. Which I think is summed up by the following quote from my guestbook ...

I was helping my son find information about Dionysus and used Lycos. I was amazed to discover a site with rich links and its own internal composition of multi-disciplinary views into history, religion & mythology. Well done. I've kept the bookmark for myself and will forward it to our minister (I am webweaver for our UU church at http://www.ultranet.com/~fpmilton .

Even so, I continue to wonder if the book is not too disjointed and lacking in cohesiveness?

 

[iBrian]

Iacchus -

I think you've demonstrated my point! I guess what I'm looking for is something more cerebral - a statement of ideas and principles, which is further explained in the chapters referenced. What you've actually linked to is a series of experiences and thoughts, which don't seem very focussed on relating the actual main crux of the book.

By that I mean that if you are arguing for the return of Dionysios, you seem to be either straying fom that point, or else not emphasising from the beginning that this is your point, and how it rationalised.

Just how it seems to myself - but, again, I could simply be mis-understanding it all.

Btw - If you need to make in-depth comment again could you please refer to your overview, rather than fill this thread with your own links? Simply because otherwise the issue of self-promotion could get a little difficult.

 

[Iacchus]

Iacchus -

I think you've demonstrated my point! I guess what I'm looking for is something more cerebral - a statement of ideas and principles, which is further explained in the chapters referenced. What you've actually linked to is a series of experiences and thoughts, which don't seem very focussed on relating the actual main crux of the book.

By that I mean that if you are arguing for the return of Dionysios, you seem to be either straying fom that point, or else not emphasising from the beginning that this is your point, and how it rationalised.

Just how it seems to myself - but, again, I could simply be mis-understanding it all.

Actually it has less to do with being cerebral than it does with everything just into falling into my lap so to speak, more as a "witness" to an event. At least this is what I'm trying to convey, and in a way that allows people to make up their own minds about it. Perhaps it's not the best approach? A bit too passive? It obviously still needs work. Another thing is that I don't want it to be too difficult for the lay person to understand, as it's not so much about the "intellectual pursuit," as it is the actual experience. And yet, I'm not sure how well this comes across either? Of course this is all where a good editor comes in handy!

Btw - If you need to make in-depth comment again could you please refer to your overview, rather than fill this thread with your own links? Simply because otherwise the issue of self-promotion could get a little difficult.

Yeah, I got the same impression by the time I was through. In fact I just sent you an email reiterating the same thing and said I would be happy to remove them. No problem.

I'll just restate that if anyone wants to get an overall view of my book they can do so by visiting my Overview Page, although it may be awhile before it gets fully updated, Okay? Thanks.

 

[iBrian]

If you're happy with the approach you have in mind - the experience - then stick to that. Likely it's the more workable.

Likely I'm just being impatient. Partly, it's a habit from surfing the web - when I research an issue I will often only read specific areas sought, to gether information quickly.

I researched the issue of comparing Hellenic deities with Jesus a while back as well - not too deeply, but enough to bear in mind names such as Dionysios, Apollo, and Helios, who all share some similarities in certain respects with the Christian tradition. Dionysios especially for the concept of resurrection personified in a man. Of course, that also leads into Green Man territory as well. Depends upon the personal dierction sought, though.

 

[Dave the Web]

The point has been made and perhaps proved that our beliefs are shaped by our guiding experiences. I would like to further ask whether these exeperiences alone are what shape our beliefs or is there something else? By my question I mean to ask if there is some very particular hunger that can only be fed by very particular ideas? Is there instance of two or more people experiencing closely related experiences but who end up following different belief systems?

 

[louis]

Oobe

Wow! That is truly facinating. Would you mind telling me about it here (or on a new post or personal message), or is it too personal? The subject of OOBE's and NDE's has interested me for years, as you know I tryed astral projection (without success) myself for a while. Such an experience as yours would likely convince me too.

From Louis...
I've had one of those so-called "out of body" experiences.
I don't consider anything "magical" - just an indication
that my mind seemed to share a "connection" that did
come about through any of my physical senses.
It happened like this :
I was on an medical cart, coming out of anesthetic after
dental surgery. As I awakened, I had a brief memory of
seeing a car being towed away after an accident. It was
not vague like a dream - it was sharp, clear and in full
colour - a road I recognised with the skidmarks on it -
a damaged car I recognised as belonging to one of my
co-workers - enough to re-construct what had happened.
And, of course, the moment I returned to work, I
confronted him about it in front of other witnesses, telling him to not say anything - just listen while I decribed the accident.
He was shocked because the accident had been his
fault and he had hoped to keep it quiet.
But he did confirm in front of witnesses the exact
TIME it happened - the SAME time I was unconscious several miles away.
" Beleive it or not ! "

 

[louis]

i searched and searched but could not find a place where "I" began and the parts quit being parts. Buddhism has, in my opinion, the answer to this question and it is quite startling and, once understood, completely changes ones world view. their answer is "there is no I."

From Louis...
I find your viewpoint very puzzling because ALL my
experience has shown me the opposite - I have never
had even the smallest doubt that "I" exist !
Although I sometimes wonder if anything ELSE exists ....

 

[Mohsin]

Asalam-u-Alaikum. Regards to all.
Not much to say, please visit the thread in the Islamic section, 'Miracles, The Ultimate Challenge'. You will come to know why I am proud to be a Muslim. You will come to know that believing in Islam is not just blind faith.

 

[Vajradhara]

From Louis...
I find your viewpoint very puzzling because ALL my
experience has shown me the opposite - I have never
had even the smallest doubt that "I" exist !
Although I sometimes wonder if anything ELSE exists ....

Namaste louis,

thank you for the post.

Descartian Philosophy? this is, if i recall correctly, the Cartesian Singularity?

from what i've been able to discover, the concept of "I" is a mental imputation and has no bearing on reality. we simply choose to lable this heap of aggregates as "I" for no real good reason.

in the same sense, we choose the lable the heap of parts a "car" or "junk"... depending on how we view those parts. the parts are the same, our mental conception is what is different.

to dig a little deeper in this soil, as it were... where does the "I" stop or begin? is it the physical form? is it the collection of the senses? is it an epiphenomenon of intelligence? is it the molecules that constitute the form?

 

[Quahom1]

Wow! That is truly facinating. Would you mind telling me about it here (or on a new post or personal message), or is it too personal? The subject of OOBE's and NDE's has interested me for years, as you know I tryed astral projection (without success) myself for a while. Such an experience as yours would likely convince me too.

How about someone else's near death? In 83, I was sitting on the Jersey shore (place called Barnegat Light on Long Beach Island). Watching the girls, and just veggin' out, when I got this inexplicable desire to go swim!? Not just swim, but swim out far. If you are familiar with the Jersey shore, the rip tide is a killer. But there I was about 1/4 mile off the beach, and thinking "are you nuts!" I turn back, and that is when I felt something grab my leg. Very tenuous, but not marine like (no jelly fish, or shark or eel). Instead of jumping away, I dive down...about 15 feet, and come up with a child (male, approximately 10 years old), not breathing, not moving, but not blue either.

Decide now, swim to shore with the kid, or try to do CPR, floating on the sea...and I hear "talk to him". Oh yeah, that is rich. So I head to shore with the boy. "Talk". So I start talking, "Hey, wake up! I'm so and so, who are you...come on kid give me a break...." Curiously the "tide" wasn't very strong, but it should have been. Even so, after the initial adrenaline rush, fatigue sets in pretty quick, and talking goes out the window. But no, this thought kept blasting in, "TAlk to him!"

So I swim, choke, and talk to this body, all the while pulling a Will Smith with the hands, and screams toward shore, which no body noticed (son of a b'-tch). Then the kid starts yelling, and yelling and pulling and pushing and in full blown panic, and I am dead assed tired, to the point of letting go, and I can't understand a word he was saying because it was spanish or portugeuse or something (close to french but not close enough). And I'm like "ah shut up kid" (the tide was pulling us faster than I could move us). Then there was that thought "Talk to him". So I talk, and he answered, and talked back, and I answered, while we swam...

Only each time he spoke, it became clearer to me what he was saying, and apparently the same was happening to him, when I spoke; but English was not what either of us were speaking.

It took us 20 minutes to get back on to the beach. I knew his mother, father, family, life story, hopes, dreams, even what he thought of God. The second my foot touched sand (in the surf), that kid bolted and rattled off a bunch of sounds while looking back at me, and I could not understand a bit of what he'd said, but I understood the emotions behind the words.

After sitting at the shore's edge for awhile, I walked two miles back to where my family (and I), had our belongings. "Where were you?" Learning to talk...

 

[iBrian]

Thanks for relating that, Quahom - and, surprisingly, not as uncommon as you would think.

Btw - I hope someone thanked you for the act - I certainly thank you for relating it to us.

 

[Quahom1]

Thanks for relating that, Quahom - and, surprisingly, not as uncommon as you would think.

Btw - I hope someone thanked you for the act - I certainly thank you for relating it to us.

Yeah, someone just did.

 

[louis]

I am !

to dig a little deeper in this soil, as it were... where does the "I" stop or begin? is it the physical form? is it the collection of the senses? is it an epiphenomenon of intelligence? is it the molecules that constitute the form

From Louis...
For me, it's simple.
"I" live in my own head - I look out of my eyes, animate
my physical body, invent ideas and sometimes turn them
into physical pictures and object. I am my consciousness -
my "ego" - that which makes me unique and separate
from other egos. I am not a physical thing - maybe I'm
just an illusion that will disappear when my body dies.
Frankly, I don't know WHAT I am - I'm just HERE !

 

[samabudhi]

For me, it's simple.
"I" live in my own head - I look out of my eyes, animate
my physical body, invent ideas and sometimes turn them
into physical pictures and object. I am my consciousness -
my "ego" - that which makes me unique and separate
from other egos. I am not a physical thing - maybe I'm
just an illusion that will disappear when my body dies.
Frankly, I don't know WHAT I am - I'm just HERE !

What you've just described is the false ego. This is not the truth. You are not separate from your environment. You are a puppet and are bound by the circumstances which brought you into this world, the circumstances you will find yourself in, and the inevitable coming of death. Essentially, there is no free will and you do not exist. Once you have accepted this, the truth, then you can work at, paradoxically, free will.

You say you live in your head and that you are consciousness. Buddhists divide the self into 5 aggregates of which consciousness is one. The others are form, perception, volition, sensation. But these boundaries are once again merely designated for practical reasons. The truth is that you are inseparably one with everything, and the cause of your suffering is the false ego which deludes you that you are otherwise.

You are an illusion, just like everything else. We call it a dependently originated phenomena. This is not Nihilism. It is not nothingness, it is relativity. Nothing is inherently real and nothing is void of any reality. All phenomena arise and decay according to this concept which is named 'emptiness.'

These concepts have helped me a lot. You might want to take a look at them.

 

[louis]

Am I the only person who visits this site, that does not believe in God? It certainly seems that way - Why all the definate belief from you guys?

From Louis, an impartial obsever...
No, you're not the only such person.
I have never understood the "religeous" kind of belief.
The only kind of belief I do understand is the kind which
depends on proof or objective confirmation.
For example : before I retired, I worked with research
engineers - designing things that had never been tried
before. We could not KNOW those things woud function until they were actually built and tested, but we always
BELIEVED a good design would function as planned.
Our "belief" was based on confidence in our own ability -
we were SATISFIED in our own minds.
But of course, there was always the risk that a mistake
had been made in our calculations, so we could not
claim to be CERTAIN until we TESTED everything.

 

[mcedgy]

Why Believe?

Those of you who've heard this theory 1000 times before please forgive me for posting it. I'm sure some have not and I'm going to add a twist!

The most well known philosophical religious argument is probably the Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) Wager Theory. It mathematically attempts to prove the logic of “betting” on the existence of God through formulation of wagers based on mathematically logical odds. Without getting into the math or the scholarly agreements and disagreements or rationalizations, I will attempt to explain the “Wager” with yet another paraphrase. ‘Even if you believe that God does not exist you should wager that He does because if He does, you have everything to gain and if He does not, you have nothing to loose.’ Accordingly, you have hedged your bet. You can win everything and loose nothing. Pascal was a Catholic and thus referring to a Christian God.

However, I’m going to use a horse race as an analogous argument against Pascal’s theory. If there is a race between seven horses of unknown quality and unknown skill and five horses are red in color one beige and one black, what is the logical bet? If we could wager only on color the logical bet is red to win. Unfortunately we must bet on which red horse will win. That’s where Pascal’s Wager fails. Which red horse should receive the ante? Which God should receive the favorable odds? McEdgy

 

[iBrian]

I'm not sure that Pascal's Wager applies to many people here - it tends to illustrate a more fundamentalist aspect of belief, IMO.

I know that many people here have undergone various religious and spiritual experiences that - to some degree or other - have found it impossible to explain those experiences without reference to a Higher Power. In fact, often a part of the experience can involve a very real sense of presence and awareness of Divinity in the first place.

When you undergo such a life-changing event - or series of events - knowledge that there is God seems so totally rational and logical - and disbelief becomes so irrational and illogical.

However, we each have our own personal experiences and formative paths - and what each of us may class as rational or logical may change from person to person.

To not have this sort of experience - why, then Agnosticism is the most logical and rational belief, as without definite proof or disproof, how can any definite judgement be made on the matter?

But with something fo the spiritual experience, it becomes an extremely rational and logical act to believe that, indeed, something beyond our sense of understanding exists behind reality, and "God" is the most meaningful concept for describing this.

Of course, I am not entirely sure how people believe entirely through faith alone without experience of such things - perhaps it is due to an innate sense of there being "something else", and a particular religious or philosophical path provides the most adequate justification and rationalisation for such a belief.