How did knowing God change you?

[thedoc]

Thanks, doc. Appreciate the swift response. I am tired now but will reflect on this later.
Hope all is going well with you and that your wife recovers well from the surgery.

Doc - I am going to be busy this week and don't have the time necessary to look into the various passages you provided. As you say, there can be various interpretations - the one thing I remember from my previous 'life' ( or chapter thereof) was being shocked by the apparent suggestion that people should be willing, if asked, to give up their family, to put Jesus first and foremost in their lives. To be willing to kill a son - seems to be a favourite test of ?love.

The promise is that giving up of one's own life ( metaphorically) - to be reborn into the Christian faith - to lose the life you lead and love in the real world will gain you eternal life. Whereas, if you hate your life (? is this what atto means by first having to HATE your life ( ? a life led by a nonbeliever who doesn't convert to Christianity), then you have this ? unpeaceful life for eternity. There is no hope of peace or joy for an non believer, ever ?
Atto seems to think that non believers need to see their lives as hateful ( ? because of the tests by 'it', or manmade tests ) before heaven ( ? on earth or above) can be attained.

So, the command is to Love Jesus and gain Peace on Earth and Heaven, For ever and ever. Amen.

However, even non or ex-believers can achieve some kind of a peaceful perspective re any life trials, and do not expect or wish for more of the same for ever and ever. It seems to me that there is an implicit/explicit threat to non believers that they will be forever in some kind of a Hell.
It's simple bribery and seduction into a religious cult, isn't it?

Take your time, a well thought out response is better than a hurried or rushed one, and worth waiting for. Your initial thoughts are good, so you're off to a good start.

[Hobbes' Choice]

However, I don't understand why you think there should be different conceptions of God even if there is only one of Him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

It's the funniest fucking elephant!!
It's funny how some people feel scales, heat and flame, and smell acid whilst others tend to put their hands into ephemeral dust clouds whilst others feel furry legs, with the scent of roses.
Whilst people called Nick seem to be able to feel the whole thing.

[sthitapragya]

Is discovering God the same as knowing God?

I dont think so, but the doc would know better.

What would you see as the difference between discovering something/someone and knowing it/them - in general terms.
You asked two different questions - perhaps you should rethink the underlying objective of this thread?
Clarify your intentions, your issue?
It seems that the barrage of initial questions is more of an attack than a real questioning or wish to understand. Just my impression.
Have you tried asking similar questions on a religious site?
I note you have started another similar thread - are you obsessed?

I gave it some thought and it seems you are right. I did start this as an attack on those theists who try and define atheists instead of just debating. And i realized that what I am doing by pursuing this line of attack is graceless and classless. So I apologize to those theists who have been nothing but genuinely trying to argue their position. Having said that, I am genuinely curious as to why this pursuit of God or spirituality is so important. So I will focus on that part of the discussion from now on. MB, thanks for making me question myself.

[surreptitious57]

Becoming an atheist led to an interest in science and philosophy. Becoming socially isolated led to a reduction in anger. Becoming old led
to an acceptance of both physical reality and death. All of this has been slowly and simultaneously happening to me which has resulted in
a real and consistent peace of mind. I now see my self as an observer of life and the human condition rather than a participant in it. The detachment lets me understand that I am just passing through and while nothing truly matters in the grand scheme of things one still needs something to do to pass to pass the time. And while this is nihilism it is a positive type. Since one gets to choose what meaning to give ones
own life [ mine is knowledge acquisition ] instead of it being decided for one by some one else. And that is it with regard to what happened
to me after I stopped believing

What stopped you doing all that before you stopped believing?
It is not about either being an observer or a participant - you can be anything
in life both and more ... at any one time you can be attached to people and relationships as well as observing them
How or Why did being a believer mean that you couldn t choose to acquire knowledge or any other meaningful pursuit?
Were you always a believer? Born and bred? What did you believe and why?

Well as I said this all happened after I became an atheist and I do not think I would be where I am today if I had not become one
I do not have relationships as I am all alone so I am definitely not a participant in life but just an observer and that suits me fine
I do not think I was mature enough back in the day to understand what I understand now. So it is not just about being a believer
I was a believer for forty six years because I was born into it and for a long time I never had the ability to question it in any way

[sthitapragya]

However, I don't understand why you think there should be different conceptions of God even if there is only one of Him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

Well, have you considered that the blind men in the story all KNEW it was an elephant ? The elephant was physically present.

Also each of them touched only a part of the elephant to arrive at their idea of an elephant. Not one tried to touch the whole elephant which implies that they jumped to a conclusion.

[thedoc]

However, I don't understand why you think there should be different conceptions of God even if there is only one of Him.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

Well, have you considered that the blind men in the story all KNEW it was an elephant ? The elephant was physically present.

Also each of them touched only a part of the elephant to arrive at their idea of an elephant. Not one tried to touch the whole elephant which implies that they jumped to a conclusion.

I have heard or read several versions of this story, and the lesson is that each man jumped to a conclusion, without trying to touch the whole elephant. So yes they did jump to a conclusion, and that is the point of the story. Also in some versions the men knew what it was that they were touching and each man said that the elephant was "like" something that they could compare it to.

[Immanuel Can]

I have heard or read several versions of this story, and the lesson is that each man jumped to a conclusion, without trying to touch the whole elephant. So yes they did jump to a conclusion, and that is the point of the story. Also in some versions the men knew what it was that they were touching and each man said that the elephant was "like" something that they could compare it to.

I first ran across it as the poem "Six Blind Men of Hindustan."

The aptness of the analogy rests on some shaky suppositions.

1. The men were blind.
2. The elephant did not have any ability to "reveal itself."
3. The men had no other indicators.
4. Nobody else was available to tell the six blind men anything.
5. They all had the access to touch the elephant equally.
6. None could possibly go further than where he began.

My thought on it would be this: only if all six of these suppositions ALSO turn out to be true of the Divine would the analogy be anything more than a foolish children's rhyme. It would not be then a vehicle of any insight, but would be what we call a "false analogy," and a rather misleading one at that, since it implies no one could possibly no more than anyone else, whereas the means to do so exist.

Number 2 is the real killer of the analogy.

Perhaps we actually need not all be "blind men."

[thedoc]

I have heard or read several versions of this story, and the lesson is that each man jumped to a conclusion, without trying to touch the whole elephant. So yes they did jump to a conclusion, and that is the point of the story. Also in some versions the men knew what it was that they were touching and each man said that the elephant was "like" something that they could compare it to.

I first ran across it as the poem "Six Blind Men of Hindustan."

The aptness of the analogy rests on some shaky suppositions.

1. The men were blind.
2. The elephant did not have any ability to "reveal itself."
3. The men had no other indicators.
4. Nobody else was available to tell the six blind men anything.
5. They all had the access to touch the elephant equally.
6. None could possibly go further than where he began.

My thought on it would be this: only if all six of these suppositions ALSO turn out to be true of the Divine would the analogy be anything more than a foolish children's rhyme. It would not be then a vehicle of any insight, but would be what we call a "false analogy," and a rather misleading one at that, since it implies no one could possibly no more than anyone else, whereas the means to do so exist.

Number 2 is the real killer of the analogy.

Perhaps we actually need not all be "blind men."

No we can be awake to the possibility that there is more to learn. Some people limit their own knowledge by choice. On another forum there is a member who is hawking her father's book, and stands by all the mistaken ideas in the book. She has even stated that she believes that what her father wrote is true, in spite of overwhelming evidence that he was wrong. She is willingly blind to anything that is not in the book, and in a way is much like one of the blind men who only "sees" one part of the elephant and forms a mistaken idea of what the elephant is like.

FYI, I have encountered many people in my life who get some mistaken idea, and refuse to see anything else, they are willingly blind to the truth.

[Immanuel Can]

FYI, I have encountered many people in my life who get some mistaken idea, and refuse to see anything else, they are willingly blind to the truth.

Indeed. I sometimes thing that that is all that is involved. There is just something they don't want to see at any cost.

[Walker]

I gave it some thought and it seems you are right. I did start this as an attack on those theists who try and define atheists instead of just debating. And i realized that what I am doing by pursuing this line of attack is graceless and classless. So I apologize to those theists who have been nothing but genuinely trying to argue their position. Having said that, I am genuinely curious as to why this pursuit of God or spirituality is so important. So I will focus on that part of the discussion from now on. MB, thanks for making me question myself.

Only now he is lying, you see how his stance is still aggressive and dominant.

“I don't have an idea for a play until after I've finished writing it. I write first, and come up with what it's about later. My technique could be compared to having a large canvas and coming in every day and putting a dot on it somewhere, and after several years - literally - I begin to say, That reminds me of an elephant, so I think I'll make it one.” - Wallace Shawn

[Hobbes' Choice]

I gave it some thought and it seems you are right. I did start this as an attack on those theists who try and define atheists instead of just debating. And i realized that what I am doing by pursuing this line of attack is graceless and classless. So I apologize to those theists who have been nothing but genuinely trying to argue their position. Having said that, I am genuinely curious as to why this pursuit of God or spirituality is so important. So I will focus on that part of the discussion from now on. MB, thanks for making me question myself.

Only now he is lying, you see how his stance is still aggressive and dominant.

“I don't have an idea for a play until after I've finished writing it. I write first, and come up with what it's about later. My technique could be compared to having a large canvas and coming in every day and putting a dot on it somewhere, and after several years - literally - I begin to say, That reminds me of an elephant, so I think I'll make it one.” - Wallace Shawn

I not sure you deserve note since you are the only contributor never to have addressed the thread topic.

[sthitapragya]

I not sure you deserve note since you are the only contributor never to have addressed the thread topic.

HC, don't use my quote along with little chihuahua's. I have him on ignore and when you quote me with him, I have to read his vile crap. I am better off not knowing.

[Walker]

I not sure you deserve note since you are the only contributor never to have addressed the thread topic.

HC, don't use my quote along with little chihuahua's. I have him on ignore and when you quote me with him, I have to read his vile crap. I am better off not knowing.

You see? Still aggressive/dominant.

karma recoil = Newton’s third law of motion + relative time subjectively perceived

[sthitapragya]

Little chihuahua, just for your information, when you quote me, I just get a notification saying you quoted me, but I still cannot see your post. So don't bother. I have no intention of reading the nothing you put up.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I not sure you deserve note since you are the only contributor never to have addressed the thread topic.

HC, don't use my quote along with little chihuahua's. I have him on ignore and when you quote me with him, I have to read his vile crap. I am better off not knowing.

You might have said please. But I understand where you are coming from.