 |
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 11/22/2006 3:46 AM (GMT -6) |   | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_everything_%28philosophy%29
Thought I'd give this a shot.
I'm thinking that the Father's disposition is the ultimate "principle" and "power" for all things. In other words, I believe that there is a SINGULAR organizing principle and power for ALL dispositional reality that is based on the Father's disposition. A principle/power of Creative Reason (Wisdom, Love, and Life). Greg, in his dissertation calls this "ordered creativity" (page 167)
This principle/power influences the "becoming process" of any given perspective towards continually being in "right relationship" to itself and it's environment (and therefore to God) such that it participates synergistically and harmoniously in all relationships that it has.
This includes the interaction of three things, in my mind:
1. Appropriate prehension of reality
2. Appropriate interpretation of reality
3. Appropriate expression of reality
This gives rise to the creation of BEAUTY.
Any perspective that fully operates by this organizing principle/power at any point in time WILL fulfill the aesthetic subjective aims that God has for it for that particular point in time. The more that a perspective aligns with this organizing principle/power, the more beautiful experience that God gains from that perspective. As I see it, we can plug in ANY SITUATION into this idea...and it works. Micro or macroscopically. In other words, any thing that we experience (I think) can theoretically be explained in terms of the level of right-relatedness and corresponding contribution of beauty involved within that experience.
(It's amazing, actually. The very power of "ordered creativity" that disposes us towards right-relatedness is ALSO the very source of our ability to SELF-DISPOSE away from our "eschatological essence". Just like SK talks about how it is our very spiritual nature that makes it possible for despair to occur. So even when we are not aligning with the principle/power, we are always operating according to it. Amazing to me.) This should actually make sense, actually. If all created reality is ultimately from the "diffusion" of the divine disposition, then all of it really is a contingent expressive form of God's divine disposition being actualized. So, it seems reasonable that we would see a singular pattern in all reality related to the divine disposition. The very FOUNDATION of reality, I am thinking, is based upon a principle/power of "ordered creativity" unto harmonious relationship...which IS beauty...which is God's nature. So... Why is there something rather than nothing? Why is reality understandable? Why are the laws of nature the way that they are? Because all reality is dispositional. God, the chief exemplification of all metaphysical truth, IS dispositional. All reality is essentially dealing with HABITS and TENDENCIES of becoming. And all dispostions are governed by the principle/power of "ordered creativity"...because all dispositional reality is ultimately of the primal dispositional reality of the Father...who is in and of Himself "creative reason". This give us all the grounds for rationality, freedom, sociality, uniqueness, etc... Hey. Like I said. Just figured I'd give it a shot. Critique it as you will. 
"All is full of love." -- Bjork
"God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." -- 1 John 4:16b
"God is most glorified in us as we are most satisfied in God's love." -- the newest mantra of the Evangelical Universalist :)
Everything that will be well...is well already! Post Edited (Namaste) : 11/22/2006 2:54:48 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/22/2006 9:32 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 11/22/2006 9:45 AM (GMT -6) | | "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of Lights..."
"All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men...the true light which gives Light to every man...the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him...He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him."
These verses came to me as I read your post. A broader sense of their immediate contextual meaning is supportive to your thoughts - the express disposition of the Father who is Light and the give of light (to all things); our ability to turn away from reciprocating a disposition conducive and aligned with the Father's will.
I think this is what theology is really all about
Starkman
My teacher used to say that whenever he read Scripture, he would always ask the question, "What does this have to say about the character of God?" Working off his thinking, as I read Scripture, I have come to ask, "What does this have to say about the heart and passion of God's desire for relationship with us? | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/22/2006 12:36 PM (GMT -6) | | The Zeroth law of Thermodynamics:
If two thermodynamic systems are in thermal equilibrium with a third, they are also in thermal equilibrium with each other.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeroth_law_of_thermodynamics
"All is full of love." -- Bjork
"God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." -- 1 John 4:16b
"God is most glorified in us as we are most satisfied in God's love." -- the newest mantra of the Evangelical Universalist :)
Everything that will be well...is well already! | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/22/2006 6:13 PM (GMT -6) | | On April 1, 2005, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (who would later become Pope Benedict XVI) referred to the Christian religion as the religion of the Logos:
"From the beginning, Christianity has understood itself as the religion of the Logos, as the religion according to reason. ... It has always defined men, all men without distinction, as creatures and images of God, proclaiming for them ... the same dignity. In this connection, the Enlightenment is of Christian origin and it is no accident that it was born precisely and exclusively in the realm of the Christian faith. ... It was and is the merit of the Enlightenment to have again proposed these original values of Christianity and of having given back to reason its own voice ... Today, this should be precisely [Christianity's] philosophical strength, in so far as the problem is whether the world comes from the irrational, and reason is not other than a 'sub-product', on occasion even harmful of its development — or whether the world comes from reason, and is, as a consequence, its criterion and goal. ... In the so necessary dialogue between secularists and Catholics, we Christians must be very careful to remain faithful to this fundamental line: to live a faith that comes from the Logos, from creative reason, and that, because of this, is also open to all that is truly rational."
I saw this and my mouth dropped!
God is UP to something!
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 11/23/2006 8:01 AM (GMT -6) | | D-
Keith Ward (Scientiist/Mathemetician/Philosopher/Theologian at Oxford) says:
"God is perfect beauty and contemplates that perfect beauty."
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/23/2006 8:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Keith Ward on Self-Transcendence. Same page.
Dude....he's right.
Basic idea: All the major religions say that "ego biases our perception of reality" and THAT'S what causes our screwing up.
YES!
See the similarities of thought in the Tao.
Tao
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tao
He also talks about how we don't find fulfillment in either total self-renunciation (which is nothing more than despair NOT to be oneself) or total self-actualization (which often is nothing more than despair TO be oneself). But we find our fulfillment in SELF-GIVING (a nice balance between the two extremes).
And self-giving and self-transcendence of this type is EXACTLY who we see God to be in Jesus!
Part of the "dry docking", Tom, is going to have to be a robust theology of religions from a trinitarian process/dispositional perspective. (Way later!) We could talk about how other religions definitely have INCOMPLETE information about Ultimate Reality, insofar as they do not hold up the centrality of the Triune God in Christ, but those religions DO have REAL TRUTH within them because the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of Dispositional Equilibrium) is act work ALL OVER THE WORLD IN ALL RELIGIONS IN SOME WAY.
And wouldn't this just be the case IF truth is indeed singular?
Also take some time and hear Keith Ward and John Polkinghorne "religion in a global age"
Good stuff, Tom.
"All is full of love." -- Bjork
"God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." -- 1 John 4:16b
"God is most glorified in us as we are most satisfied in God's love." -- the newest mantra of the Evangelical Universalist :)
Everything that will be well...is well already! Post Edited (Namaste) : 11/23/2006 7:42:02 AM (GMT-6) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/23/2006 9:12 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom,
I REALLY, REALLY think this dispositional thing is going to work out VEEEEEERY well. Especially with dialoguing with other religions. Check it. I'd say the most prevalent atheistic of all the major religions is Buddhism. I just remembered about the 8fold path of Buddhism when I heard Polkinghorne. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_Eightfold_Path
They are...
1. Right understanding
2. Right intention
3. Right speech
4. Right action
5. Right livelihood
6. Right effort
7. Right mindfulness
8. Right concentration
From Wiki:
"In all of the elements of the Noble Eightfold Path, the word "right" is a translation of the word samyañc (Sanskrit) or sammā (Pāli), which denotes completion, togetherness, and coherence, and which can also carry the sense of "perfect" or "ideal"."
Another idea is here...
From Buddhanet www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/8foldpath.htm
" The word Samma means 'proper', 'whole', 'thorough', 'integral', 'complete', and 'perfect' - related to English 'summit' - It does not necessarily mean 'right', as opposed to 'wrong'. However it is often translated as "right" which can send a less than accurate message. For instance the opposite of 'Right Awareness' is not necessarily 'Wrong Awareness'. It may simply be incomplete. Use of the word 'right' may make for a neat or consistent list of qualities in translations. The down side is that it can give the impression that the Path is a narrow and moralistic approach to the spiritual life. I use variant interpretations so you consider the depth of meanings. What do these things mean in your life right now?
It's all about...
APPROPRIATE PREHENSION, APPROPRIATE INTERPRETATION, and APPROPRIATE EXPRESSION
Sound familiar?
For those who aren't making the connection...
I'm thinking that the Father's disposition is the ultimate "principle" and "power" for all things. In other words, I believe that there is a SINGULAR organizing principle and power for ALL dispositional reality that is based on the Father's disposition. A principle/power of Creative Reason (Wisdom, Love, and Life). Greg, in his dissertation calls this "ordered creativity" (page 167)
This principle/power influences the "becoming process" of any given perspective towards continually being in "right relationship" to itself and it's environment (and therefore to God) such that it participates synergistically and harmoniously in all relationships that it has.
This includes the interaction of three things, in my mind:
1. Appropriate prehension of reality
2. Appropriate interpretation of reality
3. Appropriate expression of reality
and...
In other words, any thing that we experience (I think) can theoretically be explained in terms of the level of right-relatedness and corresponding contribution of beauty involved within that experience.
Tom, we could talk to Buddhists FROM THEIR WORLDVIEW and ask the questions:
1.What understanding of the world MOST ADEQUATELY lends itself to understanding that release from existential suffering NECESSARILY involves a CHOSEN path involving practicing "Samma" orientation?
2. What understanding of the world MOST ADEQUATELY explains the "impermanance" that Buddhists see in the world? The constant CHANGE we see?
3. What understanding of the world MOST ADEQUATELY explains the experience of nirvana as being a cessation of struggle and self-will...or REST?
And then, with a heart full of Christ's unbridled love, kindness, and humility...and a mind full of Creative Reason, we GENUINELY dialogue from there.
And Jesus does the rest...
Yeah, baby...
"All is full of love." -- Bjork
"God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." -- 1 John 4:16b
"God is most glorified in us as we are most satisfied in God's love." -- the newest mantra of the Evangelical Universalist :)
Everything that will be well...is well already! | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/23/2006 9:48 AM (GMT -6) | |
Namaste said...
Keith Ward on Self-Transcendence. Same page.
Dude....he's right.
Basic idea: All the major religions say that "ego biases our perception of reality" and THAT'S what causes our screwing up.
YES!
Now things begin to become contradictory, again.
I read Merton's "Zen and the Birds of Appetite" in 1980. D.T. Suzuki represented Budism in a dialog, and demonatrated the Zen view of the problem. BUT, it did not include the Christian notion of sin!
So, here, you are attacking what we call "ego." This can have two definitions (just like "sinful nature" can mean two things: that nature created good is marred; or, that human nature is bad -- "ego" can mean two things.) Our "rationality" is part of what it means that we are created "after the image" of God.
Ego is not the problem. Sin is.
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/23/2006 9:58 AM (GMT -6) | | POW:
Now things begin to become contradictory, again.
I read Merton's "Zen and the Birds of Appetite" in 1980. D.T. Suzuki represented Budism in a dialog, and demonatrated the Zen view of the problem. BUT, it did not include the Christian notion of sin!
So, here, you are attacking what we call "ego." This can have two definitions (just like "sinful nature" can mean two things: that nature created good is marred; or, that human nature is bad -- "ego" can mean two things.) Our "rationality" is part of what it means that we are created "after the image" of God.
Ego is not the problem. Sin is.
Sir, all sin is, at it's core, is a deviation from healthy "becoming" due to a MISRELATION in a relationship. In this case, it is a MISRELATION within one's relationship to God. That's ALL it is.
And this misrelation ends up in the "existence" of PRIVATION.
The "misrelation" is a PRODUCT of the anxious ego trying to make sense of the world WITHOUT relating rightly to the Creator. Whenever we make the desires and needs of our ego into our Absolute (which is IDOLATRY), then we invariably fall into sin.
Why do you think Jesus talks so much about self-denial?
It is helpful to talk about "sin" from the standpoint of human "ego"
"All is full of love." -- Bjork
"God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them." -- 1 John 4:16b
"God is most glorified in us as we are most satisfied in God's love." -- the newest mantra of the Evangelical Universalist :)
Everything that will be well...is well already! | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/23/2006 10:00 AM (GMT -6) | | Namaste: He also talks about how we don't find fulfillment in either total self-renunciation (which is nothing more than despair NOT to be oneself) or total self-actualization (which often is nothing more than despair TO be oneself).
PoW: This part Suzuki would say.
Namaste: But we find our fulfillment in SELF-GIVING (a nice balance between the two extremes).
PoW: This stops short. It is still "self." It is still a man-centered construction: religion!!!
(Reread St. Basil's "On The Holy Spirit")
Namaste: And self-giving and self-transcendence of this type is EXACTLY who we see God to be in Jesus!
PoW: This is getting fruity. "Self-giving" is a hit. "Self-transcendence" is a miss.
Would you say that of the Transfiguration??????
Does your generation want to reinvent the wheel? Replace Christianity with a synthesized (and patentable, like genetically altered wheat) understudy???
Namaste: Part of the "dry docking", Tom, is going to have to be a robust theology of religions from a trinitarian process/dispositional perspective. (Way later!) We could talk about how other religions definitely have INCOMPLETE information about Ultimate Reality, insofar as they do not hold up the centrality of the Triune God in Christ, but those religions DO have REAL TRUTH within them because the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of Dispositional Equilibrium) is act work ALL OVER THE WORLD IN ALL RELIGIONS IN SOME WAY.
PoW: Or, creation is evident. Creation, Fall, Redemption. Zen makes good observations, and experiments as best it is able.
(o) | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/23/2006 10:00 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
|
One Love
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 13888
| Posted 11/23/2006 10:06 AM (GMT -6) | | POW:
Drydock?
Well worth a repost... From Tom...
--------------------------
Here’s the thing about history…
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I mean, we have to take into consideration what’s preceded us. We’d be insane to ignore what others have said or learned about God. But tradition can blind us to possibilities. We’re stupid to ignore history. But we’re also stupid to not think outside the box. Whole revolutions have turned on the novel, intuitional leaps of single individuals. Then their discoveries become a new tradition that is redefined generations later when someone else, standing in a new perspective, leaps out in a new direction. To make these kinds of leaps, to move in novel ways, is by definition to refuse the admit non-negotiables.
The Church is founded upon the Apostles. There are non-negotiables. The fundamental story—triune creator God, fallen sinful creation, incarnate redeemer God, etc.—is non-negotiable.
It’s like this. Picture the non-negotiable ship of the fundamental truths just described as moving through water, weathering all the storms of life. Nice picture. She’s a beautiful ship. But as it travels through the seas, it picks up barnacles, extra weight. Things that get attached to the hull and impede its travel. Eventually you have to dry-dock that baby and clean it up and refit it for the water. It’s like each generation, or every so often we have to dry dock the Church and figure out again what’s non-negotiable HULL, the Church founded upon the Apostles, the real deal (on the one hand), and all the barnacles and crap that’s gotten attached. Sometimes its hard to tell where barnacle ends and hull begins.
That’s where the Church is today. It’s dry-dock time. And like generations before us, we’ve got people who simple don’t want to dry-dock for fear of damaging the hull. Just hang sailors over the edge while we’re afloat and let them scrape away at the problems as they surface. Other people know there are deeper issues that have attached themselves to the hull beneath the surface that only serious work can solve, but they’re also afraid to change damaging the hull. So they just sail on. Others are ready to dry-dock that baby and go to work. History tells us that dry-docking does occur from time to time (the Reformation is a good example). And we come out of it fine.
It’s time for another reformation, another dry-dock.
I was once on a trans-Atlantic flight. A gentleman took the seat next to me. In his 60’s, well-dressed, intelligent looking (not like me!). We got to talking. Turns out this guy was the curator of Smithsonian’s National Art Gallery in D.C. He was just returning from Rome where he’d been overseeing the restoration of the Sistine Chapel. What a convo we had! Amazing. He talked about the preparation for restoring the Chapel to its original vibrancy, the creative process his committee went through to find a way to remove the grime of centuries. I mean, you could still see Michelangelo’s work in spite of the grime and dirt. The beauty still shone through enough to inspire tourists! But they knew it wasn’t as beautiful as it could be. Eventually they invented a chemical wash (or a series of washes) which when painstakingly applied would remove JUST the grime and leave the original colors. If you view before and after shots of the Chapel—oh my! Soooo beautiful.
That’s what we need.
Another friend of mine told me about meeting a physics scholar on one of his flights. This guy talked about a final exam he once took (and which established his unique contribution to physics). The prof posted three mathematical problems for the student to solve. It was a take-home test. They had three days to work on the problems and then return their work. The catch was this—these were heretofore unsolved mysteries, longstanding mathematical conundrums that nobody had managed to unravel. The prof actually said, “Look, you’re not gonna solve these. They’re unsolvable. I’m just gonna grade you on how far you get and how innovative you are.” Well, our guy on the plane was late. He missed the part about the problems being unsolvable. He just picked up the sheet with the problems and thought he had three days to solve them.
You know what happens, baby. ‘Ats right. The guy solved one of the problems. He was sure he’d failed the course because he only solved ONE! Turns out the guy found a way though. What did the other students do? No breakthroughs of course. They told themselves ahead of time “I won’t solve these. They’re unsolvable.” See how it works?
I really think that Church history and tradition is a blessing—because we’re part of a community with a history and others have thought long and hard on the same issues we have. But it’s also a curse—because novelty is antithetical to tradition. It threatens our security because WE DON’T KNOW where it will take us. So we say things like “If it’s new it’s wrong” or “If nobody in the early church every said it then it can’t be biblical” and such things.
Time to dry-dock. It’s time to very patiently, with love and respect for the original beauty and the colors underneath, apply the washes to remove the grime and let the full beauty shine through.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 11/23/2006 10:22 AM (GMT -6) | | | | |
| 38 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 3:06 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 |
|
|