CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
That is similar to how I would articulate it. I favor something like:
Worship=Excessive trust
or
worship = too narrow of a focus of attention.
or
worship = Placing a person,interpersonal organization, document or concept on way too high of a pedestal
or
worship= Uncritical or unquestioning respect for an authority
Has this really happened? Have I come to terms with someone on the meaning of worship?
Of the concept words I think the world is ready to reject. Worship is at the top of my list.
While I am keen to the "no one's right" and "exploring possibilities" angle I would like to see if we can find an area of genuine disagreement. (not just agreement disguised by semantic issues)
I do consider myself to be extremely religious, but no more or less than every other human being. The primary reason of why I am religious is derived from the conclusion: I am predisposed to worship. However, I am not predisposed to worship just any or every form that can be worshipped. Nor am I inclined to persuade others that they should believe as do I. But, I am quite annoyed by those who deny they are disciples of a religion that has no worship. Or to state it in other words, I care not what a man worships per his religion, I am only annoyed by his denial of the same.
Now, here is the kicker. I consider myself to be of a similar disposition as that of Jesus Christ, but I call not myself a Christian as a consequence of what Christianity is now. In fact I will even go so far to assert that Christendom in its current and past form going back at least 500 hundred years is exactly, deed by deed and word by word, that which Jesus Christ bared witness against. And as a consequence of such, I loathe the notion of associating myself with everything that Christianity posits as Christian. For I tell you now that according to the predominant Christian doctrines I am anti-Christ.
Side note: Christians fear people like myself more than they fear atheists, deists or theists.
Pardon my digression in regards to your questions. I simply thought you might enjoy knowing that I am not anti-atheist, but I certainly am anti-Christian doctrine.
Albeit, I do have a question, if you care to answer, I would like for you to consider.
Is it possible for human beings to not worship a god? My answer is no. But, I want to consider your reasoning regardless of your answer.
I think we all are. I associate it with the sort of trust we grow out of as we mature.
However, I am not predisposed to worship just any or every form that can be worshipped.
It's my understanding that worship connotes a focusing of attention, to the exclusion of other directions that may merit deep respect.
I am quite annoyed by those who deny they are disciples of a religion that has no worship.
are you talking about atheists in general here?
I call not myself a Christian as a consequence of what Christianity is now.
That seems akin to saying you don't call yourself human because of what humanity has become.These responses are just what comes to mind after reading your comments.
Christendom in its current and past form going back at least 500 hundred years is exactly, deed by deed and word by word, that which Jesus Christ bared witness against.
Tolstoy made similar observations, and I was happy to find out I wasn't alone in my thinking. Just as I am pleased to meet you.
And as a consequence of such, I loathe the notion of associating myself with everything that Christianity posits as Christian.
It is that sentiment that was on my mind when I picked my nickname. Not just regarding Christianity, but also atheism.
If I tell someone that I am Christian, they are very very likely to get the wrong idea, the same goes for the label "atheist."
Is it possible for human beings to not worship
I think it is possible though very difficult considering our religiously conditioned predisposition. It is a constant struggle.
I will say that the more accustomed we become to critical thinking the easier it becomes to avoid falling into worship.
(I knew if I bared witness of myself sufficiently, we could find some key issues to debate.)
I am predisposed to worship.
I think we all are. I associate it with the sort of trust we grow out of as we mature.
But, what if on the contrary it is something that we only grow into as we intellectually mature, instead of growing out of? And instead of associating it with trust we associate it with higher intelligence of an understanding of life. Similarly to how we might describe our pursuit of superlative principles.
AWorship: The pursuit of superlative principles to thereby improve understanding and intelligence (paraphrased)
and
BWorship: exclusive honor with extreme submission
My thoughts are that practicing A is wise and falling into practice B is foolhardy. I notice a difference between the pursuit of truth, and having truth "revealed" to you as Jstantall and so many others understandably prefer.
In the tradition of Jesus I will explain through parable why I think B is detrimental to A at your request...............sorta hoping you won't lol
Allow me to freely speak. If I assert something that appears to be condescending please know beforehand I have no intention whatsoever of insulting you.
The effort that is required on my behalf to reconcile our disagreement concerning worship is laborious but do-able. It may consequently require a few posts to accomplish this endeavor, yet I will attempt all the same to submit one argument.
Firstly, the joy that I associate with my labors in understanding is from 99% perspiration and 1% inspiration. My comprehension of things is a result of my labors to learn and understand, it is not from the pontifications of others. I preferred/r to reason for myself and cope with only my fallacious abstractions instead of building additional fallacies derived from the fallacies of others. Consequently, I had to unlearn what it was that I thought I knew about the text of the Bible and learn from anew the text of the Bible. If a man is going to deny the applicability or justification of the Bible he must first know his subject, true? Or else the man whom bases his assessments of the bible upon the assessments of others is merely a believer in the words of another man. Well, unlike most people, I vigorously study subjects through my intellect without the impediments of another mans ignorance. Now, having said all of that, I said it in order to say this: I think you pursue your subjects equally as well as I have. And to state it un-ambiguously I have determined that our paths do not exactly meet at the moment, but they almost certainly will converge in the future. And because of my mind on this as it relates to our disagreement about worship, I will present to you what I hold to be factual (concerning me and worship) and leave you with the burden of inference about the subject of worship.
No man can rightfully claim that he is the author of the Ten Commandments. No government can rightfully claim it is the author of the Ten. Men can argue all the day long (and they have and do) that the Ten is purely a law of morals which man holds both the title and deed to. But, if they are certain that man is the author of the Ten then why is it that the Ten forbids this assertion? Let’s consider the words of the covenant between Yahweh and his people to illustrate this inconsistency.
The text (KJV) of the Ten is prefaced by the following verse:
Exodus 20:2 “I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me. (Commandment 1)
There are a few key inferences which one can validly infer.
#1. The Lord is declaring himself as the God of the Israelites.(Most Christians declare that the Lord is their God, but you will be hard pressed to find a person who asserts that God has placed Himself above him. Or think of it this way: Christians place God above themselves while ignoring the fact that God has not declared himself to be their God. Or again expressed in these words: God covenants with man, man does not covenant with God.)
#2. God forbids the Israelites from appointing another god to rule over them. (Every election cycle Christians elect men to rule the country. This very act alone immediately indicates to me that Christians transgress the words of the Covenant. Jews too!) Oops, I forgot, the very fact that Christians elect law-makers to rule over you and I indicate to me that Christians want us to be subject to their form of governance, which coincidently is god-like. (Remember, the commandment is not denying that men can submit to another god. The commandment is forbidding the Israelites to submit to another god as a part of their submission to The Lord of the Holy Covenant.
Now, before I say more on these two commandments and the remaining commandments, I want to consider your feedback.
(BTW, By the time I am through with this exegesis of the Ten you will be shocked at how far away from God Christianity has been since the time of at least Constantine, not to mention Judaism since the time of Moses as well.)
One last thing, I am not attempting to persuade you that you are wrong. I am attempting to present the facts which have been obfuscated by millennia of lies and treachery perpetuated by they who call themselves Christian or Jew.
We’ll get to the subject of worship in due time through this inquiry.
I truly truly truly appreciate your efforts to be respectful and not condescending. If I come across as condescending please note it is a habit I hope to overcome.
The effort that is required on my behalf to reconcile our disagreement concerning worship is laborious but do-able.
You need not go to the trouble. It is the hidden commonality side of the debate that wins as far as I can tell. So we can either collaborate or debate but I don't know what to challenge right now as far as how I think you think. I believe we considered one another's perspective in earnest.
I would rather move on.
here, do you agree with this?: "Most who admire virtue follow not it's lore." ~Milton
However, Milton's observation is accurate as it evidenced that problem of his day. We, 300+ years later , are now observing that most people follow the lore of a perverted meaning of virtue.
If Milton was alive today, I think he would concede our proposition: Most who admire virtue and follow the lore thereof have perverted virtue itself.
The only difference between then and now is the realization that men have perverted the meaning of virtue. Men still follow as they have always followed, but they are now using virtuous terms to hide their degeneracy.
In principle, the debates between atheism, deism and theism are nothing more than squabbles about what all men should worship.
I disagree, this is an ontological question about the imminence and transcendence of God. Atheist say He is neither, He is non-existent. Deism says He is transcendent but not imminent. Christian theism asserts that He is both imminent and transcendent.
I will surmise that all three camps worship objects that bare the sole characteristics of a god.
I will agree that in the sense that since man is created in the image of God he bears in some degree the characteristics of God, one of those characteristics is being a rational being. Therefore since Atheism exalts the human mind and it's ability to think and reason it therefore worships a characteristic of God. Inadvertently affirming what it denies, the existence of God. Because an effect needs a sufficient cause to explain it.
I affirmed by implication the principle of the debate; God exists.
The denial of God's existence is impossible and illogical.
God is a concept, anthropomorphically speaking.
How can the existence of God be propositionally denied if the subject does not exist? Impossible!
Example: How can any person logically assert that God does not exist when in fact the very act of denial implies existence?
Consider the following example, but instead of God the subject is justice.
Justice exists.
Justice does not exist.
If justice does not exist describe to me what it is that does not exist. If you can describe to me what does not exist then logically it must therefore exist because you have just described it!
(I’m tired. We’ll discuss this matter in greater detail tomorrow.)
I take my atheism literally and want to point out that I would prefer a different title to this debate. For personal religious reasons, I prefer not to debate under those terms.
The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Our discussion shall demonstrate the validity of your question. As well as the validation of our differing but common (and even mutual) intellectual foundations.
Worship is: Excessive trust, too narrow of a focus of attention, Placing a person,interpersonal organization, document or concept on way too high of a pedestal and Uncritical or unquestioning respect for an authority
way too high of a pedestal is a subjective assessment that I will set aside. To the other claims, which all seem to be subjective, so I'll remove the subjective element and just list the verbs.
You use the verbs; trust, focus and respect.
So what I'd like to know is what is so unreasonable about trusting, focusing on and respecting a being who holds your very breath in His hands?
It would seem to be the height of folly not to trust, focus on and respect such a being. Especially knowing that He spoke the cosmos into existence and all He has to do is say a word and your dead. The fear of the LORD is truly the beginning of wisdom and the fool has said in His heart there is no God.
So here is my definition of worship; to ascribe worth or value to something or someone. The trouble comes when we value someone or something more than the most valuable thing in the universe, God. When we do that we insult the dignity and honor of Him by treating Him less than He is. Anyone one would be angered if they were treated that way. Is that not what we mean when we cry "injustice" We mean someone has not been treated the way they should be. What makes theft wrong? It's says I value things more than people. And we instinctively know that people are more valuable. And that's what makes idolatry so heinous, we say that the object of adoration is more valuable than God himself.
But if they have been nothing but profoundly gracious and kind to you also, why wouldn't you.
Why do parents love their kids so much? because they are their kids, they brought them into this world. And every parent wants their kids to be happy. Now if we feel this way towards our kids can you imagine how the one who created you must love you and want nothing but your happiness.
The one who gave you life loves you immensely. so much so that He gave all he had and spared no expense to give you what would bring you the greatest joy, Himself. How could you not fall down in total trust, like a child, before such a kind a loving person. He has been nothing but kind to you and filled your life with unspeakable joys.
It would be counter-intuitive not to thank someone who has done so much for you. Is it not an insult when the one you love is indifferent towards you. How much more if your spouse had multiple affairs with lovers who beat and mistreated her. How would you feel if she scorned your love, while praising their abuse? You would be deeply hurt and so is God. How can you not trust Him when He has shown Himself to be utterly trustworthy towards you?
That is why I can't join you in your distrust of God, He has been nothing but good to me, at minimum He has given me life. And that is a staggering gift. My heart is drawn out in love towards Him. I love Him because He first loved me.
You may disdain worship and religious affections but they are the reflex of my soul towards my creator.
Hope you both don't mind if I drop in. I can't figure out your objection to worship. You both seem to be hostile to the concept and I can't figure out why.
Worship to me seems to be a natural reflex of the human spirit to something that inspires awe. For example; As a kid I was into stunt riding bicycles, I was just a punk kid riding around. But some were professionals and man could they do some really cool stunts. When I watched them, I was in awe. I wanted to be just like them; you might say I worshiped them. In fact I did. Worship to me seems like something we do all the time to all sorts of things. People worship actors, musicians, sports figures, money, fame, sex, and power: just to list a few. So that's why I can't figure out the objection. It seems to be just a natural reflex of the human spirit.
So therefore it would only seem reasonable to have this response to the one who spoke everything into existence by the word of His mouth; that is awe inspiring just to think about. Our just think what you would have to know about chemistry to make a human being and then think what it takes to take that concept and write into a DNA code. And that's just small things. What does it take to set the heavens into motion and set up everything just right so that life is possible on earth. And make it in such a way that a man can stand on the surface of earth and see the heavens. That is mind blowing and all I can think of to say is; whoa! that's awesome.
If you can look at the inner workings of a cell, see the world around you and gaze into the heavens and not fall down in worship to the one who made it all; something is amiss. And that is exactly what you'd expect to find if the Bible is true.
Now to the title of your conversation. God by definition is transcendent. Therefore if we are to know anything about God it will because He chooses to reveal Himself to us. There is no way we can come to know Him by our efforts. So the question becomes; has He spoken? Seeing that He can write the blueprints for very complex creatures, like humans, in DNA: I doubt He would have a hard time communicating something simple to us.
So to answer the question (and rephrase it) What we know about God only comes through His general revelation and special revelation. Apart from that, we are in the dark and without hope of every knowing. But praise be to God who has given us minds so that we may know Him by understanding His revelation to us. And it would seem that it was designed in such a way that we might have something in common so that there might be some point of contact and some means of communication. Hence why I think humans worship and are the only creatures who do.
So I would say were are designed to worship. And I would also say that there is a proper and improper object of worship. Our creator would be the proper and creation would be the improper. That is something I think we can know by the simple use of reason.
Final thought; I believe in God for the same reason I believe in the mailman. I may never see the mailman but by the sheer fact that there is mail in my mailbox I know there must be a mailman. Likewise; when I walk out my front door and see something instead of nothing I know there must be a cause sufficient to explain the effect. And that cause must be an uncaused cause with the power of being in and of itself; otherwise there would be nothing. And please don't tell me the cosmos have always existed like Carl Sagan did. Because the cosmos would have burned themselves out a long time ago the way they are set up. Or to put it another way; everything would have gone cold and black a long time ago.
To check your worship function check out the following DVD's;
Worship to me seems to be a natural reflex of the human spirit to something that inspires awe.
I can agree with that.
And I would also say that there is a proper and improper object of worship.
I would say there are characteristics of worship that can be beneficial if practiced in moderation. There is nothing wrong with devotion, admiration and respect unless they are taken to an extreme, then you get worship. I think we all fail at times to give credit where it's due, and this is due largely to excessive trust which to me means the same thing as worship.
"Wisdom comes when you can admire without worshiping and criticize without condemning." ~atypican
So am I completely condemning all aspects of worship? no.
You are welcome to contribute to this conversation but I will address only the comments that are provocative to me.
According to the text of the Bible, has God commanded us to worship him or is it that he commanded us to obey His voice?
Answer: We are commanded to obey his voice, and if we obey his voice then our obedience is accounted for worship. Our obedience is the form of worship our Creator seeks. We are not commanded to worship the sun, moon, stars, or anything that is in heaven above or in earth below. We are simply commanded to obey the words of His voice, and in doing so we worship Him.
Command and control relationships are not appealing to me at all. If I support what someone is up to I naturally want to be involved,. Not as a subject but as a dignified ally.
The worship oriented contents of the Bible are among my least favorite portions. The portions that teach about how we ought to hate this world, and those that would have us considering classes of people as enemies are pretty bad too.
Odd thing that even reprehensible texts can teach important lessons.
I do find alot worth honor and respect in and around the ten commandments area of the Bible. But since I am not a Bible worshiper (I don't think it is beyond reproach) I am comfortable criticizing portions that never made the cut for my personal collection of sacred texts.
How is it that someone who believes both agreeable and disagreeable portions can avoid believing themself? Whether we decide to accept some or we decide to accept all it is still we who are doing the deciding, therefore trusting ourself fundamentally in both cases.
I find it odd that God even has to command us to do something, like love each other. It should be the reflex of our heart to love God and love our fellow man. God shouldn't have to command us, we should just do it. But why don't we? Why the commandments at all. There is a deeper purpose of the commandments than just telling us what to do. Think of them more like a mirror that shows us who we really are, not just who we think we are. They exist because we are given to self-deception and self justification. Ask yourself why we react so negatively towards them. When we read them we ought to say, Hmm what's the big deal, Don't lie, cheat and steal. I do that all the time. Instead we recoil from them, why? They expose us and show us our true condition, lawbreakers. And that brings quilt and shame. Something we try and hide rather than find forgiveness for.
Galatians 3:24
Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
People worship actors, musicians, sports figures, money, fame, sex, and power: just to list a few. So that's why I can't figure out the objection.
hmm
And that cause must be an uncaused cause with the power of being in and of itself; otherwise there would be nothing.
The universe as we experience it must have a cause (or countless interrelated causes as I see it) yet there is at least some underlying condition of existence itself that always was. But if we are talking about that uncaused cause being a being that cares about the human condition, this is where my doubt is so strong that in order to be honest I must say I don't believe it. It is easy for me to see why someone would want to believe it, and I recognize the utter futility of arguing against that sort of belief, that's why my focus is rather on worship and why I think it should be outgrown.
I don't believe as do you don't believe. What l will demonstrate is that the Knowledge of God is not a belief. Nor should it be believed as a belief, but it should be understood as knowing with reasoned certainty.
Example: We need not believe anything, we only have need to know and understand.
(The more you expose yourself the more I am convinced we travel the same path.)
And you call yourself an atheist? ;) Oh, you are an atheist alright, at least in the minds of they who don't recognize you as a kindred spirit!
I am commenting. My previous post is awaiting your reply.
What l will demonstrate is that the Knowledge of God is not a belief. Nor should it be believed as a belief, but it should be understood as knowing with reasoned certainty.
if you want to, I will read it, I might not comment unless I feel I have a point to make about it.
For me, to claim a belief as opposed to knowledge is an expression of humility. We doubt our knowledge because facts have been proven otherwise time and again. A healthy belief could be called knowledge that still considers itself as having room for improvement, knowledge that doesn't worship itself.
if we are talking about that uncaused cause being a being that cares about the human condition, this is where my doubt is so strong that in order to be honest I must say I don't believe it.
If you and I are beings that care about the human condition, were does that come from? If we are moral agents who are capable of love, were does that come from? Again I ask what is the cause sufficient to explain the effect? If we posses these qualities it's hard to conceive that our creator would be less than we are, ontologically speaking. See for me I have reasons for what I believe, it's not just wishful thinking.
If we are made to worship, and I'm convinced by the evidence we are, I doubt we will ever out grow it. It's like thirst, it tells us we have a need that needs to be met. Our trouble, with worship, is that we try to satisfy the thirst with things that don't satisfy and therefore we are always thirsty. Asking a human not to worship is like asking them not to eat, you'll starve their soul.
Our trouble as humans is that we are too easily satisfied. We'll gladly eat the trash that is thrown out to the dogs rather than sit at the Kings table and enjoy a good meal. We don't know the difference between what God created for trash and what He made for food. Our souls hunger and thirst, but what do we feed on? trash. So I see worship as the hunger and thirst of the soul.
Consider for a moment why Christ referred to Himself as bread and wine. When the nation of Israel wandered in the wilderness for forty years, what was being symbolized by the manna that came down from heaven and sustained them until they came into the promise land? When Christ was tempted to turn stones into bread and eat, why did He respond saying "Man doesn't live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds from the mouth of God" All these things tell us we have a greater need than the physical and that need is spiritual in nature. That need can only be meet by the bread that comes from heaven and Christ is that bread. Why else are the two elements of The Lord's supper bread and wine. What is being symbolized?
John 6:51
I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.”
Thou hast created us for Thyself, and our heart is not quiet until it rests in Thee.
If you and I are beings that care about the human condition, were does that come from?
Call me crazy but it comes from us being human? just maybe!
See for me I have reasons for what I believe, it's not just wishful thinking.
Yeah it's not just wishful thinking, you also read your bible over and over a bunch of times. And read books by folks who also read their bibles over and over a bunch of times. lol
It's like thirst, it tells us we have a need that needs to be met.
To be spoon fed is for infants.
Our trouble, with worship, is that we try to satisfy the thirst with things that don't satisfy and therefore we are always thirsty. Asking a human not to worship is like asking them not to eat, you'll starve their soul.
I am glad to be in a state of dissatisfaction. It puts me in the class of people who have hope, the curious can be counted along with us and the otherwise discontent.
Our trouble as humans is that we are too easily satisfied.
I can agree with that
Consider for a moment why Christ referred to Himself as bread and wine. When the nation of Israel wandered in the wilderness for forty years, what was being symbolized by the manna that came down from heaven and sustained them until they came into the promise land? When Christ was tempted to turn stones into bread and eat, why did He respond saying "Man doesn't live on bread alone, but on every word that proceeds from the mouth of God" All these things tell us we have a greater need than the physical and that need is spiritual in nature. That need can only be meet by the bread that comes from heaven and Christ is that bread. Why else are the two elements of The Lord's supper bread and wine. What is being symbolized?
Hope you both don't mind if I drop in. I can't figure out your objection to worship. You both seem to be hostile to the concept and I can't figure out why.
I've only read the first paragraph of your post. And before I read and consider the remainder of it I wanted to bring the following to your attention:
Atypican(?) and I are not hostile toward worship. As this conversation unfolds you will realize that both(?) of us in both (?) deed and thought worship. We are not condemning worship as a whole.
You are welcome to participate in our discussion if he too agrees.
I say you are hostile to the concept because you are not arguing for a healthy and robust understanding of it. You appear to be arguing for it's dismissal, that's hostility towards it.
And it is true that all men worship to some degree. My question is to the proper object of such devote worship of the kind you both seem to oppose. I think there is such thing as healthy and robust worship that is a natural response to our creator. I also think it is detrimental to give that kind of worship to anything created.
I say you are hostile to the concept because you are not arguing for a healthy and robust understanding of it. You appear to be arguing for it's dismissal, that's hostility towards it.
I don't argue for it's dismissal, that's unrealistic, rather contrary to what you say I think I am arguing for a healthy and robust understanding of it. Our disagreement is about what that is.
And it is true that all men worship to some degree. My question is to the proper object of such devote worship of the kind you both seem to oppose. I think there is such thing as healthy and robust worship that is a natural response to our creator
Heres one for ya then. Wouldn't you agree that the majority of worship practiced is of the improperly directed variety?
I also think it is detrimental to give that kind of worship to anything created.
And your ability to discern the difference is infallible? That's self worship.
Than why did you say that you think it should be outgrown?
Wouldn't you agree that the majority of worship practiced is of the improperly directed variety?
Absolutely
And your ability to discern the difference is infallible?
No, it's instinctive. It's like eating a bunch of junk food and still being hungry, it didn't satisfy.
In my opinion that's why there are so many different religions; we pursue all kinds of things that never satisfy and only leave us empty. It's also why I think Christianity, properly understood and articulated, has produced some of the greatest works of art and is a singing religion. Something "clicks" in the soul that makes it sing and inspires it to produce the most incredible works of art. No other religion does that to the degree that Christianity, properly understood and articulated, does
That's self worship.
It is if my gaze terminates on me. But if I see in and through it to the one who made me and gave me a mind to think and the ability to discern than it is not. And then and only then does my thinking and discernment become an act of worship. I give credit were credit is properly due, that's worship.
1 Corinthians 10:31
Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.
Than why did you say that you think it should be outgrown?
We start out trusting like that when we are immature. People can be made to believe (or at least profess belief) in some pretty ridiculous things. I think that improved critical thinking skills are a sign of healthy development. I recognize the need for worshipful levels of trust in early stages of development.
Wouldn't you agree that the majority of worship practiced is of the improperly directed variety?
Absolutely
Further would you agree that many people worship their own understanding?
You might guess where I am trying to go logically with this.
That's self worship.
It is if my gaze terminates on me. But if I see in and through it to the one who made me and gave me a mind to think and the ability to discern than it is not
How do you look in and through? What if you are only imagining that you are looking "through yourself and fixing your attention on your creator?"
In my earlier years, I had some interesting (to me) internal dialogs (I felt quite inspired and motivated to action). I knew that this religious experience I was having, had been experienced by others. I also knew that alot of people liked to describe their experience in theistic terms.
I don't claim access to an infallible authority. Theists do. I argue that my position is one of humility and the theists is one of pride.
It would seem to me that you worship your doubt and skepticism and that your infallible authority is your your mind. Do you ever doubt yourself or do you just trust yourself without question.
All the criticism that you level at "religion" I find you practicing in your own mind. Maybe religions are made up of people just like you who suffer from the same noetic effects of the fall.
How do you look in and through
It's the grounding question that I keep driving at. From were does something come, what's behind it. We live in a cause and effect world. To understand it properly you need to understand both the cause and effect. All your thoughts seem to be consumed with the effects, also known as the phenomenon. Or to put it another way; it is the what and why question. You seem to do well at describing what is going on the world but struggle as to the why? Now you may pride yourself with your doubt to know but I think it only dodges the question. And a question not properly answered never goes away, it just lingers and gnaws at you.
