I'm an atheist and materialist because I find objective evidence of material existence and no objective evidence of any spiritual existence. Will, Sauk Rapids
Do you believe in spiritual power? Laura Stanley answers,
I'd like to believe it so I don't examine it too closely. That's enough for me. . . . The God debate is non-falsifiable. No one wins. We believe what we want to believe.
That doesn't mean that He cannot relate to us on the level of the empirical ego.
Does God exist? Wrong question!
If by God one means the set of physical laws that govern the universe, as Einstein did, then clearly there is such a God.
To be certain of the existence of God and to be certain of the nonexistence of God seem to me to be the confident extremes in a subject so riddled with doubt and uncertainty as to inspire very little confidence indeed.
This oft-quoted saying of Einstein also answers both materialists and religious fundamentalists.
Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.
Unseen Reality, January 21
My promise to present views of Einstein and Carl Sagan will have to wait and so will my answer to other comments that have come in.
All that we see, objective/external reality, arises from unseen inner reality. Outer physical reality arises from spiritual reality, not the reverse. I quote my friend Sondra to state it in yet another way,
Physical reality is an effect of consciousness, not the cause of consciousness.Our thoughts, beliefs, emotions, outlook, intentions, attitudes, expectations, and so on, along with these elements of consciousness in others, create our external reality.
Christianity mistakes its myth for history and its symbol for fact.God Is Not Three Guys in the Sky
with theistic personalism. They are NOT the same. As a Catholic, I think it is especially important to understand the difference. I totally agree with you that God is not a person. The fact is, no major theologian of any of the Abrahamic faiths before the Reformation have ever made that claim.
God, as He is in himself, is, like Joe Campbell said, beyond all categories of human thought. He is unknowable, ineffable, inscrutable, the One, Being Itself, Actus Purus.
That doesn't mean that He cannot relate to us on the level of the empirical ego. Again, speaking from a Hindu perspective, Christianity is a bhaktic tradition par excellance, which stresses relationship primarily rather than identity with the Divine. It is neither incorrect nor inferior to the jnanic perspective that you apparently prefer.
An apophatic transpersonal Divine doesn't preclude a cataphatic personal point of view.
But, Roman Catholic theology has always been largely apophatic(within a theist context)- from the days of the church fathers right up to the Middle Ages, the theologians have stayed true to the doctrine of analogy. God is "personal" in the sense that "He" is not less than a person. Just because the adult mind is far beyond the child's mind, doesn't mean an adult cannot relate to and understand the child. Many spiritual seekers find the via negative to be too cold and sterile. Hence, the masses of humankind throughout the whole world have always tended to gravitate to the "path of love" and its devotional practices. That may be less "intellectual", but not any less true or salvific/enlightening. After all, ultimate reality is beyond our comprehension.
Respectfully, I think you might profit from looking at the difference between theistic personalism and classical theism.