How confident in your belief in God?

[Ciel]

How about...No doubt, no awakening, because already awake.

Doubt as something outside the self, full of comparisons.......

- c -

 

[taijasi]

I'm really curious to know how some of you are voting 100%. That is what really interests me. How can you be so damned sure?

Because ... you left it open enough for us to interpret the question (and specifically, Who or What `G-d' is) for ourselves.

For me, it makes no difference whether you ask me to explain what I believe God is, or if you make it as general as "an Intelligence or the Ultimate beyond ourselves."

The one, the latter view, tends to focus on God, the Transcendent, and I am 100% confident that such exist(s). Yet because of my comparative religious studies, and my belief that John 1:1-4 is directly equivalent to the Sri Isopanishad ... I also "believe" in - a God Immanent, though I also have 100% confidence in this Presence, just as in God Transcendent (for the two are in reality, One).

Notice the similarity here between the Biblical and the Vedic Teaching:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.​

AND​

om purnam adah purnam idam
[FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]purnat purnam udacyate[/FONT]
purnasya purnam adaya
purnam evavasisyate
​

TRANSLATION​

(by [FONT=Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif]His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada)[/FONT]​

The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the complete whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the complete whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.​

Now, if you're ever seen `Being John Malkovich,' this can indeed get a bit weird - yet even in the most bizarre of ways, that movie does manage (ok, sort of) to illustrate what is being said in these two Scriptures.​

~+~+~+~+~+~+~​

Let me put this in simpler terms, as this is how I tend to see it:​

I cannot look at my hand, or fathom the mind of an ant, or gaze up into the heavens (perhaps at the rings & moons of Saturn, via a telescope), or pet my pet kitty-kat here, without bearing direct witness to God. I don't mean that such things lead me believe that "there is a G-d." I mean that for ANY of these things even just to exist - is a direct testimony ... to G-d's existence.​

This goes beyond logic, and beyond `mind' altogether (therefore beyond reason, in the Western sense), as also beyond the testimony of the senses (which can never bring us the same certainty as the principle of consciousness to which I am referring) ... and yes, even beyond faith.​

Despite the Zen koan, the kind of `straight knowledge,' or Intuition I am talking about, IS by its very nature, Certain Knowledge, or just, Certainty. It leaves no room for error, or doubt, because at the level of this type of awareness, none is possible! Error only enters in after one has such experiences ... when we try to interpret what we have experienced.​

~+~+~+~+~

One way to approach this subject, since it has already gone there anyway, is in terms of what we mean by `God Transcendent.' The picture that many of us have is that of the clock-maker god, having set the wheels in motion, so to speak, then remaining aloof from His Creation - save for some kind of recent intervention via Christ Jesus (or possibly another of various prophets).​

But this really says nothing for the direct activity, or interaction, between God and His Creation on a daily basis ...​

`G-d' to me suggests, in fact, a plurality of Beings - from quite an exalted state, right down to the myriad, microscopic lesser lives that literally compose every single form in the material world(s) - and I do not picture a sort of Judeo-Christian, Jehovah-God, with the long, flowing white beard, sitting enthroned among the clouds ... yet this does not mean that God is any less "real" to me.​

In terms of God Transcendent, what I have found ... is that, although I have 100%, or utmost confidence that "such exist(s)," we can never touch this `Ultimate Being,' or state of Being-ness. The reason for this, is that every time we think we've "gotten there" - or "found Him" - we learn that, in fact, we have indeed opened to a whole new level of awareness ... yet it is far, far from the "ultimate state" (or Being).​

Socrates knew this, and that is why, though not even an Initiate into the Mysteries, he was the Sophomore - the "Wise Fool." Knowing how little he really knew, he was able to always humble himself - and open to additional experience. If we cannot - or do not - do this, then I would suggest that we will never know 100% that there is (a) God, much less Know this God.​

~+~+~​

I do not mean, rattling on about all this, that there is no Summum Bonum, or definite GOAL, for Humanity's existence, our presence, upon Planet Earth. I believe that there is one, both for each of us, individually, as well as for all of Humanity, as ONE - truly as ONE.

But when we consider, for example, the Aaronic Blessing, wherein it is said:​

May the Lord bless you, and keep you
May the Lord shine His face upon you, and favor you
May the Lord lift His countenance upon you, and grant you peace
​

... I think there are several points to appreciate.

One point, clearly enough, is that Aaron (and his brother, Moses) surely must have been referring to One Being, in each of the cases where "the Lord" was used - and that, further, this seems undoubtedly to be the "Lord G-d" of Moses.

Yes, we know (or are told) that Moses beheld the Lord G-d via the burning bush, and I notice, Dondi, that this is just the sort of thing that some of tend to believe would convince us - 100% - that indeed, there is (a) G-d. I suspect that it's not quite this simple, however, and that - in fact - the burning bush (though symbolic) would not "do it" for us, in terms of getting us to 100%.

Anyway, Moses and Aaron certainly seem to be pointing to "a Lord God(s)" Who spoke directly to Moses, yet Whom Moses beheld via this medium, or physical correspondence of - a burning bush.

Now before someone whips out a Bible to demonstrate that oh indeed, Moses "spoke to God face to face," I'd like to point out that what is EMPHASIZED - is that he beheld a burning bush, NOT that "God was a dude, about 50, with salt'n'pepper hair, tan complexion, yadda yadda." WHICH, between ANY kind of physical description of a PERSON, and the `burning bush,' do we have - well preserved - for Moses' suppoesd direct encounter(s) with `the Lord G-d?'

I assure you, there's a great deal that could be said coming from any other religious tradition about this business of encounters with God. The reason that Moses' encounter, then also the Aaronic or Priestly Blessing (used in both Judaism and in Christianity) is so important - and releveant to this thread - is that I think it indicates for us something ... regarding the 100%, and regarding objectivity.

You see, the Blessing says, with the start of each line, `MAY the Lord' do these things. It is, sort of an invitation, even a bit of an Invocation, yet it is also something which I have learned is - ultimately - completely dependent upon what we ourselves do, in preparation. Moses, of course, was doing what needed doing. And he was even instructed, fairly clearly at times (though not always so), in what needed doing next. The result - perhaps - is that maybe (hell, I dunno), just maybe, he was able before he passed over, to literally look into the face of the Lord G-d directly.

Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall SEE God. But Moses, certainly at first (if not also later), did NOT literally, directly "see" God.

Moses - saw a burning bush.

~+~

As for whether or not we actually need to "see G-d" to know that there is One/Some ... I don't think we do. I think the 100% can be reached - even while we lack, as yet, the complete purity of heart, motive, word & deed ... but I do tend to think we might look at what it means to be "twice-born" - for more insight on where faith, and reason, merge into the kind of awareness (the `straight knowledge,' or direct experience) of the Saint, the Mystic, the Holy Person of every tradition.

Ask Francis king about being twice born. She has used the word "dvijati." This is a teaching in Hindusim, and Buddhism, just as it is in Christianity. Buddhists can be Srotapati, "Stream-Entrants," and Hindus call it Parivrajaka, "the Wanderer."

Could it be that there is an objective reason - why it's easier for some people to vote 100%, or 99%, or 69%? I think so. I would say that there are many, many factors which sway this, increasing or decreasing our certainty. But I also beleive - that the Universe is truly, literally, FAIR and JUST. Nothing is arbitrary, nothing is accidental (in a greater sense). We are NOT, "a fortuitous concurrence of atoms" ... and there is really no such thing, as a Ghost without the machine, or vice versa.

 

[Sunny C.]

How about...No doubt, no awakening, because already awake.

Doubt as something outside the self, full of comparisons.......

- c -

That sounds nice, but... doubt is an important component of critical thinking. Measure twice, cut once, that's useful doubt in action. I suppose in a non-physical environment, like some supremely enlightened state, there's no use for doubt. But down here on earth we need doubt in almost everything we do. I doubt that this is all there is to God would be a good mantra, I think.

 

[Sunny C.]

This is along the lines of what I was trying to say. I mean, I can see that Something makes Life possible. In my experience, the "faith factor" is trusting in the character of of that "Something".

Yeah, I'll go along with that definition. There is definitely a life force. My faith in that is 100%.

 

[juantoo3]

I wonder if a companion poll would be necessary here. One that read: How confident are you that you understand That-Which-Is.

Good to see you back around Paladin!

My answer to this would be far less certain, less than 10%.

 

[taijasi]

That sounds nice, but... doubt is an important component of critical thinking. Measure twice, cut once, that's useful doubt in action. I suppose in a non-physical environment, like some supremely enlightened state, there's no use for doubt. But down here on earth we need doubt in almost everything we do. I doubt that this is all there is to God would be a good mantra, I think.

Wow, Sunny, I think you just summed up that silly epic post of mine. Even shorter, it's -

Neti Neti
​

 

[Ciel]

That sounds nice, but... doubt is an important component of critical thinking. Measure twice, cut once, that's useful doubt in action. I suppose in a non-physical environment, like some supremely enlightened state, there's no use for doubt. But down here on earth we need doubt in almost everything we do. I doubt that this is all there is to God would be a good mantra, I think.

Hi Sunny C,

This place of no doubt.
It's in the very balance between the enlightenment and the physical environment, the interior and exterior overview where critical thought is not the main component.

Certainty where God is concerned merits love and trust, and as we move
along and through this path of life is found experience. The Is of the Is.

It is peace.

- c -

 

[pattimax]

I wonder if a companion poll would be necessary here. One that read: How confident are you that you understand That-Which-Is.

We could probably take it one step further... Do you have a personal relationship with God?

 

[taijasi]

Beautiful, Ciel!

I am pretty sure that the Peace which passeth understanding is a Peace which leaves no room for doubt ... yet I also think it leaves plenty of room for Growth.

Maybe "doubt," in the higher sense of a humble sense of proper perspective, is something compatible with this greater Peace.

 

[taijasi]

We could probably take it one step further... Do you have a personal relationship with God?

Doesn't this beg the question - Whom or what is `G-d?'

Such a poll only becomes useful, imho, if we insert the phrase "Do you feel" in front of the question.

Other polls might explore just how people of different faiths understand, or conceptualize, God ... but if what we're asking is essentially - how strong, or "sound" do you feel your relationship with the Divine (is), then I think the word choice truly goes beyond - semantics.

Just a thought ...

 

[pattimax]

Doesn't this beg the question - Whom or what is `G-d?'

Such a poll only becomes useful, imho, if we insert the phrase "Do you feel" in front of the question.

Other polls might explore just how people of different faiths understand, or conceptualize, God ... but if what we're asking is essentially - how strong, or "sound" do you feel your relationship with the Divine (is), then I think the word choice truly goes beyond - semantics.

Just a thought ...

Good thought.
So which is it (the thought), feelings or semantics?

 

[YO-ELEVEN-11]

I am 99% sure that there exists a Divine Source of some type. That remaining 1% of doubt is to remind myself to think for myself. Doubt makes a fine mistress, but a horrible wife.

Nicely put.


Im with you on this one. Doubt is a part of our exsistence and what makes us "human". To deny doubt is (IMHO) is not a good way to grow and learn of GOD(The Divine Source).

Our doubts lead us to ask questions and when we get the answers, we become more confident of what we seek to know or believe.

That 1%, 2% or 50% doubt is what keeps us "individually" looking and wanting more of what GOD has to offer us. i.e. thinking for ourselves and seeking answers for our own personal curosity and not just agreeing with everything we are told.


Im in the 70-99% range.

 

[pattimax]

This would only be a poll taken among those that did believe.

 

[Sunny C.]

Hi Sunny C,

This place of no doubt.
It's in the very balance between the enlightenment and the physical environment, the interior and exterior overview where critical thought is not the main component.

Certainty where God is concerned merits love and trust, and as we move
along and through this path of life is found experience. The Is of the Is.

It is peace.

- c -

I've felt that when I was snow skiing. You know, when you're on the very edge of control going just a smidge faster than you can think. I always think that's what the Buddhists refer to as zen, but I'm not sure. Anyway, in those kind of experiences you just do without thought, so no time for doubt. It's hard to manufacture stuff like that. I'm always trying to forget to remember, or remember to forget.

 

[Neemai]

There have been some really insightful posts in this poll. Seems to have opened up mutual field of exploration.

Being totally honest with myself I voted in the 99% category. I'm probably around 97%-99% most days, depending on the circumstances.

Similar to what others have shared, I have had enough experiences and gone through enough internal & external philosophical debates to feel highly confident of God's existance, but that's still something different to actually being 100% sure in my book. If I was a 100-percenter than I would imagine I would be living my life very differently. I have met people who as far as I could see are definitely 100-percenters, and in a real way, not a blind one - but it's not something you can artificially achieve, or force - by definition it is something to be realised. Otherwise how could it be 100%?

Another stat from the pole that interests me is how anyone can truthfully vote 0%? Sure we can say "I don't think there is xyz" but how can anyone be 100% sure of anything not being the case when really we know very little about the universe, or ourselves, or where we all came from etc...? From a purely hard-line logical perspective this doesn't seem to add-up? Any counter-views?

Best Wishes,

... Neemai

 

[17th Angel]

I was expecting a 0% from you, 17th. I thought you didn't believe in God.

1% chance of a god......

I don't believe in a form of god... But, I haven't died yet... So there is no possible way that I can be 100% sure is there? Personally it is all like some children fairy tale, but again.... I can't say 100% there isn't a god... Like I cannot say there is 100% no chance there isn't elves/pixies/loch ness monster/bigfoot/santa/satan/micheal jackson/easter bunny/tooth fairy .... I would put a 99% stake on them not existing...

Just like on the other side of it, there is NO way you can say there is 100% a god.... You simply do not know that to be true....... Your emotions/fear of death/fear of an end/intelligence.... May wish you to -hope- there is a god.... but, 100%? I doubt it..... Unless you have been in the presence of him? There is always a chance you/me/him/her are wrong.

 

[taijasi]

Just for the record, being 100% certain that - there is "a God" - doesn't necessarily mean one claims to fully "grok" (understand) that God/Higher Power, much less that we understand the ultimate nature (place, purpose, origin, etc.) of God!

Although I believe in a whole hierarchy of beings, almost any of which - after a certain point - could be called `God(s)' ... I take it as a given that even the least of these demi-Gods is well beyond my ken.

What I cannot doubt, at this point, is that this great chain of Being, or Jacob's Ladder, leads directly to - the very Heart of God, and then disappears into ... the Unknown.

This leaves plenty of room, unfortunately, for doubting oneself - and, imho, THIS is the part we must all get over, or get beyond, on the spiritual journey. Faith in God, even to the point of 100% certainty, is actually the easy part. Faith in self - if you stop and think about it - is something a lot more challenging.

Self-confidence, rooted in a proper sense of spiritual perspective, and appreciation of one's greatest strengths, and also one's weaknesses, combined with utmost humility ... and a willingness to do what is right regardless of the outcome or circumstances. Hmmm, I shudder to think how far I am from 100% when it comes to this kind of certainty ...

 

[17th Angel]

Meh, whatever there is never a 100%....

 

[Dondi]

The one, the latter view, tends to focus on God, the Transcendent, and I am 100% confident that such exist(s). Yet because of my comparative religious studies, and my belief that John 1:1-4 is directly equivalent to the Sri Isopanishad ... I also "believe" in - a God Immanent, though I also have 100% confidence in this Presence, just as in God Transcendent (for the two are in reality, One).

I would think that we can only know God Immanently within our own individual subjective experience of Him, within the confine of the human heart, conscience, and life and in our relationship with others. The God Transcendent can only be observed indirectly, through the evidences of nature and science, in the realm of our senses. But even then God is beyond what we can fully comprehend.

`G-d' to me suggests, in fact, a plurality of Beings - from quite an exalted state, right down to the myriad, microscopic lesser lives that literally compose every single form in the material world(s) - and I do not picture a sort of Judeo-Christian, Jehovah-God, with the long, flowing white beard, sitting enthroned among the clouds ... yet this does not mean that God is any less "real" to me.​

I do not believe that the scriptures intended for this Michaelangelian anthropomorphic image of God to be taken in an absolute literal sense, for even Jews would argue that God cannot be described in this fashion, even though Isaiah and Ezekiel had visions of a Being on the Throne. Rather these images were meant to convey the relational aspects of God in His dealings with man in various forms: as King, as a Father, as Creator, etc. The actual nature of God is unimaginable, which is why we need this sort of imagination to relate to Him, at least initially. How else are we to tell a child about God without an image for them to relate? Jesus taught His disciples to refer to God as our Father. It is the idea that there is Someone who cares and nurtures His children which draws a parallels with our earthly fathers that enables the child to understand the nature of God's Love, Compassion, Forgiveness and Mercy, not to mention Discipline.

As we grow up and mature in our experiential knowledge of Him, we loosen our images of the white-bearded paternal figure in favor of a greater awareness of the greatness and eternalness and unlimited power and boundlessness of God, that goes beyond imagination, yet still retain the relational aspects that we have previously been taught.

Yes, we know (or are told) that Moses beheld the Lord G-d via the burning bush, and I notice, Dondi, that this is just the sort of thing that some of tend to believe would convince us - 100% - that indeed, there is (a) G-d. I suspect that it's not quite this simple, however, and that - in fact - the burning bush (though symbolic) would not "do it" for us, in terms of getting us to 100%.

The spiritual significance of the burning bush is to convey that which is not seen. It is the evidence of the convergence between the God Transcendent and the God Immanent. The point of the burning bush is that it was not consumed. It is the expression of the promise of Mercy of God that we do not have to be consumed by His Power ("It is of the LORD's mercies that we are not consumed). In that Holy Place, we too can put ourselves in place of that bush, if we are willing to be prepared for it. Light cannot be generated without heat. And if we are going to be vessels of that Light, we must be purified in heart so that the Flame will burn cleanly while we ourselves are kept intact.

I myself have never witness any direct miracle or vision of God. I don't know that even if I did if it would cement my confidence. I am content with what I do have, so whether or not I did or didn't I don't think will affect my relationship with God that much anyway. Jesus lamented that he had followers only because of the miracle of the loaves, but He wasn't looking for followers on that basis, was He?

Still, it would be nice just to have God peek around the corner every once in a while, ya know what i mean?

 

[Ciel]

We could probably take it one step further... Do you have a personal relationship with God?

Pattimax,

Isn't this the foundation of understanding who,what and where it all is. And the first correspondent in any personal relationship being love.

- c -