Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

LuckyR wrote: June 7th, 2022, 3:56 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 6th, 2022, 7:28 pm
Nick_A wrote: June 6th, 2022, 2:08 pm
JackDaydream wrote: June 6th, 2022, 8:24 am

I haven't read Plato for a while but I can remember noticing some aspects of a Platonic influence in Jung's writings and the idea of the collective unconscious. I am not an extremely literal thinker as it seems that so much of life is embedded in mythic structures. I have found so many people who are theist or atheist to be rather literal. Most of the time it doesn't affect my thinking but, at times,I do drift into wondering about the 'literal'. The debates within philosophy about science often seem to be very literal, although even scientific theories are only models.

I guess that it sometimes seems that there is a division between reason and the imagination. Often, the imaginary realm, which does include the arts as well as religion, seems pushed aside, with reason being seen as the main focus. I am not sure that the two are opposed completely, anymore than the tension between reason and emotions. This way in which I see it is that all these aspects are important in understanding truth in a synthetic rather than reductionist account or picture of reality.
We must be careful to see if we define imagination in the same way. Imagination can be seen as what sustains Plato's cave or it could be seen as the same as intuition. First this is how Einstein defines intuition or imagination:
1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930
Einstein is referring to accessing the collective unconscious. Simone Weil defines imagination as escapism and fantasy preventing Man from seeing his real nature and thereby preventing growth.
Imagination is always the fabric of social life and the dynamic of history. The influence of real needs and compulsions, of real interests and materials, is indirect because the crowd is never conscious of it.

Imagination and fiction make up more than three quarters of our real life. Simone Weil
It is obvious then that in contemplating religion, fear inspires fantasy in imagination for many. Yet imagination is what enables remembrance, intuition or the collective unconscious. To make matters worse, neither side seems to understand the other. Does this make sense to you? The same word refers to what inspires conscious growth but also refers to the chief obstacle preventing it.
The idea of imagination involving three quarters of life is interesting, but it may well be true, as well as the relationship between fear and the imagination. I know that fear creeps in a lot of the time for me. I sometimes feel that I go into 'black holes' of fear.

With the collective unconscious there is the realm of dreams and borderline sleep experiences. There is an overlap between the religious experience and the arts as part of the imagination, especially in myths. The study of myths was emphasised strongly in Jung's writings and I understand that the story of Atlantis is spoken of by Plato as well as Homer. The Bible is so full of myths including the story of Genesis.

Sometimes though it can be a problem if myths are taken too literally and this can be an area where fear comes in, especially around the idea of hell and damnation. It does seem that the institution of the church has magnified this and may be one reason why many have sought to reason against the Bible.
So, since you brought it up, what are you fearful of? What's the worst-case scenario?
My worst scenario is a literal resurrection at the end of the world and being damned to eternal hell. I don't have this thought often these days, but occasionally I have fleeting moments when such fears come into my mind. But, going back to when I was a student, I had attended a workshop at an evangelical church, in which people had been challenging my ideas about reality. I was so stressed out that I didn't manage to get out of bed until 5pm the next day. I guess that may have been my day in hell...
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

Nick_A wrote: June 7th, 2022, 10:28 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 6th, 2022, 7:28 pm
Nick_A wrote: June 6th, 2022, 2:08 pm
JackDaydream wrote: June 6th, 2022, 8:24 am

I haven't read Plato for a while but I can remember noticing some aspects of a Platonic influence in Jung's writings and the idea of the collective unconscious. I am not an extremely literal thinker as it seems that so much of life is embedded in mythic structures. I have found so many people who are theist or atheist to be rather literal. Most of the time it doesn't affect my thinking but, at times,I do drift into wondering about the 'literal'. The debates within philosophy about science often seem to be very literal, although even scientific theories are only models.

I guess that it sometimes seems that there is a division between reason and the imagination. Often, the imaginary realm, which does include the arts as well as religion, seems pushed aside, with reason being seen as the main focus. I am not sure that the two are opposed completely, anymore than the tension between reason and emotions. This way in which I see it is that all these aspects are important in understanding truth in a synthetic rather than reductionist account or picture of reality.
We must be careful to see if we define imagination in the same way. Imagination can be seen as what sustains Plato's cave or it could be seen as the same as intuition. First this is how Einstein defines intuition or imagination:
1930
"Many people think that the progress of the human race is based on experiences of an empirical, critical nature, but I say that true knowledge is to be had only through a philosophy of deduction. For it is intuition that improves the world, not just following the trodden path of thought. Intuition makes us look at unrelated facts and then think about them until they can all be brought under one law. To look for related facts means holding onto what one has instead of searching for new facts. Intuition is the father of new knowledge, while empiricism is nothing but an accumulation of old knowledge. Intuition, not intellect, is the ‘open sesame’ of yourself." -- Albert Einstein, in Einstein and the Poet – In Search of the Cosmic Man by William Hermanns (Branden Press, 1983, p. 16.), conversation March 4, 1930
Einstein is referring to accessing the collective unconscious. Simone Weil defines imagination as escapism and fantasy preventing Man from seeing his real nature and thereby preventing growth.
Imagination is always the fabric of social life and the dynamic of history. The influence of real needs and compulsions, of real interests and materials, is indirect because the crowd is never conscious of it.

Imagination and fiction make up more than three quarters of our real life. Simone Weil
It is obvious then that in contemplating religion, fear inspires fantasy in imagination for many. Yet imagination is what enables remembrance, intuition or the collective unconscious. To make matters worse, neither side seems to understand the other. Does this make sense to you? The same word refers to what inspires conscious growth but also refers to the chief obstacle preventing it.
The idea of imagination involving three quarters of life is interesting, but it may well be true, as well as the relationship between fear and the imagination. I know that fear creeps in a lot of the time for me. I sometimes feel that I go into 'black holes' of fear.

With the collective unconscious there is the realm of dreams and borderline sleep experiences. There is an overlap between the religious experience and the arts as part of the imagination, especially in myths. The study of myths was emphasised strongly in Jung's writings and I understand that the story of Atlantis is spoken of by Plato as well as Homer. The Bible is so full of myths including the story of Genesis.

Sometimes though it can be a problem if myths are taken too literally and this can be an area where fear comes in, especially around the idea of hell and damnation. It does seem that the institution of the church has magnified this and may be one reason why many have sought to reason against the Bible.
“Whatever you repress, whatever you don’t recognize in yourself, is nevertheless alive. It is constellated outside of you, it works in your surroundings and influences other people.”
“Nothing has a stronger influence psychologically on their environment and especially on their children than the unlived life of the parent.”
~ Carl Jung

“Attachment is the great fabricator of illusions; reality can be obtained only by someone who is detached. ” Simone weil
Plato in the cave allegory explains that a person can become free from the prison of attachments to the shadows on the wall by inwardly turning towards the light with the whole of oneself.

As you point out, taking this idea to literally as with the fear of hell an damnation does more harm than good and prevents a person from recognizing the prison of attachments.

Selective attachments are encouraged in the young through politics and secularized religion. This really child abuse. Imagine a mob chanting a cause. Is there anything conscious in it or just manipulated reaction? The central idea here is if attachments are created in us as Yung suggests. If it is, how does a person become free? What does it mean to turn towards the light and away from the effects of imaginary repressions? How does a person experience the benefits of higher mind without getting caught up in the trappings of the literal mind?
Strangely enough, as a young child I wasn't worried about hell and the teachings of my parents and first teachers of religion inspired me. However, it was later, reading the Bible and mixing with people from evangelical groups related to Christian Student Unions which brought up all the hell and damnation. I also know so many people, especially from Catholic backgrounds who get caught up in these 'black holes' of fear. Perhaps, the message about hell and damnation is in Catholicism as a subliminal aspect of the teachings, or a subtext to what is being taught.

It can involve quite a lot of suffering and it is hard to recover. I do get stressed if I read the Bible and do find going to church difficult. Fortunately, I don't feel so afraid of philosophy, including Plato, as well as the philosophy of religion. These seem like the pathways to clear thinking, even though I sometimes overthink.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by Nick_A »

JackDaydream wrote: June 7th, 2022, 11:19 am
Nick_A wrote: June 7th, 2022, 10:28 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 6th, 2022, 7:28 pm
Nick_A wrote: June 6th, 2022, 2:08 pm

We must be careful to see if we define imagination in the same way. Imagination can be seen as what sustains Plato's cave or it could be seen as the same as intuition. First this is how Einstein defines intuition or imagination:



Einstein is referring to accessing the collective unconscious. Simone Weil defines imagination as escapism and fantasy preventing Man from seeing his real nature and thereby preventing growth.



It is obvious then that in contemplating religion, fear inspires fantasy in imagination for many. Yet imagination is what enables remembrance, intuition or the collective unconscious. To make matters worse, neither side seems to understand the other. Does this make sense to you? The same word refers to what inspires conscious growth but also refers to the chief obstacle preventing it.
The idea of imagination involving three quarters of life is interesting, but it may well be true, as well as the relationship between fear and the imagination. I know that fear creeps in a lot of the time for me. I sometimes feel that I go into 'black holes' of fear.

With the collective unconscious there is the realm of dreams and borderline sleep experiences. There is an overlap between the religious experience and the arts as part of the imagination, especially in myths. The study of myths was emphasised strongly in Jung's writings and I understand that the story of Atlantis is spoken of by Plato as well as Homer. The Bible is so full of myths including the story of Genesis.

Sometimes though it can be a problem if myths are taken too literally and this can be an area where fear comes in, especially around the idea of hell and damnation. It does seem that the institution of the church has magnified this and may be one reason why many have sought to reason against the Bible.
“Whatever you repress, whatever you don’t recognize in yourself, is nevertheless alive. It is constellated outside of you, it works in your surroundings and influences other people.”
“Nothing has a stronger influence psychologically on their environment and especially on their children than the unlived life of the parent.”
~ Carl Jung

“Attachment is the great fabricator of illusions; reality can be obtained only by someone who is detached. ” Simone weil
Plato in the cave allegory explains that a person can become free from the prison of attachments to the shadows on the wall by inwardly turning towards the light with the whole of oneself.

As you point out, taking this idea to literally as with the fear of hell an damnation does more harm than good and prevents a person from recognizing the prison of attachments.

Selective attachments are encouraged in the young through politics and secularized religion. This really child abuse. Imagine a mob chanting a cause. Is there anything conscious in it or just manipulated reaction? The central idea here is if attachments are created in us as Yung suggests. If it is, how does a person become free? What does it mean to turn towards the light and away from the effects of imaginary repressions? How does a person experience the benefits of higher mind without getting caught up in the trappings of the literal mind?
Strangely enough, as a young child I wasn't worried about hell and the teachings of my parents and first teachers of religion inspired me. However, it was later, reading the Bible and mixing with people from evangelical groups related to Christian Student Unions which brought up all the hell and damnation. I also know so many people, especially from Catholic backgrounds who get caught up in these 'black holes' of fear. Perhaps, the message about hell and damnation is in Catholicism as a subliminal aspect of the teachings, or a subtext to what is being taught.

It can involve quite a lot of suffering and it is hard to recover. I do get stressed if I read the Bible and do find going to church difficult. Fortunately, I don't feel so afraid of philosophy, including Plato, as well as the philosophy of religion. These seem like the pathways to clear thinking, even though I sometimes overthink.
This is the trouble with some of these evangelical like Christian student unions. They teach negativity and inspire guilt.

There is a difference between Christianity originating with a conscious source like Jesus and Christendom or man made interpretations. If Kierkegaard is right in the following quotes, the problem is returning Christendom to Christianity. Easier said than done.
People who perhaps never once enter a church, never think about God, never mention his name except in oaths! People upon whom it has never dawned that they might have any obligation to God, people who either regard it as a maximum to be guiltless of transgressing criminal law, or do not count even this quite necessary! Yet all these people, even those who assert that no God exists, are all of them Christians, call themselves Christians, are recognized as Christians by the State, are buried as Christians by the Church, are certified as Christians for eternity.

(quoted in Protestant Thought in the 19th Century by Claude Welch p.294)

Christendom has done away with Christianity, without being quite aware of it. The consequence is that, if anything is to be done, one must try again to introduce Christianity into Christendom.

ibid p.295
It isn't you. You have been made to fear a man made interpretation. This fear can destroy the healthy need for contemplation inspired by wonder. Question with sincerity and you can't go wrong
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

JackDaydream wrote: June 7th, 2022, 11:19 am
Nick_A wrote: June 7th, 2022, 10:28 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 6th, 2022, 7:28 pm
Nick_A wrote: June 6th, 2022, 2:08 pm

We must be careful to see if we define imagination in the same way. Imagination can be seen as what sustains Plato's cave or it could be seen as the same as intuition. First this is how Einstein defines intuition or imagination:



Einstein is referring to accessing the collective unconscious. Simone Weil defines imagination as escapism and fantasy preventing Man from seeing his real nature and thereby preventing growth.



It is obvious then that in contemplating religion, fear inspires fantasy in imagination for many. Yet imagination is what enables remembrance, intuition or the collective unconscious. To make matters worse, neither side seems to understand the other. Does this make sense to you? The same word refers to what inspires conscious growth but also refers to the chief obstacle preventing it.
The idea of imagination involving three quarters of life is interesting, but it may well be true, as well as the relationship between fear and the imagination. I know that fear creeps in a lot of the time for me. I sometimes feel that I go into 'black holes' of fear.

With the collective unconscious there is the realm of dreams and borderline sleep experiences. There is an overlap between the religious experience and the arts as part of the imagination, especially in myths. The study of myths was emphasised strongly in Jung's writings and I understand that the story of Atlantis is spoken of by Plato as well as Homer. The Bible is so full of myths including the story of Genesis.

Sometimes though it can be a problem if myths are taken too literally and this can be an area where fear comes in, especially around the idea of hell and damnation. It does seem that the institution of the church has magnified this and may be one reason why many have sought to reason against the Bible.
“Whatever you repress, whatever you don’t recognize in yourself, is nevertheless alive. It is constellated outside of you, it works in your surroundings and influences other people.”
“Nothing has a stronger influence psychologically on their environment and especially on their children than the unlived life of the parent.”
~ Carl Jung

“Attachment is the great fabricator of illusions; reality can be obtained only by someone who is detached. ” Simone weil
Plato in the cave allegory explains that a person can become free from the prison of attachments to the shadows on the wall by inwardly turning towards the light with the whole of oneself.

As you point out, taking this idea to literally as with the fear of hell an damnation does more harm than good and prevents a person from recognizing the prison of attachments.

Selective attachments are encouraged in the young through politics and secularized religion. This really child abuse. Imagine a mob chanting a cause. Is there anything conscious in it or just manipulated reaction? The central idea here is if attachments are created in us as Yung suggests. If it is, how does a person become free? What does it mean to turn towards the light and away from the effects of imaginary repressions? How does a person experience the benefits of higher mind without getting caught up in the trappings of the literal mind?
Strangely enough, as a young child I wasn't worried about hell and the teachings of my parents and first teachers of religion inspired me. However, it was later, reading the Bible and mixing with people from evangelical groups related to Christian Student Unions which brought up all the hell and damnation. I also know so many people, especially from Catholic backgrounds who get caught up in these 'black holes' of fear. Perhaps, the message about hell and damnation is in Catholicism as a subliminal aspect of the teachings, or a subtext to what is being taught.

It can involve quite a lot of suffering and it is hard to recover. I do get stressed if I read the Bible and do find going to church difficult. Fortunately, I don't feel so afraid of philosophy, including Plato, as well as the philosophy of religion. These seem like the pathways to clear thinking, even though I sometimes overthink.
One aspect of this, however, is the way in which Kierkergaard struggled. My very first experience of extreme worry was in connection to the passage in the Bible over the 'unpardonable sin'.At age 13 the passage in the Gospels really terrified me, even though it is so hard to know what it refers to. Even though I was aware what the unpardonable sin was, especially 'blasphemy against the Holy Spirit' meant, the passage confused me so much and I worried about it. Later on, the consolation which I found was that Kierkergaard, as well as Jung, struggled so much with this idea in the Bible. It lead me to feel not completely alone in this anxiety, and I have met one other person who was troubled with the idea of the unforgivable sin. The point which I am trying to make is that it possible to tune into this side of religion and spirituality, which can make it extremely hard to see the positive side.
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

It is incredible and painful seeing how such ignorant and stupid people like those so called Christian groups have been able to do so much evil in your vulnerable heart.
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

Angelo Cannata wrote: June 7th, 2022, 8:49 pm It is incredible and painful seeing how such ignorant and stupid people like those so called Christian groups have been able to do so much evil in your vulnerable heart.
The question may also be what do the people in these groups do to themselves psychologically? Personally, I have more or less thought myself through the knots and chains of negative interpretations of the Bible. However, I do wonder to what extent various people do work through such ideas or become entrenched in them. It is probably hard to know because those who adhere to the literal interpretations may not speak of such things openly, through fear.
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

I have known several of them. To my understanding, they support themselves through the problems of meanings of the Bible by exercising their power wherever it is possible, especially in their family. This works like a living evidence of the reward that followers of those interpretations will receive by God and of their being in the right way.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by Nick_A »

JackDaydream wrote: June 7th, 2022, 9:04 pm
Angelo Cannata wrote: June 7th, 2022, 8:49 pm It is incredible and painful seeing how such ignorant and stupid people like those so called Christian groups have been able to do so much evil in your vulnerable heart.
The question may also be what do the people in these groups do to themselves psychologically? Personally, I have more or less thought myself through the knots and chains of negative interpretations of the Bible. However, I do wonder to what extent various people do work through such ideas or become entrenched in them. It is probably hard to know because those who adhere to the literal interpretations may not speak of such things openly, through fear.
That is what happens. People do hurt themselves. But the point is that it doesn't have to happen to you.

Does it make sense that the Holy Spirit is so insulted that a person can suffer eternal damnation? What is the alternative. When a person comes to believe that they do not need the help of the Spirit and with the help of Satan, believe they are God, they cannot experience metanoia; they cannot experience Christian rebirth. The seed of the soul is doomed to live in the world of attachments without the potential for freedom. Some would consider it hell.

Fortunately such people are rare but people can hurt themselves on the inside. It doesn't effect you Jack. You are too nice of a guy. It takes a lot for the ego to corrupt the soul to such a degree.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
stevie
Posts: 762
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by stevie »

JackDaydream wrote: June 3rd, 2022, 2:46 am In many ways, the issue of the existence of God seems a lesser puzzle than understanding the writings in the Bible. The extent to which the writing of the writing in the New Testament is symbolic or literal has been a matter of philosophical confusion for me, and I don't think that this is unique to me. It is likely that many on this forum don't see much of the Bible as literally accurate. I do believe in the idea of evolution and do see many Biblical texts as allegorical, but do still wonder about how far to go in seeing the writings as symbolic.

The biggest issue is what did happen regarding the story of the resurrection of Jesus. I was brought up to believe that it happened, as witnessed by those who encountered Jesus in bodily form. I was also taught that Jesus performed miracles. The other idea was the idea of the Virgin Mary giving birth and Jesus, although for most of my childhood I didn't understand the significance of the Virgin birth, until being taught the facts about sex. I was also taught that it was wrong to question any of this, with the story of doubting Thomas, who queried the resurrection of Jesus.

However, I have definitely questioned the stories of the Bible. But, I still find it hard to know the facts and the historical basis of the writings. It is acknowledged by theologians that the Gospels were written a long time after the life of Jesus and that the only author who is the name identified in the Bible is Paul, and that his teachings were the basis of so much of Christianity.

There has been so much speculation about the underlying facts of the New Testament and there is so little known of the life of Jesus apart from the Gospels. The findings of the Gnostic texts in Nag Hammadi have been significant because they appear to offer a different perspective, more symbolic than the narrative of the four Gospels, although John's one and 'The Book of Revelation' seem to fall more into the Gnostic tradition.

One of the aspects which I find difficult is whether the witness accounts were based on visionary experiences. Even though the idea of Jesus being raised from the dead seems problematic I do wonder what did happen. Did someone move the stone? There have been so many different ideas, such as Jesus going to Charlemagne, in the Grail tradition, but so much is speculation. Also, so much of the Biblical narrative seems to contain ideas of mythic significance, such as the resemblance with the mythical story of Osiris.

I am writing this thread because I genuinely do find it hard to know how much of the Biblical narrative is symbolic. Part of the issue may be with the climate of the ideas of the early Church, especially figures such as Origen, and what was included in the canon of the Bible and what was excluded. I am aware that some who read this thread are likely to dismiss it because they will regard the stories of the Gospels as fiction. On the other hand, some may object on the basis that I am questioning what should be accepted on the basis of faith.

I am not intending to cause any offence and the reason why I am writing the thread is because the question of the existence of God is debated so much, but the issue is not merely about whether there is a God who created the world because religious beliefs are wider. Saying that I am not suggesting that the Christian tradition is the only one worth thinking about. I have a strong interest in comparative religion, but as I was brought up in Christianity I am more familiar with the aspects of 'supernatural ' in this tradition.

The question of the supernatural is the main issue which I am addressing. Where does reason or faith come in? Part of the problem which I have with the idea of faith is that to abandon reason in thinking about the Biblical texts seems like philosophical suicide. So, I am asking how much can be interpreted literally or symbolically?
The only save path of verbal expression is either the percepts of science or the percepts of everyday life. If one chooses to indulge in expressions based on fabrications of speculative thought then how can one seriously ask questions about them?
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

Nick_A wrote: June 8th, 2022, 10:00 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 7th, 2022, 9:04 pm
Angelo Cannata wrote: June 7th, 2022, 8:49 pm It is incredible and painful seeing how such ignorant and stupid people like those so called Christian groups have been able to do so much evil in your vulnerable heart.
The question may also be what do the people in these groups do to themselves psychologically? Personally, I have more or less thought myself through the knots and chains of negative interpretations of the Bible. However, I do wonder to what extent various people do work through such ideas or become entrenched in them. It is probably hard to know because those who adhere to the literal interpretations may not speak of such things openly, through fear.
That is what happens. People do hurt themselves. But the point is that it doesn't have to happen to you.

Does it make sense that the Holy Spirit is so insulted that a person can suffer eternal damnation? What is the alternative. When a person comes to believe that they do not need the help of the Spirit and with the help of Satan, believe they are God, they cannot experience metanoia; they cannot experience Christian rebirth. The seed of the soul is doomed to live in the world of attachments without the potential for freedom. Some would consider it hell.

Fortunately such people are rare but people can hurt themselves on the inside. It doesn't effect you Jack. You are too nice of a guy. It takes a lot for the ego to corrupt the soul to such a degree.
One book which I do find fairly helpful in going beyond the critical and judgmental aspects of the ego is the channelled text, 'A Course in Miracles'. I haven't read it all because it is rather long but it does seem to have a healing approach to the way in which people have been conditioned, especially within Christianity. However, I have heard that the book has received opposition from the Catholic church. I don't know if you are familiar with the book or what you make of it, because it uses the Biblical language but is more of a psychological approach.
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

stevie wrote: June 8th, 2022, 1:14 pm
JackDaydream wrote: June 3rd, 2022, 2:46 am In many ways, the issue of the existence of God seems a lesser puzzle than understanding the writings in the Bible. The extent to which the writing of the writing in the New Testament is symbolic or literal has been a matter of philosophical confusion for me, and I don't think that this is unique to me. It is likely that many on this forum don't see much of the Bible as literally accurate. I do believe in the idea of evolution and do see many Biblical texts as allegorical, but do still wonder about how far to go in seeing the writings as symbolic.

The biggest issue is what did happen regarding the story of the resurrection of Jesus. I was brought up to believe that it happened, as witnessed by those who encountered Jesus in bodily form. I was also taught that Jesus performed miracles. The other idea was the idea of the Virgin Mary giving birth and Jesus, although for most of my childhood I didn't understand the significance of the Virgin birth, until being taught the facts about sex. I was also taught that it was wrong to question any of this, with the story of doubting Thomas, who queried the resurrection of Jesus.

However, I have definitely questioned the stories of the Bible. But, I still find it hard to know the facts and the historical basis of the writings. It is acknowledged by theologians that the Gospels were written a long time after the life of Jesus and that the only author who is the name identified in the Bible is Paul, and that his teachings were the basis of so much of Christianity.

There has been so much speculation about the underlying facts of the New Testament and there is so little known of the life of Jesus apart from the Gospels. The findings of the Gnostic texts in Nag Hammadi have been significant because they appear to offer a different perspective, more symbolic than the narrative of the four Gospels, although John's one and 'The Book of Revelation' seem to fall more into the Gnostic tradition.

One of the aspects which I find difficult is whether the witness accounts were based on visionary experiences. Even though the idea of Jesus being raised from the dead seems problematic I do wonder what did happen. Did someone move the stone? There have been so many different ideas, such as Jesus going to Charlemagne, in the Grail tradition, but so much is speculation. Also, so much of the Biblical narrative seems to contain ideas of mythic significance, such as the resemblance with the mythical story of Osiris.

I am writing this thread because I genuinely do find it hard to know how much of the Biblical narrative is symbolic. Part of the issue may be with the climate of the ideas of the early Church, especially figures such as Origen, and what was included in the canon of the Bible and what was excluded. I am aware that some who read this thread are likely to dismiss it because they will regard the stories of the Gospels as fiction. On the other hand, some may object on the basis that I am questioning what should be accepted on the basis of faith.

I am not intending to cause any offence and the reason why I am writing the thread is because the question of the existence of God is debated so much, but the issue is not merely about whether there is a God who created the world because religious beliefs are wider. Saying that I am not suggesting that the Christian tradition is the only one worth thinking about. I have a strong interest in comparative religion, but as I was brought up in Christianity I am more familiar with the aspects of 'supernatural ' in this tradition.

The question of the supernatural is the main issue which I am addressing. Where does reason or faith come in? Part of the problem which I have with the idea of faith is that to abandon reason in thinking about the Biblical texts seems like philosophical suicide. So, I am asking how much can be interpreted literally or symbolically?
The only save path of verbal expression is either the percepts of science or the percepts of everyday life. If one chooses to indulge in expressions based on fabrications of speculative thought then how can one seriously ask questions about them?
What makes the expression of ideas within science or everyday life more valid than philosophy? The underlying source of all ideas is conceptual. There would be no ideas at all without thought and imagination, even if the ideas are verified through the empirical basis of the senses or scientific methods, in the development of coherent theories and everyday commonsense.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by Nick_A »

JackDaydream wrote: June 8th, 2022, 7:34 pm
Nick_A wrote: June 8th, 2022, 10:00 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 7th, 2022, 9:04 pm
Angelo Cannata wrote: June 7th, 2022, 8:49 pm It is incredible and painful seeing how such ignorant and stupid people like those so called Christian groups have been able to do so much evil in your vulnerable heart.
The question may also be what do the people in these groups do to themselves psychologically? Personally, I have more or less thought myself through the knots and chains of negative interpretations of the Bible. However, I do wonder to what extent various people do work through such ideas or become entrenched in them. It is probably hard to know because those who adhere to the literal interpretations may not speak of such things openly, through fear.
That is what happens. People do hurt themselves. But the point is that it doesn't have to happen to you.

Does it make sense that the Holy Spirit is so insulted that a person can suffer eternal damnation? What is the alternative. When a person comes to believe that they do not need the help of the Spirit and with the help of Satan, believe they are God, they cannot experience metanoia; they cannot experience Christian rebirth. The seed of the soul is doomed to live in the world of attachments without the potential for freedom. Some would consider it hell.

Fortunately such people are rare but people can hurt themselves on the inside. It doesn't effect you Jack. You are too nice of a guy. It takes a lot for the ego to corrupt the soul to such a degree.
One book which I do find fairly helpful in going beyond the critical and judgmental aspects of the ego is the channelled text, 'A Course in Miracles'. I haven't read it all because it is rather long but it does seem to have a healing approach to the way in which people have been conditioned, especially within Christianity. However, I have heard that the book has received opposition from the Catholic church. I don't know if you are familiar with the book or what you make of it, because it uses the Biblical language but is more of a psychological approach.
The text of the book "A Course in Miracles" is the product of seven years of trance spirit channeling of a Mrs. Helen Schucman. The spirit that channeled a "new gospel" to Mrs. Schucman claimed to be Jesus Christ. The "spirit" made contact with her to correct errors in Sacred Scripture, and the teachings of the Church. The "spirit" that channeled through Mrs. Schucman wrote that Sacred Scripture was in error in teaching us that sin separates us from God, and that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross for our sins. The book "A Course in Miracles" contains a Text (the dictation's of Mrs. Schucman), a Student Workbook, and an Instructors Manual (1).

I would advise you to be wary of a Course in Miracles. Channeling can be very dangerous. Here is an account of the death of Helen Schucman. Take from it what you will


Mrs. Schucman, a Columbia University professor and psychologist, was an acquaintance of Fr. Benedict J. Groeschel, C.F.R. (seen on EWTN). Fr. Groeschel gave a eulogy at her funeral. Fr. Groeschel wrote (2), "This woman who had written so eloquently that suffering really did not exist spent the last two years of her life in the blackest psychotic depression I have ever witnessed." Fr. Groeschel is a holy, practical, wise, no nonsense priest, and psychologist. During an October 1994 lecture on "Discernment" given at Holy Cross Church, Rumson, N.J., Fr. Groeschel stated that he believed that Helen Shucman's experience with the channeled "spirit" was possibly a true diabolic manifestation. Fr. Groeschel's experience as a psychologist and priest included being called upon by his Bishop to investigate reported diabolic manifestations in his New York City diocese. In the lecture Fr. Groeschel described one experience ã called as an exorcist ã where he witnessed objects unexplainably being thrown about a room. At the end of a lengthy discussion he attributed that particular experience to paranormal manifestations ã but not diabolic in nature (3). Fr. Groeschel is not easily inclined to attribute any experience to the diabolic. The possible diabolic origin in the spirit channeling of Helen Schucman was one exception given by Fr. Groeschel. Fr. Groeschel's suspicions find support in Sacred Scripture. Helen Schucman's "channeled spirit" denies that our Lord Jesus Christ came to the earth in the flesh..........................
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

Nick_A wrote: June 8th, 2022, 8:50 pm
JackDaydream wrote: June 8th, 2022, 7:34 pm
Nick_A wrote: June 8th, 2022, 10:00 am
JackDaydream wrote: June 7th, 2022, 9:04 pm

The question may also be what do the people in these groups do to themselves psychologically? Personally, I have more or less thought myself through the knots and chains of negative interpretations of the Bible. However, I do wonder to what extent various people do work through such ideas or become entrenched in them. It is probably hard to know because those who adhere to the literal interpretations may not speak of such things openly, through fear.
That is what happens. People do hurt themselves. But the point is that it doesn't have to happen to you.

Does it make sense that the Holy Spirit is so insulted that a person can suffer eternal damnation? What is the alternative. When a person comes to believe that they do not need the help of the Spirit and with the help of Satan, believe they are God, they cannot experience metanoia; they cannot experience Christian rebirth. The seed of the soul is doomed to live in the world of attachments without the potential for freedom. Some would consider it hell.

Fortunately such people are rare but people can hurt themselves on the inside. It doesn't effect you Jack. You are too nice of a guy. It takes a lot for the ego to corrupt the soul to such a degree.
One book which I do find fairly helpful in going beyond the critical and judgmental aspects of the ego is the channelled text, 'A Course in Miracles'. I haven't read it all because it is rather long but it does seem to have a healing approach to the way in which people have been conditioned, especially within Christianity. However, I have heard that the book has received opposition from the Catholic church. I don't know if you are familiar with the book or what you make of it, because it uses the Biblical language but is more of a psychological approach.
The text of the book "A Course in Miracles" is the product of seven years of trance spirit channeling of a Mrs. Helen Schucman. The spirit that channeled a "new gospel" to Mrs. Schucman claimed to be Jesus Christ. The "spirit" made contact with her to correct errors in Sacred Scripture, and the teachings of the Church. The "spirit" that channeled through Mrs. Schucman wrote that Sacred Scripture was in error in teaching us that sin separates us from God, and that Jesus Christ did not die on the cross for our sins. The book "A Course in Miracles" contains a Text (the dictation's of Mrs. Schucman), a Student Workbook, and an Instructors Manual (1).

I would advise you to be wary of a Course in Miracles. Channeling can be very dangerous. Here is an account of the death of Helen Schucman. Take from it what you will


Mrs. Schucman, a Columbia University professor and psychologist, was an acquaintance of Fr. Benedict J. Groeschel, C.F.R. (seen on EWTN). Fr. Groeschel gave a eulogy at her funeral. Fr. Groeschel wrote (2), "This woman who had written so eloquently that suffering really did not exist spent the last two years of her life in the blackest psychotic depression I have ever witnessed." Fr. Groeschel is a holy, practical, wise, no nonsense priest, and psychologist. During an October 1994 lecture on "Discernment" given at Holy Cross Church, Rumson, N.J., Fr. Groeschel stated that he believed that Helen Shucman's experience with the channeled "spirit" was possibly a true diabolic manifestation. Fr. Groeschel's experience as a psychologist and priest included being called upon by his Bishop to investigate reported diabolic manifestations in his New York City diocese. In the lecture Fr. Groeschel described one experience ã called as an exorcist ã where he witnessed objects unexplainably being thrown about a room. At the end of a lengthy discussion he attributed that particular experience to paranormal manifestations ã but not diabolic in nature (3). Fr. Groeschel is not easily inclined to attribute any experience to the diabolic. The possible diabolic origin in the spirit channeling of Helen Schucman was one exception given by Fr. Groeschel. Fr. Groeschel's suspicions find support in Sacred Scripture. Helen Schucman's "channeled spirit" denies that our Lord Jesus Christ came to the earth in the flesh..........................
I find it hard to understand the nature of channelling in general and what exactly people are tuning into. 'Isis Unveiled' by Blavatsky was a channelled text and there is a tradition of people having experiences of spirit guides. It may be a matter of discernment in thinking about what is diabolical, but it is complex.

One example of channeling which I followed more seriously than 'A Course in Miracles', which I came across more through a friend, was the teachings of Benjamin Creme. He was a British artist who claimed to have channelled from a master, and he wrote many books and developed transmission meditation. Part of his claim was that Maitreya was in East London and would emerge to the world. He had been preaching this since 1977 and died several years ago. I attended Creme's final lecture, some time before he died, and I also went to a number of transmission meditation workshops. I found the meditation helpful, but the idea of transmission meditation is based on the idea of energies channelled from invisible masters.

I read a lot of Creme's writings but with skepticism. I understand that the theosophical movement do not accept the claims of Creme but there is an organisation which he set up, 'Share International', and it is still going. It was after the experience of being interested in Creme's writings and transmission meditation that I turned back to philosophy as a way of scrutinizing ideas carefully. I really don't know what to make of channeling, but, of course, ideas such as automatic writing, as experimented with W.B. Yeats, is open to questioning.

The mainstream of Christianity, especially the more fundamentalist groups are very critical of channeling and other means of information from the unconscious, stressing the potential demonic aspects. Many people in philosophy circles see both the claims of Christians and esoteric groups as gobbledegook. So, it can be a difficult area to think about because there are so many divided opinions. Within early Christianity there were divisions between the mainstream church and Gnostic thinkers. But, there were many other esoteric traditions, including Hermeticism, and Plato himself seems to be part of this. So, I would say that it is such a complex idea, and the idea of miracles, as taught within Christianity itself is difficult to understand because it is different from the worldview which is accepted scientifically in the twentieth first century.
Nick_A
Posts: 3364
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:45 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by Nick_A »

Demons and daemons are not the same. I believe a person can experience demonic influences a well as the beneficial influences of a daemon. Socrates had a daemon:

https://markandrealexander.com/2015/07/ ... ner-voice/
Socrates often mentions that he is guided by a daemon, a kind of divine spirit, oracle, or “sign,” that takes the form of an inner voice or non-vocal nudge. The guide never tells Socrates what to do. It only indicates when Socrates is not to do something.

This distinction is important. One way to tell that a dialogue is spurious is if it has Socrates’ daemon tell someone else what to do.

Socrates learned over time to listen to this inner divine voice. He acted in service to it. Nothing that he does in his life is untouched by this inner divine voice.

He describes it in the Apology:

You have heard me speak at sundry times and in diverse places of an oracle or sign which comes to me, and is the divinity which Meletus ridicules in the indictment. This sign, which is a kind of voice, first began to come to me when I was a child; it always forbids but never commands me to do anything which I am going to do. This is what deters me from being a politician.

Later, he explains that the defense he is giving to the Athenian court has been approved by this inner divine voice.

Hitherto the divine faculty of which the internal oracle is the source has constantly been in the habit of opposing me even about trifles, if I was going to make a slip or error in any matter; and now as you see there has come upon me that which may be thought, and is generally believed to be, the last and worst evil. But the oracle made no sign of opposition, either when I was leaving my house in the morning, or when I was on my way to the court, or while I was speaking, at anything which I was going to say; and yet I have often been stopped in the middle of a speech, but now in nothing I either said or did touching the matter in hand has the oracle opposed me. What do I take to be the explanation of this silence? I will tell you. It is an intimation that what has happened to me is a good, and that those of us who think that death is an evil are in error. For the customary sign would surely have opposed me had I been going to evil and not to good.
So I don't know how to find the truth in this. But when a demon announces that it is Jesus Christ, my gut feeling is to be very wary of what one has channelled. It may want to feed on you rather then serve you.
Man would like to be an egoist and cannot. This is the most striking characteristic of his wretchedness and the source of his greatness." Simone Weil....Gravity and Grace
User avatar
JackDaydream
Posts: 3220
Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm

Re: Christianity, Faith and Reason: What is Symbolic or Literal?

Post by JackDaydream »

Nick_A wrote: June 10th, 2022, 7:17 pm Demons and daemons are not the same. I believe a person can experience demonic influences a well as the beneficial influences of a daemon. Socrates had a daemon:

https://markandrealexander.com/2015/07/ ... ner-voice/
Socrates often mentions that he is guided by a daemon, a kind of divine spirit, oracle, or “sign,” that takes the form of an inner voice or non-vocal nudge. The guide never tells Socrates what to do. It only indicates when Socrates is not to do something.

This distinction is important. One way to tell that a dialogue is spurious is if it has Socrates’ daemon tell someone else what to do.

Socrates learned over time to listen to this inner divine voice. He acted in service to it. Nothing that he does in his life is untouched by this inner divine voice.

He describes it in the Apology:

You have heard me speak at sundry times and in diverse places of an oracle or sign which comes to me, and is the divinity which Meletus ridicules in the indictment. This sign, which is a kind of voice, first began to come to me when I was a child; it always forbids but never commands me to do anything which I am going to do. This is what deters me from being a politician.

Later, he explains that the defense he is giving to the Athenian court has been approved by this inner divine voice.

Hitherto the divine faculty of which the internal oracle is the source has constantly been in the habit of opposing me even about trifles, if I was going to make a slip or error in any matter; and now as you see there has come upon me that which may be thought, and is generally believed to be, the last and worst evil. But the oracle made no sign of opposition, either when I was leaving my house in the morning, or when I was on my way to the court, or while I was speaking, at anything which I was going to say; and yet I have often been stopped in the middle of a speech, but now in nothing I either said or did touching the matter in hand has the oracle opposed me. What do I take to be the explanation of this silence? I will tell you. It is an intimation that what has happened to me is a good, and that those of us who think that death is an evil are in error. For the customary sign would surely have opposed me had I been going to evil and not to good.
So I don't know how to find the truth in this. But when a demon announces that it is Jesus Christ, my gut feeling is to be very wary of what one has channelled. It may want to feed on you rather then serve you.
The idea of the daimon and demons is such a big difference and most people are far more familiar with the concept of demons. The idea of the daimon may far more obscure. In thinking about channelling it does seem that caution is extremely important, to avoid succumbing to the dark side of the collective unconscious. However, this aspect may be part of life anyway, so it may be that some kind of critical discernment is part of the process of thinking about all ideas which arise in a the human mind. Some may be dressed up in the veils of notions of the supernatural. The whole idea of the supernatural as a foundation can be problematic in itself, as if it comes from some higher dimension. It is so easy to become confused here. In separating the natural and supernatural, as well as any ideals derived from these notions, is a the task of phlosophy. The principle of reason is extremely important, but this may be about the essentials of ethics and human values, as well as the metaphysics and epistemology underlying religious perspectives, including the philosophy of Christianity.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021