A Rational God

Is there a concept of a rational God that we can believe in? One of the greatest obstacles to a belief in a divine being in this scientific age is the apparent conflict of belief with reason. It seems like a lot of people compartmentalize their lives into the rational part that believes in the dictates of science, and the religious part that believes in magical beings. They switch their consciousness effortlessly between these “compartments” depending on the circumstances, perhaps only vaguely aware of the inherent conflicts betweens them.

Before you can really begin to investigate this problem you have to first figure out what you actually mean when you say “God.” As George H. Smith writes:

 Knowing what one is talking about is of inestimable value in any dialogue, so the theist, before he sets out to explain why we should believe in god, must first explain what he means by the word “god”.

Atheism: The Case Against God, George H. Smith, p. 29

Unfortunately the many attributes associated with the Christian God are hopelessly imprecise, contradictory, and in the end mostly unintelligible. For example most Christian theologians attempt to defend these three aspects of God:

Continue reading “A Rational God”

Alice A. Bailey On Planetary Evil

Alice A. Bailey (AAB) and Djwhal Khul (DK) writing on planetary evil imply that evil is a necessary part of Creation as Spirit is projected into matter. They also distinguish between planetary evil and cosmic evil.

Below are some quotes from the writings of AAB and DK on the subject of evil, particularly planetary evil.


First. It should be remembered that the whole subject of planetary evil (and students must distinguish carefully between planetary and cosmic evil) lies hid in the individual life cycles and in the history of the Great Being who is the planetary Logos of the Earth.  Therefore, until a man has taken certain initiations and thus achieved a measure of planetary consciousness, it is useless for him to speculate upon that record.  H. P. B. has touched, in the Secret Doctrine [S. D., III, 62; Section 6, page 67] ,  upon the subject of “the imperfect Gods,” and in these words lies the key to planetary evil.

Second.  It might briefly be said that, as far as our humanity is concerned, the terms planetary evil and cosmic evil might be interpreted thus:

Planetary evil arises from certain relations existing between our planetary Logos and another planetary Logos.  When this condition of polar opposition is adjusted, then planetary evil will cease.  The adjustment will be brought about through the mediation (occultly understood) of a third planetary Logos.  These three will eventually form an equilateral triangle, and then planetary evil will cease.  Free circulation will ensue; planetary obscuration will become possible, and the “imperfect Gods” will have achieved a relative perfection.  Thus will the karma of the manvantara, or secondary cycle, be adjusted, and so much planetary karmic evil be “worked off.”  All the above must be interpreted in its esoteric sense and not its exoteric.

A Treatise on Cosmic Fire , 2. The Nature of Magic


Continue reading “Alice A. Bailey On Planetary Evil”

What Question Would You Ask God?

Anne Foerst writes in “God in the Machine: What Robots Teach Us About Humanity and God“:

“What does it mean to be human? How can humanness be defined? Can we ever come up with criteria that distinguish us from animals – or, for that matter, from robots? And what exactly is our place and our purpose on this planet, in our sun system, in the universe? Are humans special, or are they just another random species on an insignificant planet?”

As computer scientists make great advances in the field of Artificial Intelligence the day looms when such questions may become crucial. No one knows when our technology will reach the point of either reproducing real intelligence, or mimicking it so accurately that even experts may have difficulty discerning the difference.

As early as 1950 Alan Turing proposed the possibility of creating a test to distinguish between human and machine intelligence. Today this is known as a Turing Test and various forms have been devised for commercial use on the Internet to try to weed out “bots,” or computer programs that attempt to imitate humans in leaving comments with thinly disguised spam to sell everything from smut to stocks.

One has to wonder if there might be a possibility of a kind of Turing Test for God. After all, if you were hiking in the Rocky Mountains and a bush started to glow and voice came out of the bush, would you have a good trick question or two to ask in order to make sure that the voice was the genuine article?

In Exodus 3 Moses has a pretty good question. He asks God what his name is. Apparently names had very significant meanings in ancient times so his question may be far more penetrating than we would at first suspect. The traditional translation of the original Hebrew is that God replied that, “I AM THAT I AM.Exodus 3:14

Some hold that “I AM” signifies God’s unchanging, and perhaps unfathomable nature. In the footnotes of the NIV translation they give an alternate answer which is, ” I will be what I will be.” This reflects the fact that the verb is in the future tense.

Author Joseph J. Dewey writes that he believes that Moses understood the answer to be something like, “I am becoming that which I decide to become.”

“Here is how they translate the name in Exodus 3:14:

“What about his name? What shall I say to them?

Then Elohim spoke to Moses: I shall come to be [just] as I am coming to be. And He said thus shall you say to the sons of Israel, I shall come-to-be has sent me to you.”

Then the translation has a footnote which reads:

“I shall come…coming to be, literally I AM BECOMING WHO I AM BECOMING, or traditionally rendered as I AM THAT I AM, the name Yahweh is derived from this verb meaning BECOME, BE or COME.”

“One thing we know for sure. God did not tell Moses that He did not exist, but will exist in the future. Nevertheless the future tense even makes sense in light of the true meaning mentioned in The Immortal which was: ‘I AM BECOMING THAT WHICH I DECIDE TO BECOME.‘”

“When you make a decision around some goal of becoming that decision relates to what you will be in a future time or what you shall become.”  Joseph J. Dewey, I AM BECOMING

Perhaps unlike the static, unchanging “I AM” vision held by a majority of believers, God is a being that is always becoming something new, evolving, and changing with its creation? Perhaps even more revolutionary is the idea that God was not always the God that we imagine it to be.

“Behold, I will do a new thing; now it shall spring forth; shall ye not know it? I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the desert.” -Isaiah 43:19

Whatever the case, the next time someone meets God in the burning bush, he will need a better question. God has already heard that one.

 


Is God Perfect?
Being God
What Is God?
Who Is God?