Is pantheism a form of omnipresence? (page 5)

LittleToe

Xena:
So by that proposal, is God exactly as large as the Universe(s), or that plus some?

Biscuits:
Sorry - that's what late night ponderings can do for ya

Bebu:

But of what worth are my thoughts here?

As much as anyone else's, here. Now show that backbone, that we know you have, and shout it to the world!!!

S:

I thought xena was a goddess incarnated.

Aye, but only to her worshippers, albeit many of those are afar off

Czar:
NIce analogy.

Brenda:I concur.

SunnyGal:
But if Panteism is correct, as a state of being, then are we not part of that which is omnipresent?

Pete:Thanks for supplying that link. That's interesting.

Kenneston:So which part of your body does your spirit not inhabit?

Narkissos

To the original question: omnipresence of what (or who)?

The other way around the question would be theological:
- is (the monotheist doctrine of) omnipresence a (disguised) form of pantheism? (I'd say yes, but we've already discussed that)

The modern approach of pantheism, as exemplified by the links above, actually writes theism (or transcendence) off pantheism.

But to me the basic problem is in the pan- (): "the all" is a very problematic concept, and so is the process of totalisation (cf. Emmanuel Levinas). Is there a totality which can comprise the solar system, your favorite poems or your childhood's memories, and mine? How do such things "add"? Who can "see" them "all"? (Basically the questions of Job 28).

LittleToe

Didier:And yet surely you no difficulty with the concept of everything being constructed of energy, at the lowest scientific level?

Is the concept actually transcendance or subscendance?

Sunnygal41

Yes, Satanus, I saw those meanings, also. I'm not sure what the "true" meaning of it all is, and, I guess I don't really care as much as some do. I liked what the site said, it resonated with my own feelings. LT, you make my head hurt! LOL! I guess my isn't truly into debating or figuring the Big Picture out right now, but, I thought your subject was interesting. I'll just sit back quietly now and read what ya'll have to say.............

Narkissos

Ross,

So you think you can answer questions with questions?

In the diffuse, fuzzy, watered down version of "science" that happened to reach my fairly lazy and unscientific mind, I heard of transformation of energy into matter and matter into energy, not of transcendance (or subscendance) of energy over (or under) matter. So I doubt that "everything being constructed of energy" is correct in the sort of "genealogy" or "hierarchy" it suggests (but I may be wrong).

Whatever the case, I also doubt that our "symbolical" or "imaginary" constructions have much to do with the energy/matter relationship, or that they can be included or recapitulated into any meaningful "all" (call me an "apanist"!). I'd rather talk (metaphorically) of the potentially infinite drift of being (and words and ideas in their own "space," which doesn't really "add" itself to the physical universe). This, on the other hand, makes the relative encounters (between people, for instance) the only ground for (relative) meaning.

An interesting read: http://www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/levinas.html

Kenneson

LT,

Could not the same question be asked about God? So which part of the universe does God not inhabit? Yet are the two the same?

Xena

Xena:So by that proposal, is God exactly as large as the Universe(s), or that plus some?

lol supersizing, I thought that was just an American thing
It appears to me, from my limited perspective, that pantheism wants to contain God within the spectrums of our knowledge/existance. So while it might be a form of omnipresence it doesn't show the complete picture.
Panentheism appears to allow bigger parameters. All is IN God vs All is God. Therefore it would better convey the idea, to me at least, of omnipresence.

Midget-Sasquatch

I'm with Xena.

If there's nothing beyond the universe/multiverse, so that it is "all", then pantheism and omnipresence would be the same right?

But if Pantheism has boundaries, and If God doesn't, then pantheism is like an Omnipresence Lite.

LittleToe

Sunny:I'm just exploring the subject, rather than earnestly debating it

Didier:

So you think you can answer questions with questions?

I can certainly try, mon ami - LOL.

Quoted from referred site: The self must be separated from the Other in order to have the idea of infinity. The idea of infinity is itself a form of transcendence of the relation to the Other. Exteriority is achieved by having the idea of infinity.

I wonder what JamesThomas would make of that

I find his concluding challenge of interest:

The problem to be solved is how cause-and-effect relations can exist between separated beings, and how absolute separation can explain objective reality.

And thus I would bid that there is also an experiential requirement to syncrete these ideas with the model of omnipresence.

As for your doubts of "symbolic" constructs having much to do with the matter/energy relationship, why does this have to be "imaginary", rather than "mind over matter"?

Xena / Midget:
That's the way my mind works on it.

Given the findings of quantum theory, I wonder whether or not the underlying energy of which our universe(s) is constructed is inately "intelligent", and at least having a laugh at our expense

LOL @ supersizing it

Kenneston:
I'm not saying they are synonymous, but rather speculating that the spirit inhabits everything that is physical, plus some.

As above, so below.

Satanus

Sunnygal or peacefulpete

Materialist pantheism is a new one for me. Do you know if it is a new group or idea? Another question that i would like to pose, if i could: why would this kind of pantheist have more respect for nature made of dead matter, than human manufactures? Don't they see organisms as marvelous, but dead machines without spirit, kind of how the wt sees things? I don't mean to put you on the spot about this. I just thought that maybe you already understood this subject, it would save me some time.

S

Is pantheism a form of omnipresence?

Share this