Mine too but I’ve always strived to be succinct though as @LM77 knows I do not always succeed. All of this faith and sacred stuff is extremely hard to write about at all.
2 Likes
You give me an idea, it would probably shorten the reaction time I usually need, catching up on things I am not fully conversant about. Do you have a suggestion, which AI to use?
Actually I’ve never used one, personally, so can’t offer a recommendation… but from what I’ve heard from students, they certainly improve one’s efficiency!
I quite liked the video, but to be honest, the personalities he mentions that have give us the dogma that traditional theism uses all theorise using scriptures in a way that they weren’t intended, except perhaps the letters of Paul. My perspective is from varying disciplines, not only Iain McGilchrist’s book, including the analytic idealism of Bernardo Kastrup, as well as the teaching of Advaita Vedanta and Taoism. I also had a typical lay preacher training, albeit in German.
But my Kindle is full of theological treatises and books, and I have gathered the transcriptions of many videos I have seen, and as a pensioner, has a lot of time on my hands. Meditation practise complements the list, so as Mark has said, I tend to write far too much drawing from all of these sources, and have landed at panentheism as the most viable hypothesis.
I liked it too.
Thankfully we are more able now and mature enough to take it each in our own way as the Spirit leads
Then you should be aware of John 1:1-2.
And 1 John 1:1
“we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched”
Mine tastes pretty good because it is about experienced reality (you may not have read), not just a lot of words strung together about personal conjectures.
It is simple, not simplistic – it is about a Father’s interactions in the lives of his children.
That says essentially nothing true. Jesus calls me his friend and he has rescued me from my sin and Father has adopted me into his family. That is the Good News and there is no better. It is you, sir, who ignore his words, and that has very deep consequences.
I have no argument with that, but it appears I know what it means and you do not.
1 Like
I like John 14:21, especially the present continuous tense of the YLT.
Good friends of mine who may not be enamored with institutionalized religions have, nonetheless, seen more in life than materialism. I have on occasion quipped that some of them may be more Christian in their acts than many of us who profess the faith verbally but perhaps fall short in our daily lives.
2 Likes
Regarding panentheism and dualism, it does seem to bear mentioning the wonder of how the immediate effect of an uncaused cause will entirely appear to come from nothing
You repeat that a lot without context and it has just sort of rolled off my back, so to speak. But pondering it a little now (I’m a bit slow ; - ), I’m realizing how nicely big bang cosmology gives it context.
And I’m also wondering if it also doesn’t fit Father’s other providential interventions (‘other’ because the beginning of the universe should qualify!). The causes of the orchestrated and preternatural timings and placings are certainly not evident and those effects “appear to come from nothing”, but the effects are bursting with meaning and the M.O. certainly points to the Cause (and we’re not even talking about supernatural miracles).
1 Like
“I AM” in the Pentateuch is a statement that sets YHWH-Elohim starkly apart from all other entities, being a declaration that YHWH-Elohim alone exists in and of Himself and thus all others are contingent.
3 Likes
I’ll note in connection with the mention of Luther that Luther and later theologians distinguished between different modes of God’s presence.
2 Likes
Sorry for butting in but I’m struck by the part of the expression I bolded. Isn’t it a little odd to think of God as an entity amongst others even if He is deemed as having qualities which set him apart? It is what makes panentheism so appealing to me.
This seems to tie well into the communicable and incommunicable attributes of God
1 Like
It’s a problem of terminology and trying to come up with a neutral term.
1 Like
How fitting would it be to set God’s transcendence with dualism in relation to his immanence with panentheism?
There is nothing odd about the concepts of his omnipresence and immanence. What is odd is disallowing for the existence of the supernatural and the aseity of God.
Check out this passage from my introduction to the immanence and transcendence of God. It’s from Ray Sutton’s book on covenant theology, That You May Prosper:
The Biblical idea of creation involves God’s providential sustaining of creation throughout time and eternity. This is the meaning of providence. Because God made the world and personally sustains the world, He is present with the world, but is not part of the world. Because He is the Creator and Sustainer, He is also present (immanent) with us. This presence of God is equally an aspect of true transcendence. No other being is fully transcendent, so no other being is universally present. God alone is omnipresent (present everywhere).
1 Like