 |
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > General Chat > (No Subject)
| Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/12/2010 7:26 PM (GMT -6) |   | | Start here. 4 propositions to accept...
1. "At all moments, God is where I am."
God's complete Presence is at the "absolute center" of every "thing" that exists, and this includes the sentient creature, like a human being. God doesn't stand at Creation "at a distance", but is actually the sustaining "inwardness" of all the different things in Creation, keeping Creation in existence. There can be at no time that God "leaves" a human being, because without Divine Presence at their center, sustaining their existences continually, they would cease to exist. The Presence of God is constantly "with" every person where they are.
2. "At all moments, I am where God is."
Divine Presence is omnipresent, meaning it literally is true that there is no where that our human selves can go in all of Creation that the full presence of God is not. (Absence of God is not a objective reality.)
3. The same is true for every other human being who exists.
4. God is Love. (1 John)
I don't think that there are any conscientious Christians who believe in God's omnipresence who would deny any of these ideas. (And actually, I think the Jesus Prayer implicitly portrays all of these beliefs, but that's just me.)
Now, if a person thinks about these truths enough...I don't see how the two-storey view of God can remain. Really. Just think about these four thoughts all day. For a day. Just repeat them to yourself. Can you really believe that God is "up there somewhere" and we are "down here" begging God to acknowledge us...if you believe the 4 things above? I can't see it.
Now...on the next day...what happens when a person asks these questions:
1) What is your location right now?
2) Where is God right now?
3) Where was God during this horrible incident?
4) How was God involved in that beautiful event?
4) Do you ever feel alone? Are you alone?
5) Do you ever feel unloved? Are you unloved?
6) Where is "heaven"?
7) Where is "hell"?
How would you answer? Really think about it. 
Post Edited (One Love) : 3/15/2010 4:17:22 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
JET
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 397
| Posted 3/12/2010 11:20 PM (GMT -6) | | | Are these proposition compatible with the idea of epistemic (as opposed to spatial) distance? There is some real, enduring gap that God could close unilaterally if God wanted to, right? To what extent is this gap merely a by-product of an immature creation (per the Irenaean hypothesis) which God is actively working to overcome and/or to what extent is God actively maintaining the distance for a greater good?
John Hick, p. 41: We could have the picture of God creating finite beings, whether angels or humans, directly in the divine presence, so that in being conscious of that which is other than oneself the creature is automatically conscious of God, the limitless reality and power, goodness and love, knowledge and wisdom, towering above oneself. In such a situation the disproportion between Creator and creatures would be so great that the latter would have no freedom in relation to God; they would indeed not exist as independent autonomous persons. For what freedom could finite beings have in an immediate consciousness of the presence of the one who has created them, who knows them through and through, who is limitlessly powerful as well as limitlessly loving and good, and who claims their total obedience? In order to be a person, exercising some measure of genuine freedom, the creature must be brought into existence, not in the immediate divine presence, but at a “distance” from God. This “distance” cannot of course be spatial, for God is omnipresent. The distance must be epistemic, a distance in the cognitive dimension. And the Irenaean hypothesis is that this “distance” consists, in the case of humans, in their existence within and as part of a world that functions as an autonomous system and from within which God is not overwhelmingly evident. The world exists, in Bonhoeffer’s phrase, etsi deus non daretur, as if there were no God.Post Edited (JET) : 3/12/2010 10:23:50 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 3/13/2010 9:42 AM (GMT -6) | | Hick: For what freedom could finite beings have in an immediate consciousness of the presence of the one who has created them, who knows them through and through, who is limitlessly powerful as well as limitlessly loving and good, and who claims their total obedience?
Tom: They would have no freedom with respect to evil (i.e., in the choice between doing good and doing evil). But they could be entirely free with respect to creative expression within a range of equally loving options. It all depends upon what this all-present God WILLS. If his will extends to the minutia of creaturely states, movements and choices, then I think we've stepped into a functional pantheism. But if God's will prescribes/grounds only the range of all possible goods and that we freely determine ourselves within that range (in other words, IF the obedience God requires is that we be creatively free in expressing our love), then we're a) still doing the will of God and b) remain self-determining and creative.
But for us to actually perform this way we have to retain SOME perception of the self as other than God. And since this otherness IS the case--ontologically speaking--and since this otherness (most importantly) is an otherness OF PERSONS (between us and God), no intensity or manner of divine presence however limitless or overwhelming can span and negate this truth. Thus, so long as God is a truthful God and creatures know the truth, creatures can remain free within God's presence.
It would be like performing a Bach piano sonata with Bach in the room. Heck, like D always says, with Bach IN YOUR HEAD, and with Bach being constitutive of your own act of self-perception; Bach everywhere you look. Wouldn't we play that piece in every detail of interpretation EXACTLY as Bach wills? ONLY IF Bach wills to will so. But given what we know of Bach, there's EVERY reason to believe he does NOT will so. The score of his original composition does NOT prescribe all that can be prescribed. It is MEANT to be a point of 'creative departure'. Likewise, we have every reason to believe that where all our available options are equally loving and good, that is, where this open range of love and goodness is itself the 'score' (God's proffered 'space' for creation's point of departure), that God's will does not extend to the minutia of all final forms of creaturely expression. We can be free within the fullest possible experience of God's presence because that presence WILLS us to be free. In knowing his presence we know his desire for our freedom and creative expression. God IS the distance that makes this possible. Of course, God is also the nearness and ground that makes this possible. There are no problems unless ONE (nearness or distance--both travel together) is made supreme over the other.
Bach everywhere you look. But not Bach as the ONLY thing you perceive.
Hart likes to use the analogy of creation's being the "surface of being" and 'being' as a mirror. So creation is a mirror that reflects God. When you look into a perfectly clean mirror, you only see yourself. You don't SEE the mirror. The mirror counts for nothing OUTSIDE ITS PURPOSE AS A MIRROR. It's there, but it's not seen or perceived. All that's seen is the reflection of the One who IS.
It's a good analogy as far as it goes, but it fails to capture (or worse, negates) other equally valid truths and theological intuitions (biblical ones too). What if the reflection God wishes to see requires something other than the "flat surface" of a mirror? What if the likeness God seeks to enjoy is more 'parental' (I see myself in my kids, Bach sees himself in EVERY other interpretation of him) than 'lifelessly flat'? But this would require some variation in the terrain on the "surface" of the mirror (to tweak Hart's analogy); i.e., it's not absolutely flat (not if it's PERSONALLY other than God). I like the mirror analogy for expressing some aspects of the God-world relation. But it can't capture other things that need to be said.
With Hart in mind, notice what he does in The Beauty of the Infinite. He says NONE of the available metaphysics (two-story dualism, idealism, panentheism, whatever) can express the truth here. Because God is ontologically other, he stands OUTSIDE of 'being' itself, outside our metaphysics. He isn't just "a" being among beings. That would be to subsume God under a higher category of 'being' per se, and that can't be. SO, Orthodoxy says the ONLY way our language can approach the truth is analogically, never univocally (being, existence, etc., are terms that only apply analogically to God). Not sure all this is necessary, or that it says all that needs to be said, but I can appreciate the point.
Tom
KIXYTΘEMTAPost Edited (Tom) : 3/13/2010 9:32:17 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/13/2010 1:20 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
Hick: For what freedom could finite beings have in an immediate consciousness of the presence of the one who has created them, who knows them through and through, who is limitlessly powerful as well as limitlessly loving and good, and who claims their total obedience?
Tom: They would have no freedom with respect to evil (i.e., in the choice between doing good and doing evil). But they could be entirely free with respect to creative expression within a range of equally loving options. It all depends upon what this all-present God WILLS. If his will extends to the minutia of creaturely states, movements and choices, then I think we've stepped into a functional pantheism. But if God's will prescribes/grounds only the range of all possible goods and that we freely determine ourselves within that range (in other words, IF the obedience God requires is that we be creatively free in expressing our love), then we're a) still doing the will of God and b) remain self-determining and creative.
But for us to actually perform this way we have to retain SOME perception of the self as other than God. And since this otherness IS the case--ontologically speaking--and since this otherness (most importantly) is an otherness OF PERSONS (between us and God), no intensity or manner of divine presence however limitless or overwhelming can span and negate this truth. Thus, so long as God is a truthful God and creatures know the truth, creatures can remain free within God's presence.
Kabbalah idea of "bitul"
Bitul is the spiritual state associated with the inner experience of chochmah, whereby one's consciousness opens up to a continuous flow of Divine wisdom and new insight through one's nullifying his sense of autonomous and self-sustained being. Bitul is the experience of ayin, of being nothing within the omnipresent radiance of God's infinite light. In general, there are two identified levels of bitul:
Bitul b'metziut ("existential nullification" ) constitutes the absolute form of bitul whereby one loses all sense of independent existence. This is the state of bitul in the world of Atzilut, whose consciousness, permeated by the supernal level of chochmah (Abba mekanen b'Atzilut), is solely that of God's omnipresence.
Bitul hayesh ("nullification of [one's] somethingness" ) constitutes a lower form of bitul whereby one is consciously involved in the process of nullifying the outer layer of self (ego). This is accomplished by the concentrated effort to experience the continual recreation of all reality, including oneself, as "something from nothing." This impresses upon one's consciousness that there is no independent reality attached to one's sense of "somethingness." This is the state of bitul present within the three lower worlds of Beriah, Yetzirah and Asiyah, while its conscious experience is dependent upon one's Divine service. Divine consciousness in the three lower worlds derives from the chochmah of malchut d'Atzilut, referred to as the lower chochmah, thus giving rise to the lower level of bitul.
----------------------------------------
To save time, I'll break this down as I understand it. When one is empowered, by God's Spirit, to self-relate "from God's Perspective" as it were, one can actually experience oneself and one's environment from the perspective of the uncreated energy of God that continually sustains our existence. In this way, there is a continually self-giving self who doesn't lose their "self" in their self-denial. They experience what is true. Hesychasm leads to the same experience...
The goal at this stage is a practice of the Jesus Prayer with the mind in the heart, which practice is free of images (see Pros Theodoulon). What this means is that by the exercise of sobriety (the mental ascesis against tempting thoughts), the Hesychast arrives at a continual practice of the Jesus Prayer with his mind in his heart and where his consciousness is no longer encumbered by the spontaneous inception of images: his mind has a certain stillness and emptiness that is punctuated only by the eternal repetition of the Jesus Prayer.
This stage is called the guard of the mind. This is a very advanced stage of ascetical and spiritual practice, and attempting to accomplish this prematurely, especially with psychophysical techniques, can cause very serious spiritual and emotional harm to the would-be Hesychast. St Theophan the Recluse once remarked that bodily postures and breathing techniques were virtually forbidden in his youth, since, instead of gaining the Spirit of God, people succeeded only "in ruining their lungs."
The guard of the mind is the practical goal of the Hesychast. It is the condition in which he remains as a matter of course throughout his day, every day until he dies. It is from the guard of the mind that he is raised to contemplation by the Grace of God.
The Hesychast usually experiences the contemplation of God as light, the Uncreated Light of the theology of St Gregory Palamas. The Hesychast, when he has by the mercy of God been granted such an experience, does not remain in that experience for a very long time (there are exceptions—see for example the Life of St Savas the Fool for Christ (14th Century), written by St Philotheos Kokkinos (14th Century)), but he returns 'to earth' and continues to practise the guard of the mind.
The Uncreated Light that the Hesychast experiences is identified with the Holy Spirit. Experiences of the Uncreated Light are allied to the 'acquisition of the Holy Spirit'. Notable accounts of encounters with the Holy Spirit in this fashion are found in St Symeon the New Theologian's account of the illumination of 'George' (considered a pseudonym of St Symeon himself); in the 'conversation with Motovilov' in the Life of St Seraphim of Sarov (1759 – 1833); and, more recently, in the reminiscences of Elder Porphyrios (Wounded by Love pp. 27 – 31).
It's the same experience James Loder spoke about in "The Knight's Move"...
Beyond vision, in the fourth and final phase of the journey of intensification, is the numinous, imageless passage into the absolute unity of all things. Here no-thingness (cf. Eckhart's Ohne bild) is experienced as more real that than the reality of the ordinary state, even after self-consciousness returns to phase 1. Although imageless, its impact most often leaves the after-image of radiant white light, so vivid it cannot be described except perhaps by a kind of via negativa. For this phase there is no language, only silence--favete linguis (hold your tongue), says Kierkegaard. For this phase there is still differentiated self-consciousness, but beyond that only a reaction of awe as before the Holy who both fascinates and overpowers at the same time. This corresponds to the vision of God in Augustine, Hildegaard, Teresa (of Avila), Eckhart, and several others.
The neurological foundation of this experience is the profoundly significant capacity of the brain to present to consciousness not only an ordered content but the very way in which that content is itself presented: i.e., the order itself. In this case, it is the whole or totality in itself that is communicated. Clearly this is not a reductive account, but only a claim that the human organism is made so as to support and entertain an encounter with an imageless sense of the Absolute Unity of Being. The numinous impact of this is, of course, like that of the encounter with the Holy in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. If mythic vision and cosmic consciousness were the consequences of the third phase, then here the consequence is that one may now see the cosmos from a standpoint beyond it, while still within it. (OL's Note: Living "in", but not "of" the world. )
The benevolent detachment from the world which is the consequence of this experience has the effect of making the world becomes a matter of choice rather than one of defensive survival. All that is needed for ultimate survival has been given and far more, so engagement with the world are a matter of decision in what can only be called a state of blessedness.
---------------------------------------
It IS true that all Creation, including ourselves, are grounded in the ONE uncreated energy of the ONE Uncreated, Omnipresent Triune God...right? That's...like...one of the most true things about us, yes? But perception of this is ONLY POSSIBLE by Grace, given of the Uncreated Spirit of God.
Post Edited (One Love) : 3/13/2010 12:41:10 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/13/2010 1:59 PM (GMT -6) | | Let me say that I'm AGREEING with you, Tom.
1) I don't believe that God's ultimate desires for humanity is an eternal state of all lost sense of independent existence (which is what would happen in pantheism)...not if God desires genuine PERSONAL INTERDEPENDENCY between the Uncreated and Created and there are good reasons to believe that God desires loving interpersonal relationship with Creation.
2) I do believe that, sans an real, enduring sense of creaturely independent existence, worship (creaturely self-giving actualization of divinely-offer possibilities) of the Uncreated is impossible...and there is reason to believe that human beings are designed and creatured for worship of the Uncreated. [Eucharistic existence]
At the same time...
I would say that it is possible for a human being to see Creation (including their own individual existence) "through God's Perspective" via the Holy Spirit of Christ-the-Logos such that God's actual omni-Presence (and the existential ramifications of such) are very clear to the human being. The single-eyed, pure-hearted human being who is "filled with the Spirit" discerns and "sees" and self-relates in the Holy Spirit. It's possible for such a person, by Grace, to "see" God Himself continually working in Creation...thus seeing that even though there is creaturely independence, this and existence itself is an unpossessable, yet receivable GIFT continually given from God. In this sense, we are no-thing, because we are only the "other side" of the Uncreated's free willingness to give Himself to "another" (in other words, we can't give anything to God that he hasn't already given us unconditionally, freely, and lovingly)...but we are some-thing, because God Himself grounds our created "otherness" in order for us (Creation) to enjoy a love relationship with God as "personal Other." But this human self-referential perspective on the Uncreated and Created is impossible without God Himself working in the human via the Holy Spirit.
I like this...from Tom's buddy...Nikolai Berdyaev...
We are entering an epoch of a new spirituality, that will correspond to the new form of mysticism. It will no longer be possible to argue against a heightened spiritual and mystical life that human nature is sinful and that sin must first be overcome. A heightened spiritual and mystical life is the road to the victory over sin. And the world is entering a catastrophic period of choice and division, when these will be required of all Christians, an uplifting and intensification of their inner lives. The external, everyday, moderate Christianity is breaking up. But eternal, inward, mystical Christianity is becoming stronger and better established. And within mysticism itself a 'paraclete' type is beginning to predominate. The epoch of new spirituality in Christianity, can only be an epoch of a great and hitherto unheard of manifestation of the Holy Spirit.
Post Edited (One Love) : 3/13/2010 1:36:30 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/13/2010 2:15 PM (GMT -6) | | | As for the "unpossessable, yet receivable" idea. Think about the biblical idea of "manna." It was to be received by the people of God like "daily bread" and not seen as a means to greed (greed is impossible without a belief in possession). They were to pick up only what they needed for the specified periods (accounting for the Sabbath)...no more, no less. To overreach that...to try to POSSESS for oneself rather than merely RECEIVE graciously from God as needed...was to produce worms.
I believe that God's sustenance of Creation (us) is like that. We constantly "receive" it as gift at every moment...but we can never possess as "ours" it at any moment. True creaturely self-possession is found in continually receiving oneself from God as "God's gift" in love and gratitude...and living in that reality. Enduring "self" is maintained while the sense of self-sufficiency is not. Just like the Israelites didn't "own" the manna, but always stayed with it.
Post Edited (One Love) : 3/13/2010 1:32:23 PM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 3/13/2010 3:40 PM (GMT -6) | | May it ever be that when someone who has not learned that God is ever present and always "there" find that it to be through us, standing next to that person's side, holding their hand, to be those whom God has used to reveal such truths.
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 3/13/2010 6:19 PM (GMT -6) | | D: I would say that it is possible for a human being to see Creation (including their own individual existence) "through God's Perspective" via the Holy Spirit of Christ-the-Logos such that God's actual omni-Presence (and the existential ramifications of such) are very clear to the human being. The single-eyed, pure-hearted human being who is "filled with the Spirit" discerns and "sees" and self-relates in the Holy Spirit. It's possible for such a person, by Grace, to "see" God Himself continually working in Creation...thus seeing that even though there is creaturely independence, this and existence itself is an unpossessable, yet receivable GIFT continually given from God. In this sense, we are no-thing, because we are only the "other side" of the Uncreated's free willingness to give Himself to "another" (in other words, we can't give anything to God that he hasn't already given us unconditionally, freely, and lovingly)...but we are some-thing, because God Himself grounds our created "otherness" in order for us (Creation) to enjoy a love relationship with God as "personal Other." But this human self-referential perspective on the Uncreated and Created is impossible without God Himself working in the human via the Holy Spirit.
T: Totally agree. Even IF we are truly ontologically 'other' and this is perceived (and grounds our freedom), this does not mean we are ontological 'independent of' God. To be 'ontologically other' doesn't entail being 'ontologically independent'. And the former (our freedom and otherness) is only enjoyed to the extent the latter (our ontological dependence upon and groundedness in God) is perceived and embraced. We live as a free other on the other side of death to self. Remember our two "moments" (inward death and groundedness and THEN outward freedom and otherness)? Yeah. So living freely and creatively as 'other' can only be the RESULT of inward renunciation of independence.
Tom
KIXYTΘEMTA | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/15/2010 1:39 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom:
I agree there's no place I can go where God is not. But that would be #1 too. Saying "I am where God is" sounds to me like "wherever" God is I am also there (i.e., God can't be somewhere and I NOT be there also). God at the core of the Sun, so I'm at the core of the Sun. But that would make me omnipresent. So that dudn't work.
So it's true (#1) God's complete Presence is at the "absolute center" of everything that exists. But not every "thing" that exists is at the center of everything else that exists.
Duly noted.
Revising: At all moments, I am "in" God.
Like what you are saying, there's no place where "I" can be and God is not.
But mayber that's another way of saying things. God is always "in" me...and I am always "in" God. And it just can't be no other way. Appropriate...
Post Edited (One Love) : 3/15/2010 4:18:54 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 3/15/2010 4:30 PM (GMT -6) | | Yo, Tom. Why did this JUST hit me? You said...
We live as a free other on the other side of death to self. Remember our two "moments" (inward death and groundedness and THEN outward freedom and otherness)? Yeah. So living freely and creatively as 'other' can only be the RESULT of inward renunciation of independence.
1) Think about Cross and Resurrection. Isn't that the ultimate expression of just this theme?
2) Jesus' yoke. His becoming nothing. His being meek and lowly of heart. His theocentricity. and his correspoding FREEDOM to go to the Cross.
During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.
Losing your life to find it...all that.
Jesus indeed is the Way...
Post Edited (One Love) : 3/15/2010 4:34:08 PM (GMT-5) | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 6:05 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|