Elen1107

Ok, here's one for ya; Scientist are currently talking about something called dark matter and dark energy. I myself might call this invisible matter and invisible energy, cause I don't like the word 'dark', but basically I think that we could be meaning and talking about, about the same thing. Well, 90-something percent of all energy and matter in the universe seems to be this dark/invisible matter and energy, the larger part of this being energy, (can't remember how much, but the scientists and physicists have gotten this down to pretty precise numbers). If 90-something, (it might be like 98% or something like that) of all energy and matter, is something that can only be proven by the math, (I'm thinking that this is the math of quantum physics, which I myself can't do, at least not right yet), is dark or invisible, and this matter and energy is "required", by the math, in ordered for the universe to work, and it can only be proven by the math, and not by any other scientific method. Could this possibly be saying something about God? I don't know Just a thought. Also, I think that they are saying that 90-something of everything that is inside of us, that is our bodies, is some kind of invisible energy and matter also. If we reduced all the physical and tactile material in our bodies to nothing but just that, it would be about the size of a sugar cube or something similar. Google these things, cause I'm really not sure about the numbers Added edit > Also what they say about this stuff, is that it holds the universe together and that it can create what we call matter, that is visible or detectable matter.

Seems that it can be like a more regular way of being or something too. Like in touch with Christ's Spirit, from moment to moment or through the day(s) so to speak.

There is a difference in the way we think of God and the way we think of unicorns. A unicorn is based on a combination of things that we know and see in the physical world, a horse, and the horn of a dear and a whale. God is not. If God is not physical and tactile in the way we understand these things, can the "existence" of God be proved in the way that we generally and perhaps scientifically prove things? Thanks for reading

I know what you are saying and I've had these experiences that I didn't create. They just happened and I am glad and thankful for them. I know that somewhere in the New Testament it says one can't bombard or force their way into heaven or God or JC. But I kind of feel sometimes like I kind of have done this. I finally got fed up, and felt I wanted to feel JC's presence and love all the time, or more of the time than I was experiencing it. So I kicked out (of myself) all other kinds of thinking and feeling, and kind of was like, "let me 'in' or I and things are going to get really difficult". I'm thinking that maybe what has really happened is that I was able to be more "tuned in" to Christ and his Spirit. I also feel that I'm at least to a degree able to maintain this being 'tuned in", even for days in a row. Where perhaps I am not "creating" or "recreating" these experinces, I am doing something that makes them happen more often and makes them more part of my life. They are not the blissful, all encompassing experiences that one sometimes has regarding these things. But there is a real element of bliss and all-emcomass-ment about it, as well as a spiritual happyness, that may not be all that intense, it still is a real joy and happyness. Thanks for reading this, again (bold highlighting by me). I think I kinda have had this kind of experience too. Thanks for sharing, for somethings, it's good to know that one is not the only one. Thanks

I don't know. Can you give these experiences of yours at least some creadence, like maybe they were real and really meant something? Maybe there was something "Higher" that was trying to communicate to you and reach you? I think that sometimes God or JC tries to communicate to us in images and symbols that we understand. Perhaps for you a "white Jesus with blonde hair" was one you would recognize and could relate to. Myself when I've had little inner "visions" of Jesus, he seems to have brown hair and a beard, and is wearing white robes. It's the typical image of Christ that I am most familiar with and something I would recognize as being a picture or image of Christ. As for hell, I'm kind of just not going there lately. There's a quote from the NT Pauline Epistles that says, "Don't ask who will go up or who will go down, but know that the word of God is in your mind and on your lips". I don't think that this quote quite covers it all, but it does kind of supports or reinforces my notion of 'not going there', and that's not really what the whole thing is about. Sorry, but I'd just rather not focus on "hell", and would much rather focus on the positive side of things, like heaven, God and JC and their energy and the HS, (Holy Spirit). I also seem to do much better spiritually and I guess I could say psychologically when I do this. It's also not my progitive. I don't feel like I have any say so about whether or not hell exists or who might go there. That's not "my department" one might say, and if hell exists, it's the "department" of the real higher-ups like JC or God or maybe even St. Peter. Or if hell exists then maybe it's the "devil's" department and I'd rather not be in league with him/it. (sorry to be rambling on here a bit). Where you say, "Other times I would swear that Jesus was with me personally, unable to be seen but an invisible consciousness that was a definite presence, as I experienced anyhow." Could you believe that there could be any reality or credence to this what so ever, even if the literal context in which you understood Jesus at the time, turns out not to be 100% true, or true to you? . . . I've had this kind of experience too, and more and more often as time goes on. I can actually say that I've had this type of experience for days in a row, but this is another set of stories or something(s). I myself probably couldn't handle dreams and visions like those. Perhaps you are internally stronger and have more internal fortitude regarding this kind of thing, than I have. Neale Donald Walsch, has said that God communicates with us primarily through our imagination. While I don't agree with or understand everything that NDW says or is about, this idea of his really has stuck with me over time. I'm not trying to convert you or tell you what to think, (for one reason, I tend to be particularly bad at this sort of thing). I also think that people need to come to these things on their own personal path, and if it's not internally substantial or real to them, and perhaps them alone, then it doesn't carry that much weight or water anyways. Thanks for reading all this

I definitely agree. This time the bold is added by me. Thing is I would just love there to be something, anything, or someone, that I could just go along with all the time, or at least most of the time, and then I wouldn't have to think so much. Some book, some person, even some poet or musician. But it's not to be. Of course there's JC, but with just a spiritual connection to him, I don't know if that's giving me the same kind of thing. (< I definitely don't know how to word that). Speaking of thinking too much, there's been a number of things that you and other people have written about today that I would have just loved to have commented on. But the fact is, I'm just too tired. Maybe I'll find those posts again tomorrow. I think I'm almost out of "allowed" comments anyways. Laters 🙂

For myself, your question, "what this is all about" is also tied in with the need to believe in something. The questions that you state that Andrew Greeley lists: who are we, why are we, how are we, what does it mean and what are we to do, and how are we to live? These are pretty big and vast questions. The question of, how did we come to be is one big one. I myself believe in a kind of evolution into Christ, or the Christ Spirit, perhaps with a bit of reincarnation mixed in. (I'm not saying this to get you or anyone to agree with me, I'm just stating that's where I'm at). Thing is, we really don't know everything about evolution, and new data and info is coming in all the time. One needs to accept that we may never know everything about this, at least not in our lifetimes, and be happy with what we do know. Each question that Greely lists could encompass an entire post topic thread and we still wouldn't be able to cover everything. I'm sometimes happy to realize that there are somethings that maybe we aren't meant to know or find out. At the same time we will keep trying and searching all the same, which is probably a good thing in it's own way too. Thanks for reading, again

I sometimes wonder if people NEED to believe in something, anything, so bad that they will grab at anything just for the comfort of believing in something. It may be the only belief system that's available to them where they live, or the only one that they are allowed to have. But they really NEED to believe in something. This might be what compels people to become fanatics or become things like suicide bombers. I once felt a strong need to believe in something, but I wasn't willing to go along with something I didn't really believe in just to fulfill this need. What happened is that I ended up embarking on a long search, and eventually ended up where I am now. Where I do believe in something that I really do believe in and in things that I really do believe are true.

I'm thinking that there might be two or more senses of the word atheist as well as a number of nuances in-between. Perhaps the thing is to ask a person what being an atheist means to them, and how do they understand it. I agree that we can't say that the word atheist means someone who rides a bicycle, that would be a bicyclist. Or someone who does carpentry, that would be what we would call a carpenter. But that's not what we are dealing with here. The debate between what's an atheist and what's an agnostic and where they overlap has been going on for a long time. I'm thinking that we should ask them how they mean it and how they see the word, within certain limits of course.

I don't always agree with him either. But he's given me enough ideas and insights that I can really appreciate him. He's one of my more favored writers from inside the Christian faith, so much so that it makes me feel bad when I do disagree. But I don't think he would want us to be going blindly along with him anyways.

Just ran into this video before I logged on. It's self-criticism from an Imam inside Islam. I myself can do without beheadings and bombings and things like that. I myself would also say that these people aren't really in touch with God, even though they think they are. They have a book that says this is what God says so they think that God really thinks and says these things. I'm thinking that a personal understanding of God could be better, and asking oneself whether 'I' think God thinks and says these things might give one a better understanding.

I agree with you. We approach God in different ways. Intellectualism, spiritualism, intuition, even through our emotions and feelings. These are all good and valid and also interconnected. I'm really glad and happy that you have found some authors and books that have really spoken to you and inspired you. For myself this hasn't really been the case. Sometimes I feel I learn more about God by watching documentaries on evolution or the cosmos or quantum physics. I don't see these things as separate from God or faith at all. Sometimes I see little pieces of God in these things or that God is really working through all of them .

I've googled him, Thank You

I myself don't think there is that much of a problem when someone criticizes one part or another of a religion. It helps if this is constructive criticism instead of just saying it's all dumb or is really just picking on others because they think differently or because the picker needs someone to pick on because they themselves are afraid of getting picked on. Constructive criticism often comes from those people who really care, either about society at large and or for individuals who are involved in ideas that could hurt them psychologically. Hell seems to be one of these ideas. I think that it's also very positive when one, or people, can criticize their own tradition or belief system from within. This is caused self-criticism. I think this can be a very good and powerful thing. If folks would like to see some very powerful self-criticism from within the Christian faith, from someone who is a life long Christian, and even an ordained bishop, this might be a good video. It's a presentation given by John Shelby Spong who I understand is also a central and celebrated figure within Progressive Christianity. It was given just before the release of his book, 'Sins of the Scriptures'.

I think it's perfectly fine for atheists and agnostics to define what these things mean for and to themselves. As long as people are not like calling a cat a river or a house a chicken, and totally getting away from any common understanding of what certain words mean, people should be able to define what they mean and what the nuances of certain words are and mean to them. I know when I've told people I'm a Christian, they often immediately think that that means I think this, this and this. I'm like, no, I don't think this, this and this. It sometimes feels like they haven't even heard of denominations or don't have any idea that different Christians think differently. Still I get where they are coming from, and I guess I was once kind of that way myself.

I've saved links to both of them. The other challenge will be finding the time. That's a good idea: "Just take a single thought and let it roll around in your head all day." Thanks

I've been over this in my own thinking a number of times. I don't know quite what to say or how to explain where I'm at with this question. I'm thinking I'll put it on hold for now, and possibly get back to it later. I know what I've been thinking and feeling on the subject, but articulating it to someone else is another thing all together. I myself have gone and "kicked the tires and driven the car around the block" so to speak, with regards to God and JC. They say that one is not supposed to do this, but, well, this is me you're/they're talking to and well, I went ahead and did it anyways. I did end up in a better place than I was before, with regards to my faith and my understanding of JC and God. I did this very early on, when I wasn't yet much of a believer. I myself would have probably said that I wasn't one at all at the time. I'm not saying that this is the right thing to do, or that it would work for everyone. It also seems like a kind of disrespectful thing to do with regards to these two. Thing is, I ended up with a good piece more respect for them after I did it. It was actually like JC understood me and what and why I was doing this, (though I don't expect you or anyone to believe me on this one either). Ok, how about your favorite food or piece of music or something?

Apologies for not getting back to you for this reply of yours to my question(s). I'm still figuring out how to navigate this site, and I've been bumped off a few times because I'm only allowed so many comments in a certain time period. It makes it hard to catch up or figure out what comments I've missed or have to catch up on. I'm thinking that this is great,... You've met Bart Ehrman I'm not part of his blog yet, but I've been thinking about it. My library consortium has his New Testament lecture series on audiobook. It's fantastic! I've listened to it like 7 or 10 times. One used to be able to get it free on YouTube, but they took it down for copywrite reasons. It's a shame. This series would be great information for so many people who would not be able to see or hear it otherwise. I'd love there to be a webpage or group that was called 'Christians for Bart Ehrman' or something like that. Did you get his autograph? or am I being too corny and shouldn't ask?

I have a neighbor who said she had the experience of the Holy Spirit flowing through her and flooding through her once. There are saints and pieces of art about the saints that describe that they have experienced God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit. I've read and seen videos of people who say they have had experiences like this. Is this what Carl Jung is saying,.. I don't know

I know what you are saying here, but there is a difference. Putting it into words is the hard part. This is perhaps what Carl Jung means when he says he knows. Somethings are as or more "real" or true that anything else one has experienced. Perhaps in time I can put it into words. All I can really say to a person right now is that one experiences it, when one is in touch with God or experiencing God, one knows it. There is no doubt. It's not some kind of corny, trumped up feeling that one gets about God or something like that. This is something else. Describing it however evades me right now, . . . not too sure if it can be done in words. Can one describe how lemonade tastes in words? . . . Or does a person just have to taste it? Likewise can one describe the experience of God in words? . . . One rather one has to be on a sincere search for the truth, no matter what one has to win, lose or draw even on. This is at least how some people have come to the 'experience of God.' For myself, I'd say that the experience of God and the experience of what we call red are two rather different things.

I'm thinking that for myself I'd say, I believe in God because I experience God. I don't know if I myself would say that I "know" there is a God. For me, knowing is something that I experience through the 5 senses. Like I know that I'm looking at my computer screen right now because I can 'see' it, and seeing is one of the 5 senses. I don't experience God through any of my 5 senses. This happens on a deeper and perhaps one could say, more enlightening level. . . . Something else is happening here. . . at least for myself. I do like Carl Jung however. Thanks for reading

Apologies for my combining your past two quotes to me as one. This forum only allows me so many comments in a certain measure of timing so I'm trying to conserve and consolidate as many as possible. From what I understand on the subject, your last sentence is true, "The last bit is currently bit of a mystery." I have consulted dictionaries a number of times, as well as other people's definitions. I still don't know exactly what the terms atheist or agnostic actually mean. I'm thinking that it's perhaps best to let each person define what it means to them and how these words might pertain to them. I've had a bunch of people jump all over me, saying that if I'm a Christian, then I have to believe that every word in the bible is true and that it is all the "word of God". I've told them that I don't have to,... because I live in a free country. I've looked at your link. I'm thinking that I might have to read it twice, when I have the time. Definitions are tricky, some definitions more than others. One always needs to consider who they are talking to and what the word means to them.

I think at this point, I'd call myself just a Christian. (upper or lower case 'c' doesn't matter too much,... & sometimes I actually like the "just a" tacked on the front there. It sometimes helps in communicating when people get talking about things like denominations or right wing, left wing,... and things like that.) Do I consider myself part of the group called "Progressive Christianity" yet? I don't know. I've been "turned on" to this group and this website and forum by a favored author and writer of mine, John Shelby Spong. . . I'm thinking that if he is a part of this organization, and calls himself a "Progressive Christian", then so can I,.. because enough of our ideas overlap and I agree with him well often enough, I can't see why this wouldn't also pertain to myself. Thanks for reading

Actually your kitchen chair is anything but red. It is absorbing more colored light waves of every other color in the spectrum, and reflecting more of the red light waves. It looks red to you, because that is what it is reflecting and not absorbing, and that is what the human eye sees as what we call "red".

Where I can see what you are saying in terms of the most common usage of the word "atheist",... Do atheists get to define what atheism means to them personally, similar to the way that Christians, or at least Progressive Christians get to define what this means to us/them?