Pantheism and Panentheism

[seattlegal]

This sounds good to me. References?

I was asking Avi for clarification regarding this post.

I was using the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate as a template. The downward reading would address the scientific aspects Avi mentioned, and the upward reading would address the psychological/philosophical aspect that Avi mentioned.

 

[seattlegal]

Re: !

Yeah, except for this part, (alchemical).

I think SG was making fun of me !

Do you make and/or seek to rely on funky elixirs or "happy pills" (or other materialistic means) as the way by which one draws closer to God? If so, then yes, I am making fun of you.

 

[Thomas]

As I see it, panentheism is concerned with redefining the world as a world that G-d is involved in above and beyond the primordial creation event.

The Abrahamic Traditions deals with a God as Transcendent Cause and Immanent Presence without the need to redefine pantheism which has been adequately philosophically demonstrated as an erroneous assumption in the first place.

Now, as a result of recognizing His His immanence, we see that G-d is even greater than classic theism would have you believe.

Netti-Netti, I'm amazed. If you think that then you've never really understood the Abrahamic Tradition.

Thomas

 

[seattlegal]

In my view, miracles can't exist. .

There is always a rational explanation. It has to be consistent with what we know about physics, chemistry, biology, geology, math. We have not found any exceptions, only things we don't yet understand. And generally we find out the reason later.

Are you denying that the "not finding any exceptions" might be due to "ignoring exceptions?"

 

[Avi]

Are you denying that the "not finding any exceptions" might be due to "ignoring exceptions?"

Of course it is impossible to prove an absolute. I cannot say with 100% assurance that no miracle ever occured.

But I can say with high probability that most reported miracles were caused by explainable phenomenon.

Not so long ago people believed that wind was caused by the motion of the tree branches. What a miracle !!

And it will be interesting to hear Netti's miracles !

 

[seattlegal]

Of course it is impossible to prove an absolute. I cannot say with 100% assurance that no miracle ever occured.

Are you trying to equate the irrational to the meaningless?

But I can say with high probability that most reported miracles were caused by explainable phenomenon.

Those are the best kind, imo.

Not so long ago people believed that wind was caused by the motion of the tree branches. What a miracle !!

How is that a miracle?

And it will be interesting to hear Netti's miracles !

Tossing pearls before swine comes to mind...

 

[Netti-Netti]

But nor are you demonstrating any equivalence between God and creature that could be called panentheism.

Hi Thomas, I see you did not cite a panentheist who posited equivalence "between God and creature". Is that because there is none?

The "equivalence between God and creature" language sounds like pantheism (G-d is all) ad thus misrepresents panentheism (G-d in all/G-d as the whole) and creates a false backdrop for comparisons between your ideas on Christianity and panentheism.

I'm not sure what you are trying to do by promoting this kind of conceptual confusion. Suffice it to say that your positions involves a misconception that casts serious doubts on everything you have been saying about panentheism thus far.

 

[Netti-Netti]

I'm amazed. If you think that then you've never really understood the Abrahamic Tradition.

Thomas, the comment you are responding to was a comparison between the ex nihilo Creator and a panentheistic evolutionary G-d. In theological circles the difference is recognized.

 

[Thomas]

Thomas, the comment you are responding to was a comparison between the ex nihilo Creator and a panentheistic evolutionary G-d. In theological circles the difference is recognized.

You seemed to be implying that an ex nihilo Creator is not immanently involved with His creation?

Thomas

 

[shawn]

What is funny about these kinds of discussions on these themes is people don't have anything to go on but their speculations so they cloak everything (or dress things up) in fancy sounding terminology which requires much study to decipher.
This is no different than the legal profession which does exactly the same thing to secure their jobs and make even more work for themselves by obfuscating simple things in obscure terminology.
Yes, it sounds all eloquent and technical, but it is just an egotistical defense mechanism employed by those too proud to admit that they know not what they prognosticate and pontificate upon.

pontificate:To act like a pontiff; to express one’s position or opinions dogmatically and pompously as if it is absolutely correct.(intransitive) To speak in a patronizing, supercilious or pompous manner, especially at length.

 

[seattlegal]

Re: An Interfaith view

In the Christian Tradition, we call this the Primordial Cause ... which does not exist, but is 'more-than-existence'


In the Christian Tradition, we have a name, for He said, "I am the Way (the Tao), The truth and the Life" (John 14:6).


"The Spirit breatheth where he will; and thou hearest his voice, but thou knowest not whence he cometh, and whither he goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." (John 3:8).


"Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say to you, before Abraham was made, I am." (John 8:58).

As regards the Supreme Ultimate proceeding from the Infinite ... the Son proceeds from the Father, the Logos of God, the Arche from the Apeiron, the Arche from the Arche Anarchos ...

"I and the father are one" (John 10:30) but "the father is greater than I" John 14:28.

"Do you know, daughter, who you are and who I am? If you know these two things, you would be blessed. You are that which is not; I am he who is."
The Dialogues of Catherine of Sienna.

Thomas

Yep. Quite similar. Even with the same use of water as illustration for the actions involved.

 

[seattlegal]

What is funny about these kinds of discussions on these themes is people don't have anything to go on but their speculations so they cloak everything (or dress things up) in fancy sounding terminology which requires much study to decipher.
This is no different than the legal profession which does exactly the same thing to secure their jobs and make even more work for themselves by obfuscating simple things in obscure terminology.
Yes, it sounds all eloquent and technical, but it is just an egotistical defense mechanism employed by those too proud to admit that they know not what they prognosticate and pontificate upon.

Aww shawn, let the guys do their thing.

You can always ask them to translate.

 

[Netti-Netti]

You seemed to be implying that an ex nihilo Creator is not immanently involved with His creation?

Thomas

If you look at what was very popular notion of G-d as outside Creation, the implication was that G-d did not act in history and in that sense was seen as not involved with His Creation. A theological ex nihilo Creation doctrine was elaborated at about the same time. There was probably a connection.

 

[Thomas]

If you look at what was very popular notion of G-d as outside Creation, the implication was that G-d did not act in history and in that sense was seen as not involved with His Creation. A theological ex nihilo Creation doctrine was elaborated at about the same time. There was probably a connection.

OK. I thought you were talking about Christian or Abrahamic theology specifically.

Thomas

 

[Netti-Netti]

Re: An Interfaith view

riginally Posted by seattlegal 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.

In the Christian Tradition, we call this the Primordial Cause ... which does not exist, but is 'more-than-existence'

The Taoist creation myth starts out with chaos, described as "formless." According to Erigena, the primordial causes are divine ideas which in turn cause all things. These primordial causes have some divine organization and divine intention to them, and therefore would not be considered chaos.

 

[Netti-Netti]

Re: An Interfaith view

Yep. Quite similar. Even with the same use of water as illustration for the actions involved.

But again, there seems to be no divine intention of any kind in the Taoist creation myth. So one would have to conclude that the similarities are superficial.

"The Son proceeds from the Father" is referring to the Incarnation (Christ Jesus). Is there any equivalent in Taoism?

 

[Netti-Netti]

OK. I thought you were talking about Christian or Abrahamic theology specifically.

Thomas

The concepts I was referring to were espoused by Gnostics and were apparently widely held among early Christians.

 

[Netti-Netti]

What is funny about these kinds of discussions on these themes is people don't have anything to go on but their speculations

Religion is largely speculative, isnt it? Does it make sense to look for physical proof for metaphysical things?

 

[seattlegal]

Re: An Interfaith view

But again, there seems to be no divine intention of any kind in the Taoist creation myth. So one would have to conclude that the similarities are superficial.

Wei wu wei.
Tao Te Ching 51

All things are produced by the Tao, and nourished by its
outflowing operation. They receive their forms according to the
nature of each, and are completed according to the circumstances of
their condition. Therefore all things without exception honour the
Tao, and exalt its outflowing operation.

This honouring of the Tao and exalting of its operation is not the
result of any ordination, but always a spontaneous tribute.

Thus it is that the Tao produces (all things), nourishes them,
brings them to their full growth, nurses them, completes them, matures
them, maintains them, and overspreads them.

It produces them and makes no claim to the possession of them; it
carries them through their processes and does not vaunt its ability in
doing so; it brings them to maturity and exercises no control over
them;--this is called its mysterious operation.​

"The Son proceeds from the Father" is referring to the Incarnation (Christ Jesus). Is there any equivalent in Taoism?

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.

 

[Netti-Netti]

Re: An Interfaith view

Wei wu wei.
Tao Te Ching 51

All things are produced by the Tao, and nourished by its
outflowing operation. They receive their forms according to the
nature of each, and are completed according to the circumstances of
their condition. Therefore all things without exception honour the
Tao, and exalt its outflowing operation.

This honouring of the Tao and exalting of its operation is not the
result of any ordination, but always a spontaneous tribute.

Thus it is that the Tao produces (all things), nourishes them,
brings them to their full growth, nurses them, completes them, matures
them, maintains them, and overspreads them.

It produces them and makes no claim to the possession of them; it
carries them through their processes and does not vaunt its ability in
doing so; it brings them to maturity and exercises no control over
them;--this is called its mysterious operation.​

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" (which is associated with Li) to consider, but it's not the same, imo.

You're very close to making a convert out of me.