Pantheism and Panentheism

Discussion in 'Belief and Spirituality' started by Avi, Sep 5, 2009.

  1. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    First point: No less inconsistant than any other view.

    Second point: Yes, it is possible. I can move a cart without being part of the cart. Without me, the cart is inert, with me, it moves. The cart does not become part of me nor do I become part of the cart. We remain ontologically distinct.
     
  2. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    And all the others have such a "right"? Evidently, they seem to think so. However, since mine is the minority view, you decide it is safest to launch an attack upon me.

    I do not worship the dead material world as you do. That things EXIST is evidence that God is within creation.
     
  3. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,731
    Likes Received:
    1,408
    Ah, but some of us don't believe you are distinct. You and the cart are one. You just see yourself as seperate. It isn't uncomon.

    To me it is sort of like when you scratch your left arm with your right fingernail. The cells in your fingernail don't know they are connected to the cells in your right arm...and they'll scratch away till the arm bleeds if you insist. But you know you are all one.

    In the same way we cannot hurt another without hurting ourselves. If we'd all just understand this it would be a different world.
     
  4. Gatekeeper

    Gatekeeper Shades of Reason

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,330
    Likes Received:
    39
    You might be able to move the cart without being the cart itself, but you cannot move the cart without first becoming a part of it. In the same way, God is part of us, and we are a part of God. In the same way, I am part of you and you are part of me. We collectively make up one body, just as all things make up the entirety of God.

    The individual parts of existence are a very real a part of God, but this does not mean the individual parts are God. My being a part of you does not make me you, only a very real part of you and your reality.

    Go back to Genesis and look to the fall of man. Adams sins effected us all, just as your sins and my sins effect us all. Like Wil suggested, we cannot harm others without harming ourselves. We are one, and are in this life together [as one].

    The idea that we are separate from God, and separate from one another, causes us to be blind to the realities of life, just is it tends to make us selfish.

    The sooner we realize that we are [one] and start learning from our mistakes and from the mistakes of others, and by putting others before ourselves, the sooner we (As a species) can begin the healing process (Collectively).

    For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function, 5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

    Romans 12:4-5 (ESV)





    GK
     
  5. immortalitylost

    immortalitylost Say Meow.

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Messages:
    862
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just poppin in to say I'm still here. I just haven't found much to say that hasn't been said already, and I'm afraid it's still the case now. :eek:

    Just wanted to say that I agree with wil and GK. God can be completely a part of everything in creation, and still completely distinct from it. Just because God is within all of creation does not mean that creation is God, or visa-versa, nor that creation is necessarily made up of God, woven from the same "fabric" as.

    I just don't see where it becomes a problem that God is both a part of everything, and yet distinct from it. I mean, he's God. Doin the impossible is kinda his thing.:D

    Just look at the whole free will paradox he's got goin. :p
     
  6. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    Prove it. Prove that my view of separateness is and must be incorrect. This has not been done. Instead, it has merely been dismissed and ignored.
     
  7. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sophistry. Nothing but sophistry. I do NOT BECOME PART OF THE CART WHEN I MOVE IT. Prove that I do. Prove that you are not just playing word games. You claim I do, I claim I do not. Prove your view over mine. I predict that you will now cop out and claim that you don't have to prove it.

    I've never claimed that my view is necessarily correct, only that it is not untenable and not worthy of casual, crass, and close-minded dismissal as seems to be so common on this board. It is no wonder that the Orthodox are so few and far between here. Our models are so alien to the paradigms here that they simply cannot be grasped.

    We are not part of God. God is ontologically distinct from creation.

    That is the heresy of pantheism, not supportable by the full tradition of Scriptural interpretation.
     
  8. Gatekeeper

    Gatekeeper Shades of Reason

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,330
    Likes Received:
    39
    I can give you an example of what I mean if you like. :) Btw, this isn't a battle here, only a discussion of our differing views. Say you have a glass of water. The water is what it is - water. Say you add vinegar to that water. (Just as you must add yourself to the cart to move it) the vinegar now becomes a part of the water, but is not the water itself, only a part of. It's not a complicated thing.
    It seems to me that you are dismissing my view also, only you seem to be a bit agitated because I view things differently than you.

    It's not brain surgery, but it can be a difficult thing to understand when you are conditioned to view it another way.

    Really? Prove it. :p

    Oh boy, here we go ... the H word. It was only a matter of time, lol.

    GK -->> The happy heretic
     
  9. Netti-Netti

    Netti-Netti New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    You must have gotten the same fortune cookie I did: "I see an epistemic quandary in your future."
     
  10. Avi

    Avi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dogbrain, I think in an interfaith environment there might be a good deal of questioning and discussion about religions. If you are confident in your beliefs you can simply explain them. You do not have to convince everyone that you are right.

    On the other hand, are you interested in learning perspectives which are very different from your own ?
     
  11. shawn

    shawn New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,085
    Likes Received:
    0
    Based on your study, education and experience. But this does not make your opinion the last word on the matter.
    I have had experience which has proved that opinion of yours to be utterly wrong.
    But I cannot prove it to you.
    I wish that it were different and such things could be proved
    I do not really agree with the pantheist position and see panentheism as being much more reasonable.
    But I think that to say God is completely divorced and separate from creation is just as misplaced a notion as saying the creation is God.
     
  12. immortalitylost

    immortalitylost Say Meow.

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Messages:
    862
    Likes Received:
    0
    Um... ok, here's what I've got so far. My working hypothesis as it were...

    Creation is in God, as in, all possibilities that make up creation, including matter, which is an actuality of possibility. In this way creation is one with God, as it would not exist if not for God holding it's possibility. And may not exist in some reality as that is yet another possibility...

    However, Creation is not made up of the same "material" as God. It does not hold the consciousness of God intrinsically (exceptions are possible as per God's will), and is not a part of him, as a limb would be. In this way it is completely distinct from God, in that it is made of separate stuff, and made up of many consciousnesses and composts of matter, not many parts of God made matter, holding many fractions of his consciousness.

    So we're back to paradox. Creation is one with God, and at the same time distinct.

    These are my views on the matter, lol, I said matter... Not sure if this helps, but I thought I'd throw 'em out there. Criticize away if this doesn't do it for ya!


    Y(^_^) = Peace!
     
  13. nativeastral

    nativeastral fluffy future

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    1,525
    Likes Received:
    0
    [youtube]XGK84Poeynk[/youtube]
     
  14. wil

    wil UNeyeR1

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    20,731
    Likes Received:
    1,408
    Namaste Dogbrain and peace my brother,

    I'm afraid I am not the scientist. But a connection with all has been discussed frequently recently in various scientific theories.

    I am comfortable with it, it resonates with my beliefs. Do you care to prove that man made wine and bread turn into flesh and blood? I wouldn't ask you to prove the myriad of your beliefs. Our beliefs differ, I don't have any issues with that.

    (Namaste NativeAstral, too funny you posting yours while I was writing!! thanx!)
     
  15. iBrian

    iBrian Peace, Love and Unity Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,537
    Likes Received:
    7
    Has it been proven to be "correct"?
     
  16. Dogbrain

    Dogbrain New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2008
    Messages:
    813
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's just it, everyone else presumes and insists that their views must be correct and mine must be incorrect. My view, and the view of my Church, is simply dismissed, airily hand-waved away.

    I present the view of my Church, and I only get told that it cannot be correct. Why can it not be correct? Or have I misunderstood this board, and the proper protocol here is simply to be dismissive of the doctrines of others?
     
  17. Netti-Netti

    Netti-Netti New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,571
    Likes Received:
    0
    It might have some value in the dialogical dialect. Ditto the pitting of seemly incompatible views against each. It's a fairly traditional way of framing arguments and dramatizing. By no means specific to this forum.
     
  18. Avi

    Avi Interfaith Forums

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dogbrain, can you explain how your views are different from those of Thomas, who also rejects panentheism ? Please review his 57 posts on this thread before making a rash decision.

    Your understanding is correct, the proper protocol on this board is immediate and complete dismissal of all other doctrines than the one I follow :rolleyes:.
     
  19. iBrian

    iBrian Peace, Love and Unity Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2003
    Messages:
    6,537
    Likes Received:
    7
    I've been laughing at this thread throughout, for the various attempts to force various traditions on what was already stated to be an unknown quality.

    If someone believes they have a tradition that offers answers, and you disagree, there's no need to take it too seriously. :)
     
  20. seattlegal

    seattlegal Why do cows say mu?

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2005
    Messages:
    6,549
    Likes Received:
    26
    Hehehe! Did your fortune cookie contain a self-fulfilling prophecy? :p
     

Share This Page