Ryan Hauck, Do We Need a 'god'? If so, What Kind?

[RevLindsG King]

Ryan, and to all who want to join the dialologue, you say,

Greetings one and all!

Its been some time since I posted in these forums, and life has been nothing short of a wonderful, miraculous journey.

I come here today to inquire about how willing the members here are in embracing new idea's about Christianity, Christ, Jesus, God, Heaven, and the Atonement.

======================

Ryan, Lindsay King here.

Did I just hear you ask about how interested we are in exploring:


New idea's about Christianity, Christ, Jesus, God, Heaven, and the Atonement?

THANKS FOR THE IMPORTANT QUESTION and for the challenge that we all need to think deeply about life so we will become empowered to WILLingly take action! I am very interested in exploring how life works: somatologically, psychologically, and especially, pneumatologically--that is, bodily, mentally and spiritually.

Interestingly, in 1 Thess., 5:23. Paul makes this tri-unity an integral kind of point.

You go on to tell us,
I have been spending a great deal of time studying and exploring the Contemplative tradition of Christianity, and have found there to be a wellspring of spiritual value that I have never experienced with mainstream, traditional Christianity.

In fact, the last time I went to church I had the vivid experience that there was something outside the church, cranking a wheel to keep the whole circle going......

Then you conclude:

Anywho! I have been following the work of Ken Wilber (Integral Theory), and Father Thomas Keating (Centering Prayer) and have been wanting to engage into some discourse relating to some of the "leading edge" idea's being posited by more progressive forms of Christianity. AUM​

====================

Theologically speaking, Ryan, I think of myself as a UNI-theistic panENtheist, one who seeks Unity--that is, Oneness with that which Generates, Organizes and Delivers reality. More on this, later. It was with the help of two excellent books on Integral Theory:

1. INTEGRAL CHRISTIANITY--The Spirit's Call to Evolve, by Paul R. Smith & 2. REVERENT IRREVERENCE--Integral Church for the 21st Century, by the Rev Tom Thresher​

that I began to appreciate at least some of Ken Wilbur's totally-inclusive "whole-picture" message.

BTW, Ryan, to me, it looks like that we already have much in common.

When and where were you ordained. Born in 1930. I was ordained in June 1953, at http://www.mta.ca/Prospective/Default.aspx NB, in the days when the neo-orthodox and the liberal theologians vied for the hearts and minds of students to: "Follow me!" I was 23. Now let's have, what I feel, know, can and will be a helpful, pleasant and fruitful dialogue open to all with comments and questions. Let the dialogue begin!
Last edited: Yesterday at 12:33 AM

Signed ============================================
G~O~D--the Oneness which Generates, Organizes & Delivers: Goodness, Optimism &Delight--IS in, through & around all things & is OUR CONTEMPORARY. Now, with rational and open minds, let us joyfully explore a new way to do theology. Check out www.unitheist.org [Over 70 members in FaceBook group. Welcome!
=================================================

 

[Luce NDs]

As there are those that don't believe in abstract ... could we tell such mythical things in dialogue with real people that only believe in absolutes ... thus darkness, and Levity does not exist ... and we suffer heavy siblings ... and the other kind flighty sorts as ... fey creatures of trust in things unfixed, flexible and friable as rheids! These include glacial activity and de ice mon ... that'd be kohl ... like tunnel vision and waiting to see out the end ...

There are numinous allegories ... but real folk can't see thro' M!

 

[RevLindsG King]

JUST AS AN INTERLUDE, TAKE A LOOK AT THE FOLLOWING: First, I post this as an experiment to see how it--a living work of ART, by Catherine King and her artist-husband, Wayne Adams (both on facebook)--plays out in this thread.

BTW, in 1992, Catherine's mother and I were there when there was just enough room in the floating house, for four of us--but look at it now. Visitors to Tofino, BC, have and open invitation to visit.
==========================
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?...78947192.30691.100004505324589&type=1&theater

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

Wow! That's fantastic, Rev. Lindsey. These are your family members who built the floating villa?

I haven't been in years - not sure why, I'm on the west coast - but the Tofino area is one of the most beautiful places on earth in my opinion!

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

It's called Freedom Cove. There are lots of pictures of it on the web. What an amazing dream space come true!

Tofino really is a very spiritual place. I sensed it even as a kid visiting there (would've been shortly before those structures were built) when I didn't even have those words for it. Truly awesome!

 

[Ryan Hauck]

@RevLindsayGKing1930 First I'd like to thank you for instigating this thread.

Being someone who has quickly passed through the Traditional --> Modern --> Postmodern stages of development in the lines of spirituality and cognition, I can relate with both sides of the Theological fence. What was at first, prior to full comprehension, a challenge for me has now
blossomed into a powerful asset in my journey of conscious evolution.

This "challenge" manifested as never feeling fully satisfied with anyone path or tradition, and therefore being open to learning about many simultaneously. At first, as you can imagine, this generated much confusion. However, as time passed and my vision grew clearer and more inclusive, I found certain elements in each coming together in a vibrant and harmonious way.

As it stands, I embrace this altitude of consciousness [Integral] and the gifts which it holds. However, there are some parts of me which battles with the "necessity" of previous stages, especially when we have within our reach the ability to learn more and grow. The presence of Spirit within us, naked of theology, tradition, or belief provides everything we need to "Wake up".

Christ didn't have Christianity. Buddha did not have Buddhism. They reached the spiritual heights with only that which God [Almighty] imbued in them.

I feel compelled to facilitate a similar journey for others, yet am still learning the appropriate "language" in which to communicate my findings and maintain a space of "Safety and Love". We experience fear when threatened, and with so many (myself included for a time) their beliefs are their comfort zones and to change or evolve them puts their sense of safety at risk.

I suppose one my primary interests within this conversation, is to fall on my Brothers and Sisters for their wisdom in this area.

Richest Blessings

 

[Ryan Hauck]

To more clearly answer the thesis of this discussion, I don't believe we "need" a God. And there are points in our development where we get along just fine without any sense of a God in our lives. Yet, as it has been in my experience, only God can hold my gratitude, Love, and Stillness. Or is it God whom holds me?

 

[revjohn]

The question presupposes that I get to invent a god of my own choosing rather than having to confront a God who is.

Does that work in any other relationship?

Do I get to construct each of you to my liking and not have to deal with your particular quirks?

Am I your construct? Does one of you shape my every post so that they puff you up?

I guess we all want strings that only we get to pull while simultaneously swearing that there are no strings that any other can use to manipulate us.

I suspect we'd all be more comfortable with a god who is domestricated, predictable and pushes others without pushing ourselves.

Is that the god we need though, or just the one we want?

 

[Ryan Hauck]

@revjohn

I suppose it matters at what level the question is being asked.
Do I need a God for my day to day living? Do I need a God to have peace in my life and in my relationships? Do I need a God to even exist?

What if God exists at every stage of our choosing? In many of my most recent studies, as well as my first hand experiences, God is both imminent and transcendent. That is to say that God is at my current altitude of consciousness and all levels before as well as beyond my current capacity of understanding.

When we speak of God, do we only mean the "Creator"? Or is God also the "very ground of being". Advaita Vedanta describes God as "Absolute Consciousness or Awareness". That which is formless and where all form "lives, moves, and has its being".

Can such a thing be perceived or even experienced?

Perhaps, the qualities God holds for a person reveals more about them then anything else. Is it a God for just them? Or does God's love "shine down on everyone"?

And how does my relationship with God as the "ME" disappears? Is God still "out there"?

AUM

 

[Mystic]

No, John, but it can be very useful to ask a disillusioned seeker: "Suppose you were in charge of the universe, including salvation.
What doctrines would you establish? When I lived in Cambridge, Mass., I once was joined in my subway seat by a young man who was clearly drunk. He poured out his heart to me about what he felt was wrong with religion and specifically the Catholic church. I asked him the above question and was deeply moved by his answer. He quickly poured a set of beliefs that I later assured him were what the Bible actually teaches about the big questions. I was getting near my stop; so I suggested he lay out the same set of beliefs to a specialist in biblical theology for confirmation.








ej

 

[Luce NDs]

If one was in charge of large responsibilities ... would some ideals be required that would shift according to the time, place and light of the developing scenario?

If the scenario had not developed ... would one be required to develop ideals for an unknown situation? This is difficult for those that believe all things are just as they be ... and there is no becoming sense! IT just won't arrive as such moving things escape the notice of obstinate idealism that does not adjust to alterations ... altruisms.

If morals are lessons what sort of uprights could lead us to such pools of learning? Could we call that a philosophical ethic just to be Piscine off the obstinate that despise philosophy as the love of all knowledge and learning?

Could this leave the cosmos with pockets of naïveté? I think Einstein said these created dimples in space ... sort of like happy Nous ... essences? The essence is not substantial only a scent of the real thing ... drives mortal gods crazy ... the Primal ID?

Gives us that initial start ... and the I'z pop open ... apocalyptic in some traditions that are infinitely on-going ...

 

[Luce NDs]

Can a moral Christian relate ideals with idée as a rule, or roué's for change? Sometimes an Eros!

So many little abstract icons to learn and so little time ... it becomes a Black Blob ... A'hole? Then if a prefix "A" in like not in atheist what's an a'hole but a pathological character that hasn't got it all together yet ... just believes he does?

I find myself scattered ... like onanism ... and you know how the hard-shell feels about that ... the essence of learning? Then its over ... aD Jaer'd ... like the little Brown Jug? Some extensive bunch of literary traditions may be required to get into it as interspatial entanglement String Theory?

 

[Luce NDs]

Never admit to knowing anything ... the Romans despise knowledgeable, informed, thinking peoples!

Tis the problem of pure free love ... no thoughtful inhibitions ... and under extreme freedom (polity) the walls must come down so the resource can be raped ... sort of like forest, animals and ground fish ... even clear air that real men like to soar in ... as if they were eagles ... but they might really be turkeys ... sort of numinous or justly numb!

 

[Hermann]

Do we need a god?

For me, the simple answer is "no."

But most of us need meaning in our lives. And if this meaning involves a concept of god, and/or a belief in god, then so be it. But one can certainly lead a meaningful life without such a concept and belief.

If there is something like a god, what kind would it be?

The only kind of god I can imagine is the creative power or force that set the universe in motion. Science may one day prove the existence of such a force, but whether or not this proves the existence of god is debatable.

If I, personally, were to define God, I would define IT as the self-generative, holistic or unified universe: the totality of being as a self-creative or self-generative singularity in a state of synthesis. As a theology, this would be unitheism, holotheism or pantheism. As a religion, it would be "Saganism," although such a religion does not (yet?) exist.

 

[Mendalla]

As a religion, it would be "Saganism," although such a religion does not (yet?) exist.

And hopefully never will. I doubt Sagan would appreciate becoming the prophet of a new faith which would no doubt acquire its own load of doctrinal baggage.

 

[revjohn]

Do I need a God for my day to day living? Do I need a God to have peace in my life and in my relationships? Do I need a God to even exist?

In order of the asking. No, no and no.

No we do not need God for our day to day living unless reality cannot possibly hold itself together without God's constant care.

No we do not need a God to have peace in our lives or in our relationships.

No we do not need a God to exist (unless reality cannot possibly hold itself together without God's constant care.

And yet not needing God for any of that does not of necessity eliminate God from existence does it?

What if God exists at every stage of our choosing?

What if God does?

Is God the agent of our choosing? Is God subject to our choosing? Does God have no will of God's own or existence independent of our choosing? If God does exist at every stage of our choosing how does God find God's self there? Is it by accident or our design?

In many of my most recent studies, as well as my first hand experiences, God is both imminent and transcendent. That is to say that God is at my current altitude of consciousness and all levels before as well as beyond my current capacity of understanding.

The imminence and transcendence of God are not new to Christian thinking.

When we speak of God, do we only mean the "Creator"? Or is God also the "very ground of being".

When we speak of God we cannot help but limit our speaking by the words we choose and the understandings we assign to those words. From time to time our language will be very particular and at other moments it will be somewhat vague.

Advaita Vedanta describes God as "Absolute Consciousness or Awareness". That which is formless and where all form "lives, moves, and has its being".

Can such a thing be perceived or even experienced?

Only to the degree that we are able to participate in Absolute being.

Having begun in a Christian context we now move to a Hindu context. Are there rates of exchange which make the leap from one context to another a simple transaction? I guess if we deal with the umbrella term of religion it might be possible. I am not confident it is an easy leap when we stay in the particulars of one faith being fundamentally different from another. I am confident that neither faith expression's definition of God is agreed upon by the other.

Perhaps, the qualities God holds for a person reveals more about them then anything else. Is it a God for just them? Or does God's love "shine down on everyone"?

Again, this presupposes that God is a personal construct and not something that exists outside of ourselves.

It may be that what we see in God, or even prefer to see in God is something which is intensely personal. If God's very self does not offer challenges against what we want then such a God is not likely capable of helping us with what we really need.

And how does my relationship with God as the "ME" disappears? Is God still "out there"?

AUM

If God is not discernible from "ME" then God is not other in any way. God would only still be out there to the extent that we were out there since, in this understanding, God's very self is dependent upon "me."

 

[Hermann]

And hopefully never will. I doubt Sagan would appreciate becoming the prophet of a new faith which would no doubt acquire its own load of doctrinal baggage.

I don't mean Saganism as an organized religion, I'd never go for that. I mean Saganism as an unorganized (not disorganized) religion. More like a movement. Science-based spirituality, but also drawing from all other spiritual traditions and wisdom schools.

 

[Mendalla]

I don't mean Saganism as an organized religion, I'd never go for that. I mean Saganism as an unorganized (not disorganized) religion. More like a movement. Science-based spirituality, but also drawing from all other spiritual traditions and wisdom schools.

I'd say it would be more of an informal school of spiritual humanist philosophy than a religion but that's really picking nits.

 

[Waterfall]

Is that the god we need though, or just the one we want?

Especially like this.

 

[Kimmio Laughterlove]

If God is life itself (no matter what name it is given by people), and no matter what stories or theories are used to describe it, then we do need God.