A Few Short Notes on the Matter of Debunking Conceptualizations of God

11/4/2024

Regarding yesterday’s post, I must clarify a few things concerning my scribblings about metaphysics and the nature of God and my discussions with Kristor of the Orthosphere.

I am not motivated to debunk any conceptualization of God, including the God of classical theism. I merely wish to share my views on how I understand God. Those views are, inevitably, often at odds with most classical/traditional/conventional conceptualizations. That does not imply that I regard such conceptualizations with scorn; I simply don’t agree with them.

I am not all that interested in the God of philosophy/theology. Nor do I regard philosophy/theology as the ultimate path to God. I am more inclined to an intuitive approach because I firmly believe in the development of human consciousness and the primacy of freedom.

I am not out to “prove” anything or convince anyone of anything when it comes to metaphysics. My assumptions are my own, and I believe that all people must take full personal responsibility for their assumptions without needing to prove the superiority of said assumptions or dismantle the apparent inferiority of other assumptions. Living honestly by one’s assumptions as best as one can is enough of a challenge...and reward.

3 Comments

bruce g charlton

11/4/2024 15:49:04

@Frank - Maybe, though, as a Christian; it is right and necessary to "debunk" conceptualizations of God that make it difficult (perhaps impossible) to describe coherently the work of Jesus, and the nature of what he offers us?

This strikes me as a Big Problem. At least, the usual answers I have heard to what Jesus did, what he was for, why we might follow him etc are very unsatisfactory.

Sometimes they are ultimately double-negative in form, and focused on original sin - when OS is far from intuitively obvious, or coherent - and there are other ways of escaping it than Jesus (e.g. the oblivion of "Nirvana"-like states of ego-destruction and assimilation to the divine.

Sometimes they are focused on Jesus as a King/ Ruler - when most of us find Kings/ Rulers not to be obviously Good or loving persons.

Usually, when it comes down to practicalities, Jesus's cosmic gift turns-out to be limited to those who are obedient to specific requirements of a specific church - when these churches seem clearly to be riddled with corruption and internally fragmented and labile.

Or there are weird and incomprehensible Trinitarian requirements to affirm Jesus's nature.

Exacerbated by an insistence that Jesus's work was not really located and accomplished in human history, but a matter "sub specie aeternitatis" - meaning it always was, is, and shall be... That it has "already happened"...

In other words; there are many, many ways in which definitions and descriptions of God interfere-with and contradict simple and clear understandings of who Jesus was, what he did, and our role in the scheme.

Francis Berger

11/4/2024 19:59:27

@ Bruce - All of that is vital, of course, but as you often say, motivation is key.

The most important level of debunking is the personal level, where people figure these matters out largely for themselves. What I mean is, the debunking that occurs within each person privately as an individual. Things are a bit trickier at the public discourse level.

Christians tend to view or have been conditioned to regard debunkers as arrogant threats, cranks, lost souls, kooks, etc., particularly if debunking" is sensed as the primary motivation behind the communication.

I feel the only way forward is to share ideas/insights/knowledge from the perspective of relationship and love and leave any potential debunking or deeper thinking that may occur after that to individual agency and God.

Sharing unorthodox views about God should aim to be non-threatenting, in the sense that it should rise above being knee-jerk objectionable. Such views must not come off as impositions or demands on individuals but as available/accessible options individuals can freely engage with should they become motivated to do so.

The ideas will reach the people who "need" them most.

I'm not suggesting that I am doing this successfully or consistently, but I would like to.

That's how I see things now.

11/7/2024 15:13:09

@ Bruce - On second thought, you are completely right concerning the conceptualizations of God that make it difficult (maybe impossible) to coherently describe the work of Jesus, and the nature of what he offers.

That consideration comes first. Everything else is secondary.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

A Few Short Notes on the Matter of Debunking Conceptualizations of God

Leave a Reply.

Archives

​A Few Short Notes on the Matter of Debunking Conceptualizations of God

Leave a Reply.

Archives

A Few Short Notes on the Matter of Debunking Conceptualizations of God