An argument for not calling god by that name.

[martins name]

@Serotoninluv I coming at this from a purely practical standpoint, of thinking what language should I use to maximize peoples understanding of being.

29 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

Updating the term God to point to a higher truth is precisely what is needed for people to face their belief in an irrational idea of god

I think we have a better chance moveing them from their pre-rational blue, to orange rationality and then beyond to trans-rationality. I think it will be hard to change a stage blue person's conception of god. I don't think many actualized viewers are pre-rational. But I live in Sweden, one of the most secular countries in the world, so I might be taking rationality for granted. Playing ball with pre-rationals in USA might be productive, i don't know.

 

[Cameron]

I've actually found the most effective name/word/symbol is many of them. Call it God. Call it Absolute Truth, Infinity, The One, Pure Consciousness, Nothing. I like how Leo hasn't harped on just one. It's helped me realise that none of these names/words/symbols are the thing we are actually talking about. They're all just pointers. Had it been just God or just Pure Consciousness, I'd be more likely to hold it ideologically as a separate thing other than myself.

Edited February 18, 2019 by Cameron

[Leo Gura]

@martins name Whatever name you call it, the devil will co-opt it.

Ignorance is not an accident. It is the most powerful force in the universe, second only to Truth.

[Aaron p]

On 2/16/2019 at 11:26 PM, martins name said:

As Leo has talked about, Muslims are not allowed to draw pictures of god, originally because god can't be symbolized. 
I think calling it god, rather than, for example, pure presence, is making that same mistake, because, the word god is creating an unnecessary layer of abstraction/symbolization that people will hang attributes on, which is counterproductive for not-knowing.
I think that that layer of abstraction is only meant for stage blue people so they can put the concept of god at the top of their moral hierarchies. Our culture is beyond stage blue now so there is no need for it anymore.

It's also off-putting for outsiders and potential newcomers who think we are talking about a pre-rational god. 

@martins name the word "god" is useful for a variety of things. For example, letting go. It's hard to give away your control when you don't know what it is your trying to give your control away to. I think the concept it ok when it's understood.

[Forestluv]

@martins name I agree that there are generally two steps. Realizing the irrationality of a pre-rational god and then realizing a truer post-rational god. Yet, I don’t think it’s a good idea to cow tow to blue stage. Other spiritual examples include concepts of emptiness and nothing. I think we should teach people more evolved understandings rather than make up a bunch of new terms that would be very esoteric. 

With that said, I think terms such as “everything”, “One” and “nothing” are more efficient terms to help evolve Orange to post-rational. The term “god” often triggers preconceived notions, baggage and defenses. It’s iften counter-productive. For these reasons, I rarely use the term “god” when trying to help others evolve. Yet, I still wouldn’t want to concede the term “god”.