Pantheism and Panentheism

[seattlegal]

Submission to G-d is an Abrahamic concept, which is developed in Genesis 22:

The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, "I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore.

Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me." ​

​

OK

Some people contend that from an Abrahamic perspective (Judaic, Christian, and Muslim) faith= obedience.

Faith = trust and fidelity (as in following through with any promises you make.)

Which brings me to the first paragraph of the Mahmoud Ayoub article you mentioned: There's "inherent Islam, which is the law of God for all created things in nature,"

So far, so good...

...and then there's "voluntary Islam, which is the human faith-commitment to affirm the Oneness (tawhid) of God and obey His will."

Which would correspond to Taoist wu wei in not letting your own desires get in the way.

I think the above distinction shows how different Taoism and Revelation-driven Abrahamic religions really are. The human faith-commitment is predicated on Revelation and the concept of G-d's conscious will toward Creation. Since Taoism doesn't have any of that, one might conclude that there is no such thing as human faith-commitment as such in Taoism, which is why some might question whether it is a religion.

Who told you there is no such thing as revelation in Taoism?

 

[Netti-Netti]

[/INDENT][/INDENT]
Faith = trust and fidelity (as in following through with any promises you make.)

As in G-d's promise and G-d's faithfulness toward His children.

Which would correspond to Taoist wu wei in not letting your own desires get in the way.

In the way of following divine will?

Who told you there is no such thing as revelation in Taoism?

As in Divine revelation of G-d's will? Not sure what you mean. What is
revelation in Taoism?

 

[Netti-Netti]

Obviously this forum is supposed to concerned with comparative religion. But sometimes looking for similarities can cause us to overlook important differences. I still remember someone saying that Buddhist have the equivalent of Christian mystical experiences. I'm not sure where Buddhists would get theistic images of the Father and the Son and so on. At any rate, I like the presentation of Taoism, but I think some comparisons are pushing it.

Based on descriptions attributed to Jesus, the Holy spirit is transcendental in origin and its function is the illumination of divine truth and a transformative empowerment that elevates human nature beyond the usual this-worldly attachments (sense experiences) to participate in divine life through a commitment to certain idealistic values. It may very well be true that Taoism recognizes some of these values, but they would mean something different if they are not considered part of a divine order.

Taoism tells us that the world evolves cyclically and developments reflect the inner nature of things, without needing the redemptive influence of divine Grace. That being the case, there is also no need for the Holy Spirit to help facilitate spiritual progress in the direction of divine values.

So far in the discussion there seems to be no equivalent in the Taoist view of things as far as a individual person of faith undergoing a transformation and becoming a vehicle for G-d's mercy. This theme is of interest because the Bible tells us that when G-d elects a soul to be saved, this will involve a regeneration of the person and a new nature being activated by the Holy Spirit. (Romans 2:28-29). This is not option in Taoism, which apparently has no place for the Holy Spirit or for redeeming Grace.

 

[seattlegal]

Which would correspond to Taoist wu wei in not letting your own desires get in the way.

In the way of following divine will?

In the way of the tao, and the "harmonizing breath of the Vacancy"

As in Divine revelation of G-d's will? Not sure what you mean. What is revelation in Taoism?

Tao Te Ching 42 (more translations here)
42

The Tao produced One; One produced Two; Two produced Three; Three produced All things. All things leave behind them the Obscurity (out of which they have come), and go forward to embrace the Brightness (into which they have emerged), while they are harmonised by the Breath of Vacancy.

What men dislike is to be orphans, to have little virtue, to be as
carriages without naves; and yet these are the designations which kings and princes use for themselves. So it is that some things are increased by being diminished, and others are diminished by being increased.

What other men (thus) teach, I also teach. The violent and strong do not die their natural death. I will make this the basis of my teaching.
​

Revelation in Taoism is associated with spontaneity, when your own desires are not obscuring the tao. It is subtle, but profound.

Tao Te Ching 1

The Tao that can be trodden is not the enduring and
unchanging Tao. The name that can be named is not the enduring and
unchanging name.

(Conceived of as) having no name, it is the Originator of heaven
and earth; (conceived of as) having a name, it is the Mother of all
things.

Always without desire we must be found,
If its deep mystery we would sound;
But if desire always within us be,
Its outer fringe is all that we shall see.

Under these two aspects, it is really the same; but as development
takes place, it receives the different names. Together we call them
the Mystery. Where the Mystery is the deepest is the gate of all that
is subtle and wonderful.​

Does this not fit into your definition of revelation?

 

[seattlegal]

Obviously this forum is supposed to concerned with comparative religion. But sometimes looking for similarities can cause us to overlook important differences.

Sorry if I was being a bit too yin. (Looking for interconnectedness.)
I did mention that the divergences seemed to spring from the different political preferences. These differences might be highlighted by The Three Treasures of Taoism, highlighted in blue below:

Tao Te Ching 67
All the world says that, while my Tao is great, it yet appears
to be inferior (to other systems of teaching). Now it is just its
greatness that makes it seem to be inferior. If it were like any
other (system), for long would its smallness have been known!

But I have three precious things which I prize and hold fast. The
first is gentleness; the second is economy; and the third is shrinking
from taking precedence of others.

With that gentleness I can be bold; with that economy I can be
liberal; shrinking from taking precedence of others, I can become a
vessel of the highest honour. Now-a-days they give up gentleness and
are all for being bold; economy, and are all for being liberal; the
hindmost place, and seek only to be foremost;--(of all which the end
is) death.

Gentleness is sure to be victorious even in battle, and firmly to
maintain its ground. Heaven will save its possessor, by his (very)
gentleness protecting him.
​

I still remember someone saying that Buddhist have the equivalent of Christian mystical experiences. I'm not sure where Buddhists would get theistic images of the Father and the Son and so on. At any rate, I like the presentation of Taoism, but I think some comparisons are pushing it.

Sorry. I do enjoy pushing the envelop.

Based on descriptions attributed to Jesus, the Holy spirit is transcendental in origin and its function is the illumination of divine truth and a transformative empowerment that elevates human nature beyond the usual this-worldly attachments (sense experiences) to participate in divine life through a commitment to certain idealistic values. It may very well be true that Taoism recognizes some of these values, but they would mean something different if they are not considered part of a divine order.

How is the Tao not divine order?

Taoism tells us that the world evolves cyclically and developments reflect the inner nature of things, without needing the redemptive influence of divine Grace. That being the case, there is also no need for the Holy Spirit to help facilitate spiritual progress in the direction of divine values.

What? Didn't we already cover this?

So far in the discussion there seems to be no equivalent in the Taoist view of things as far as a individual person of faith undergoing a transformation and becoming a vehicle for G-d's mercy.

Wu Wei.

This theme is of interest because the Bible tells us that when G-d elects a soul to be saved, this will involve a regeneration of the person and a new nature being activated by the Holy Spirit. (Romans 2:28-29). This is not option in Taoism, which apparently has no place for the Holy Spirit or for redeeming Grace.

I thought we already covered this, as well?

 

[nativeastral]

light relief

[youtube]hwyuQbIb0Xs[/youtube]

 

[Avi]

NA, very cute video. And I meant to thank you for this earlier post as well.

'At the most fundamental level, synchronicity led Jung to speculate about the nature of reality. The fact, for instance, that in synchronistic events the same archetypal pattern of meaning seems capable of expressing itself independently in both psychic and physical contexts suggested to him that `all reality [may be] grounded on an as yet unknown substrate possessing material and at the same time psychic qualities' (Jung 1958b: 411). The synchronistic principle `suggests that there is an inter-connection or unity of causally unrelated events, and thus postulates a unitary aspect of being which can very well be described as the unus mundus' (Jung 1954--55: 464--5). This postulated unitary background to existence, in which the concepts of psyche and matter and space and time merge into a psychophysical space-time continuum, was where Jung considered the archetypes themselves, as opposed to their phenomenal manifestations, ultimately to be located. To express this ambivalent nature -- at once psychic and physical yet neither because beyond both -- he was led to coin the term `psychoid'. The ability of the archetype to manifest synchronistically in independent psychic and physical contexts is itself an indicator of its fundamentally psychoid nature.
Regarding the phenomenal world rather than its hypothetical substrate, synchronicity, as a connecting principle complementary to causality, directs attention to a whole dimension of experienceable relationships between events which would be disregarded or marginalized by any exclusively causalistic view. On a general level, this helps create conceptual space for the acknowledgment of radically anomalous or paranormal events which might otherwise be denied.'
synchronicity

If feel that this idea of synchronicity brings together ideas of physics and psychology in a very interesting way. Causality is certainly in important issue in physics. I guess it is also important in psychology, and perhaps that is where the overlap exists.

I am still re-reading much of this thread, so many interesting ideas all interconnected !!

 

[seattlegal]

NA, very cute video. And I meant to thank you for this earlier post as well.




If feel that this idea of synchronicity brings together ideas of physics and psychology in a very interesting way. Causality is certainly in important issue in physics. I guess it is also important in psychology, and perhaps that is where the overlap exists.

I am still re-reading much of this thread, so many interesting ideas all interconnected !!

Jung studied quite a few traditions:

Wiki article on Carl Jung
Jung's work on himself and his patients convinced him that life has a spiritual purpose beyond material goals. Our main task, he believed, is to discover and fulfill our deep innate potential, much as the acorn contains the potential to become the oak, or the caterpillar to become the butterfly. Based on his study of Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, Taoism, and other traditions, Jung perceived that this journey of transformation, which he called individuation, is at the mystical heart of all religions. It is a journey to meet the self and at the same time to meet the Divine. Unlike Sigmund Freud, Jung thought spiritual experience was essential to our well-being.[17]
In 1944 Jung published “Psychology and Alchemy”, where he analyzed the alchemical symbols and showed a direct relationship to the psychoanalytical process. He argued that the alchemical process was the transformation of the impure soul (lead) to perfected soul (gold), and a metaphor for the individuation process.[12]
​

There's that alchemy and psychology connection, again!

 

[Thomas]

Re: An Interfaith view

Hi Netti-Netti

I would say that it is based in the idea of Deity that is becoming infinite through finite forms.

If I read you right, you're effectively making a quantitative valuation — that the Deity becomes infinite through an infinite number of finite forms?

But no number of finite forms can equal the qualitative difference between finite and infinite, which is the point.

Another way of looking at it is — the finite has a beginning, and and end; it appears and it disappears; it has a cause, it is not self-subsisting; it moves; it suffers ... none of these things are divine qualities ... in fact finitude possesses no divine qualities.

Except it's source by Divine Causation.

I would further say the Deity has no interest in dispersing Itself into myriad finite forms, for ontologically that is neither a good for the Deity, nor for the forms ... ?

A Deity that creates the myriad finite forms, and then calls them all into harmony with Itself, by the Gift of Itself to them ... so that all creation realises itself as One in the Deity.

Panentheism seems to be saying "the One is in all things" whereas Christian metaphysics says yes, but the aim of all things is the unity of "all things in the One"

'Everything returns to the source of its arising'

It's so long since I read Teilhard de Chardin, I really can't comment.

Thomas

 

[Netti-Netti]

Re: An Interfaith view

Lemme think about that one in regards to the incarnation. There is the supreme ultimate, through which all creation proceeds, proceeding from the infinite, and there's always "the body of Chien (or Qian)" (which is associated with Li) to consider, but it's not the same, imo.

ok, so Taoism doesn't have anything like the Incarnation. Let's move on to the Holy Spirit....

"Taoism tells us that the world evolves ....without needing the redemptive influence of divine Grace. That being the case, there is also no need for the Holy Spirit to help facilitate spiritual progress in the direction of divine values."
​

What? Didn't we already cover this?

Actually, no. This is the first time I have mentioned the Holy Spirit in relation to Taoism and I'm making a point of mentioning it to show that you and Thomas have been trying to compare Taosim with Christian Panentheism even though Taoism does not meet three basic criteria:

1) Taoism does not have a Creator God who controls and sustains the wold while remaining independent of Creation, and whose essence is not exhausted by Creation.

2) Taoism does not have a place for a Holy Spirit who is transcendental in origin and who elevates human nature.

3) By your own admission, the Incarnation does not have a place inTaoism.

​

I thought we already covered this.

No, we haven't. I wanted to see how the discussion would evolve (and see how many more times Thomas would agree with you on various Taoist/Christian comparison) before I'd mention that I was very surprised to see Thomas agree with you a while back that the Tao allegedly acts like the Holy Spirit even though there is no reason to think of Tao as a theistic Creator G-d or deity of any kind. (see Thomas' Post #125).

A Christian notion of Holy Spirit is that it's one of three Divine Persons in the Holy Trinity. Both you and Thomas seems to be suggesting that, contrary to a Christian view, it's possible for there to be the Holy Spirit without a theistic Creator G-d who is also part of the Trinity. In effect, the both of you have been revising Christian doctrine on the spot in order to find some semblances to Taoism.

 

[Netti-Netti]

Who told you there is no such thing as revelation in Taoism?

How can there be Revelation when there is no divine agency?

Does this not fit into your definition of revelation?

I think of revelation in Judeo Christian terms as being from a divine agency who is outside Creation who is revealing a divine/transcendent jurisdiction over the created world. It can include an element of divine judgment and salvation. In Jewish terms, revelation is G-d's way of calling to me to enter into dialogue with Him. In Christian terms, revelation took the form of Christ Jesus. There is no match for any of this in your example.

The Tao that can be trodden is not the enduring and unchanging Tao. The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name.
​

This is a distinction between universals and the outward manifested forms.

(Conceived of as) having no name, it is the Originator of heaven and earth; (conceived of as) having a name, it is the Mother of all things.
​

This tells us something about a wold of forms but does not portray the agencies having conscious intentions or as setting up divine standards of justice that come into play in salvation.

Always without desire we must be found, If its deep mystery we would sound; But if desire always within us be, Its outer fringe is all that we shall see.
​

This sounds like the Judeo Christian idea of communication with the Divine. But again it does not really tell us anout a divine intention that we are able to discuss the way we can talk about G-d's Will as revealed in the Scriptures and the Incarnation.

Under these two aspects, it is really the same; but as development takes place, it receives the different names.
​

The universals unfold as particulars, but there's no divine intervention or control behind any of it.

Together we call them the Mystery. Where the Mystery is the deepest is the gate of all that is subtle and wonderful.
​

This is basically saying that we don't know, whereas a Judeo-Christian view is that we do know because we have revelation in the form of Scripture.

 

[seattlegal]

Re: An Interfaith view

ok, so Taoism doesn't have anything like the Incarnation. Let's move on to the Holy Spirit....

"Taoism tells us that the world evolves ....without needing the redemptive influence of divine Grace. That being the case, there is also no need for the Holy Spirit to help facilitate spiritual progress in the direction of divine values."
​

Actually, no. This is the first time I have mentioned the Holy Spirit in relation to Taoism and I'm making a point of mentioning it to show that you and Thomas have been trying to compare Taosim with Christian Panentheism even though Taoism does not meet three basic criteria:

1) Taoism does not have a Creator God who controls and sustains the wold while remaining independent of Creation, and whose essence is not exhausted by Creation.​

​

See Tao Te Ching 25 (Already posted several times on this thread, but here it is yet again)

25

There was something undefined and complete, coming into
existence before Heaven and Earth. How still it was and formless,
standing alone, and undergoing no change, reaching everywhere and in
no danger (of being exhausted)! It may be regarded as the Mother of
all things.

I do not know its name, and I give it the designation of the Tao
(the Way or Course). Making an effort (further) to give it a name I
call it The Great.

Great, it passes on (in constant flow). Passing on, it becomes
remote. Having become remote, it returns. Therefore the Tao is
great; Heaven is great; Earth is great; and the (sage) king is also
great. In the universe there are four that are great, and the (sage)
king is one of them.

Man takes his law from the Earth; the Earth takes its law from
Heaven; Heaven takes its law from the Tao. The law of the Tao is its
being what it is.​

I would say that this meets all of your criteria above.

2) Taoism does not have a place for a Holy Spirit who is transcendental in origin and who elevates human nature.

See part in blue highlighted above, as well as Tao Te Ching 42 (yet again)

42

The Tao produced One; One produced Two; Two produced Three;
Three produced All things. All things leave behind them the Obscurity
(out of which they have come), and go forward to embrace the
Brightness (into which they have emerged), while they are harmonised
by the Breath of Vacancy.

What men dislike is to be orphans, to have little virtue, to be as
carriages without naves; and yet these are the designations which
kings and princes use for themselves. So it is that some things are
increased by being diminished, and others are diminished by being
increased.

What other men (thus) teach, I also teach. The violent and strong
do not die their natural death. I will make this the basis of my
teaching.​

3) By your own admission, the Incarnation does not have a place in Taoism.

True, I cannot think of where The Incarnation might be mentioned, although taiji is very much like the Logos.

I thought we already covered this.

No, we haven't. I wanted to see how the discussion would evolve (and see how many more times Thomas would agree with you on various Taoist/Christian comparison) before I'd mention that I was very surprised to see Thomas agree with you a while back that the Tao allegedly acts like the Holy Spirit even though there is no reason to think of Tao as a theistic Creator G-d or deity of any kind. (see Thomas' Post #125).

Keywords: acts like. How does wu wei work? By letting the action of the tao work without hindering it by your own desires.
See my response here:

How is the Tao not divine order?

A Christian notion of Holy Spirit is that it's one of three Divine Persons in the Holy Trinity. Both you and Thomas seems to be suggesting that, contrary to a Christian view, it's possible for there to be the Holy Spirit without a theistic Creator G-d who is also part of the Trinity. In effect, the both of you have been revising Christian doctrine on the spot in order to find some semblances to Taoism.

Taoism describes qualities and actions. Wuji is the formless tao, taiji is like the logos that creates the form, and the tao flows through the forms. There's your three. See Tao Te Ching 42 above.

 

[Thomas]

Re: An Interfaith view

This is the first time I have mentioned the Holy Spirit in relation to Taoism and I'm making a point of mentioning it to show that you and Thomas have been trying to compare Taosim with Christian Panentheism even though Taoism does not meet three basic criteria

Er ... no I haven't. As I don't hold with 'Christian Panentheism', I would hardly bother trying to make a comparison.

... before I'd mention that I was very surprised to see Thomas agree with you a while back that the Tao allegedly acts like the Holy Spirit even though there is no reason to think of Tao as a theistic Creator G-d or deity of any kind. (see Thomas' Post #125).

Then you assume too much.

I believe that the Tao is an achievement of the reasoning intellect, and delight in its existence as such. Similarly I reckon that Anaximander's theory of Aperion also marks a highpoint in human reasoning and bears many correspondences with the philosophy of the Tao. It's a shame that all we have of Anaximander is a couple of fragments. Again there's Plato ...

I also happen to believe that Christianity is Revealed, which transcends the reasoning faculty, and illuminates those things that can only be foreshadowed in the unaided intellect.

A Christian notion of Holy Spirit is that it's one of three Divine Persons in the Holy Trinity. Both you and Thomas seems to be suggesting that, contrary to a Christian view, it's possible for there to be the Holy Spirit without a theistic Creator G-d who is also part of the Trinity. In effect, the both of you have been revising Christian doctrine on the spot in order to find some semblances to Taoism.

Well, I don't think Seattlegal has at all, and anyone who could think that of me really hasn't got the first idea of what I'm talking about, or where I'm coming from.

Having said that, I do believe there's ground for respectful discussion between between Christianity and Taoism without either side having to surrender its beliefs, or reinvent itself to find some common ground ... I would have thought that ground was the search for truth itself.

From another viewpoint, I am surprised to see you affirm things of Christianity in your responses to Seattlegal that you have refuted in your arguments with me.

Thomas

 

[seattlegal]

How can there be Revelation when there is no divine agency?

Remember this post? About your not denying the agency of the tao?

The Tao can't be pinned down.

That's too bad because that means you can't compare Taoism with theisms that have Revelation to explain divine intention!!

The Tao Te Ching writes about those deny the agency of the Tao, and the resulting lessening of the positive transformative action of the Tao within those who deny it as such:

What men dislike is to be orphans, to have little virtue, to be as
carriages without naves; and yet these are the designations which kings and princes use for themselves. So it is that some things are increased by being diminished, and others are diminished by being increased.​

​

I never denied the agency of Tao. I merely said that the passages you cited don't qualify Taoism as theism.

Now you seem to be denying the agency of the tao...

How about this post? Do you remember this one?

How is the Tao not divine order?

Now let's get back to revelation and divine agency:

I think of revelation in Judeo Christian terms as being from a divine agency who is outside Creation who is revealing a divine/transcendent jurisdiction over the created world. It can include an element of divine judgment and salvation. In Jewish terms, revelation is G-d's way of calling to me to enter into dialogue with Him. In Christian terms, revelation took the form of Christ Jesus. There is no match for any of this in your example.

The Tao that can be trodden is not the enduring and unchanging Tao. The name that can be named is not the enduring and unchanging name.
​

This is a distinction between universals and the outward manifested forms.

Wuij and taiji, or the formless infinite and the logos.

(Conceived of as) having no name, it is the Originator of heaven and earth; (conceived of as) having a name, it is the Mother of all things.
​

This tells us something about a wold of forms but does not portray the agencies having conscious intentions or as setting up divine standards of justice that come into play in salvation.

That comes later on in the Tao Te Ching, and I've posted it several times already.

Always without desire we must be found, If its deep mystery we would sound; But if desire always within us be, Its outer fringe is all that we shall see.
​

This sounds like the Judeo Christian idea of communication with the Divine. But again it does not really tell us anout a divine intention that we are able to discuss the way we can talk about G-d's Will as revealed in the Scriptures and the Incarnation.

You have to be in it (without desire) or you will only see the outer fringes, no? We can talk about it all we want, but that is not the same as being in it. (See line 1) (Talking about it requires attention on the part of the listener, just as being in the tao requires inattention to our own desires.)

Under these two aspects, it is really the same; but as development takes place, it receives the different names.
​

The universals unfold as particulars, but there's no divine intervention or control behind any of it.

Our desires get in the way of it. In other words, we are free to pay attention to our own desires rather than to pay attention to the tao. (Just as you are free to not pay attention to what is being written.)
Our paying attention to our own desires rather than being in the tao does not mean it is not there. As the next line says, the tao is subtle, so it it easy to ignore in favor of paying attention to our own desires.

Together we call them the Mystery. Where the Mystery is the deepest is the gate of all that is subtle and wonderful.
​

This is basically saying that we don't know, whereas a Judeo-Christian view is that we do know because we have revelation in the form of Scripture.

No, it is saying that it is subtle and wonderful. (And the name that can be named is not the enduring name.)

 

[Netti-Netti]

Re: An Interfaith view

I believe that the Tao is an achievement of the reasoning intellect, and delight in its existence as such. Similarly I reckon that Anaximander's theory of Aperion also marks a highpoint in human reasoning and bears many correspondences with the philosophy of the Tao.

Relevance to pantheism or panentheism?

I do believe there's ground for respectful discussion between between Christianity and Taoism without either side having to surrender its beliefs, or reinvent itself to find some common ground .

I'd be interested in your thoughts on common ground with respect to End of Times, that is, the idea of salvation.

So far into the discussion I haven't seen anything resembling a (panen)theistic view in Taoism, particularly in terms of the immortality of the soul, the Covenant of Grace, the Heavenly afterlife, Divine Judgment, punishment for wrongdoing, things like that.

 

[Netti-Netti]

No, it is saying that it is subtle and wonderful.

Many things can be subtle and wonderful wihtout being divine.

Taoism describes qualities and actions. Wuji is the formless tao, taiji is like the logos that creates the form, and the tao flows through the forms. There's your three.

Which of those three are salvation principles? In a Christian view, the Holy Spirit and the Incarnation are salvific in function and importance. Pantheistic ideologies still have a place for them.

The Free dictionary.com definition of salvific reads:

Having the intention or power to bring about salvation or redemption.

Example: "the doctrine that only a perfect male form can incarnate G-d fully and be salvific"
​

(I would think a Taoist would like that example!)

That comes later on in the Tao Te Ching, and I've posted it several times already.

You've posted on conscious intent of the Tao? Sorry I missed that.

Since it would be ancient text, I would be looking for a description that uses anthropomorphic terms to attest to a creator G-d's plan. Here is an example of it: "We speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began." (Corinthians 2:7) Not only does this indicate planfulness, it also asserts that G-d transcends the world.

As far as I can tell, there is no divine agency and no divine plan in Taoist cosmology. Your own quote attest that at the beginning, the unfolding of the world may have had some primordial force behind it, but what we see in nature now is a self-perpetuating cyclic process: "Great, it passes on (in constant flow). Passing on, it becomes remote. Having become remote, it returns."

There is a cycle that involves the world of forms returning to chaos - a diffuse and "vague" and impersonal state of "no-thingness," presumably something like a state of pure potentiality. That chaos is not G-d. It is merely one phase in a mechanistic cycle that keeps repeating the same basic mechanism of Taoist cosmology without any divine agency. I'd say this is much closer to being a barren scientific world view than religion.

Can we agree that here is nothing in the Taoist creation accounts you've cited that gives the impression of divine intention, divine control, or divine intervention?

 

[seattlegal]

Many things can be subtle and wonderful wihtout being divine.
<...>

There is a cycle that involves the world of forms returning to chaos - a diffuse and "vague" and impersonal state of "no-thingness," presumably something like a state of pure potentiality. That chaos is not G-d. It is merely one phase in a mechanistic cycle that keeps repeating the same basic mechanism of Taoist cosmology without any divine agency. I'd say this is much closer to being a barren scientific world view than religion.

Can we agree that here is nothing in the Taoist creation accounts you've cited that gives the impression of divine intention, divine control, or divine intervention?

If you are looking for a thing you won't find it. Even Lao Tzu said he was hard pressed to name and describe it. (Tao Te Ching 25) You describe it as chaos. Lao Tzu described it as the way and as great, and described the order that is associated with it:

Man takes his law from the Earth; the Earth takes its law from
Heaven; Heaven takes its law from the Tao. The law of the Tao is its
being what it is.​

Lemme post the etymology of the word design for you:

design 1548, from L. designare "mark out, devise," from de- "out" + signare "to mark," from signum "a mark, sign." Originally in Eng. with the meaning now attached to designate (1646, from L. designatus, pp. of designare); many modern uses of design are metaphoric extensions. Designer (adj.) in the fashion sense of "prestigious" is first recorded 1966; designer drug is from 1983. Designing "scheming" is from 1671. Designated hitter introduced in American League baseball in 1973, soon giving wide figurative extension to designated.​

What does it take to make form from formlessness, and to animate these forms? Can you do it? Lemme post the etymology of the word intelligence for you:

intelligence 1390, "faculty of understanding," from O.Fr. intelligence (12c.), from L. intelligentia "understanding," from intelligentem (nom. intelligens) "discerning," prp. of intelligere "to understand, comprehend," from inter- "between" + legere "choose, pick out, read" (see lecture). Meaning superior understanding, sagacity" is from c.1430. Sense of "information, news" first recorded c.1450, especially "secret information from spies" (1587). Intelligent is a 1509 back-formation; Intelligentsia "the intellectual class collectively" is 1907, from Rus. intelligyentsia, from Latin. Intelligence quotient first recorded 1922 (see I.Q.).​

Yes, Taoism is all about the way of intelligent design. Have you also noticed how Te is also emphasized? Here's the western view, which divides it up:

virtue c.1225, "moral life and conduct, moral excellence," vertu, from Anglo-Fr. and O.Fr. vertu, from L. virtutem (nom. virtus) "moral strength, manliness, valor, excellence, worth," from vir "man" (see virile). Phrase by virtue of (c.1230) preserves alternative M.E. sense of "efficacy." Wyclif Bible has virtue where K.J.V. uses power. The seven cardinal virtues (c.1320) were divided into the natural (justice, prudence, temperance, fortitude) and the theological (hope, faith, charity). To make a virtue of a necessity (c.1374) translates L. facere de necessitate virtutem. [Jerome]​

So lemme see, is intelligent design a barren scientific world view? (your words)

 

[shawn]

Mortality could be the playhouse for that which is immortal.
We are ignorant and fallible, etc, all those things which the divine is not,
So here we are all running around being busy, doing things, having experiences and thinking we are individuals which are somehow separated from the divine when nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[seattlegal]

Mortality could be the playhouse for that which is immortal.
We are ignorant and fallible, etc, all those things which the divine is not,
So here we are all running around being busy, doing things, having experiences and thinking we are individuals which are somehow separated from the divine when nothing could be further from the truth.

From The Zen of Farting thread:

Tao Te Ching 3, modern interpretation by Ron Hogan:

Stop doing stuff all the time,
and watch what happens.​

 

[Netti-Netti]

If you are looking for a thing you won't find it.
Even Lao Tzu said he was hard pressed to name and describe it.

Well ok, if you can't name it or describe it, how do you study it?

Yes, Taoism is all about the way of intelligent design.

First of all, intelligent design theory does not settle the question of deity being responsible for the natural order of things -- you know, the question I keep asking and don't get an answer on.

Secondly, I'm not sure how you would reconcile basic Taoist concepts to intelligent design theory as a scientific paradigm. It is theory that includes arguments or propositions that are "empirically testable or even falsifiable," and involve testable predictions.

Virtually any discovery in astrobiology is likely to bear on our (intelligent design testability) argument one way or the other. ...We have given only two examples here. There are many other design arguments in biology, origin-of-life studies, and paleontology that are also empirically testable and that make predictions. Honest commentators should stop claiming that ID is empirically untestable, or that it makes no predictions. The claim itself has been tested and falsified.
​

Evolution News & Views: Intelligent Design is Empirically Testable and Makes Predictions


You say Taoism is "all about the way of intelligent design." Does that mean you have ideas on what aspects of Taoism would lend themselves to empirical investigation?

Like which of these qualities of the Tao would you say lend themselves to testable hypotheses: "mysterious" or "unnameable" or "blurred and indistinct"? How would you measure these things? And how do we establish that the Tao indeed antedated heaven and earth, as has been claimed?

Lemme know when you'd like to take a break. I know digging a deep hole is hard work.

A refreshment perhaps?.....