| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Knuje
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:13 am Post subject: Pandeism to Deism: regression or natural progression? |
 |
|
Pandeism proposes a Creator, the "Deus" which not only made and
abandoned or withdrew from the Universe, but _became_ the Universe (in
the Pantheistic sense), so that the appearance that the Universe
having been abandoned derives from that Creator having put itself in a
position of being unable to interact with the Universe in any
conscious way.... this is in explained by the Creator's need to
experience existence through the prism of the Universe -- perhaps, as
Johannes Scotus Erigena speculated over a millennium past, the Creator
is outside of any definition, and must see the Universe through the
defining senses of being such as ourselves to know what it itself is!!
Does study of a deistic Universe logically lean further to finding a
pandeistic Universe? Does Pandeism flow naturally from Deism, in light
of our recent trend of scientific discovery about the nature of the
energy from which the Universe is woven, and the patterns of stellar
and biological evolution? Or does Pandeism add an unnecessary (or even
anathemic) step to a rational model of a created Universe? |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Knuje
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 29, 2008 7:20 am Post subject: Re: Pandeism to Deism: regression or natural progression? |
|
|
On Jul 29, 3:13 am, Knuje <knujonmap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Pandeism proposes a Creator, the "Deus" which not only made and
abandoned or withdrew from the Universe, but _became_ the Universe (in
the Pantheistic sense), so that the appearance that the Universe
having been abandoned derives from that Creator having put itself in a
position of being unable to interact with the Universe in any
conscious way.... this is in explained by the Creator's need to
experience existence through the prism of the Universe -- perhaps, as
Johannes Scotus Erigena speculated over a millennium past, the Creator
is outside of any definition, and must see the Universe through the
defining senses of being such as ourselves to know what it itself is!!
Does study of a deistic Universe logically lean further to finding a
pandeistic Universe? Does Pandeism flow naturally from Deism, in light
of our recent trend of scientific discovery about the nature of the
energy from which the Universe is woven, and the patterns of stellar
and biological evolution? Or does Pandeism add an unnecessary (or even
anathemic) step to a rational model of a created Universe?
|
* Note also that Pandeism establishes as its initial premise that
whatever science reveals to us about the operation of the Universe
reveals the mechanism by which God designed the Universe to operate;
Pandeism seeks to discern the nature and intent of God from this
operation, and finds that divine creation only makes sense if it
offers God a way to experience something that God could experience in
no other way but to create a Universe....
Pandeism offers a logical connection between those two things: God
became the Universe for the purpose of experiencing limitations
unavailable to a god-entity (which also explains the need for a
Universe containing life); God does not interfere in the Universe
because, well, it can't because it _is_ the Universe. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Knuje
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:28 pm Post subject: Re: Pandeism to Deism: regression or natural progression? |
|
|
On Jul 29, 3:20 am, Knuje <knujonmap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
| Quote: | On Jul 29, 3:13 am, Knuje <knujonmap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Pandeism proposes a Creator, the "Deus" which not only made and
abandoned or withdrew from the Universe, but _became_ the Universe (in
the Pantheistic sense), so that the appearance that the Universe
having been abandoned derives from that Creator having put itself in a
position of being unable to interact with the Universe in any
conscious way.... this is in explained by the Creator's need to
experience existence through the prism of the Universe -- perhaps, as
Johannes Scotus Erigena speculated over a millennium past, the Creator
is outside of any definition, and must see the Universe through the
defining senses of being such as ourselves to know what it itself is!!
Does study of a deistic Universe logically lean further to finding a
pandeistic Universe? Does Pandeism flow naturally from Deism, in light
of our recent trend of scientific discovery about the nature of the
energy from which the Universe is woven, and the patterns of stellar
and biological evolution? Or does Pandeism add an unnecessary (or even
anathemic) step to a rational model of a created Universe?
* Note also that Pandeism establishes as its initial premise that
whatever science reveals to us about the operation of the Universe
reveals the mechanism by which God designed the Universe to operate;Pandeism seeks to discern the nature and intent of God from this
operation, and finds that divine creation only makes sense if it
offers God a way to experience something that God could experience in
no other way but to create a Universe....
Pandeism offers a logical connection between those two things: God
became the Universe for the purpose of experiencing limitations
unavailable to a god-entity (which also explains the need for a
Universe containing life); God does not interfere in the Universe
because, well, it can't because it _is_ the Universe.
|
**Note also that Pandeism intends to offer an inherent moral compass,
in that the experience of the pandeistic Universe is directly the
experience of God, and therefore all our acts for good or ill are
creations of experiences of God.... |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
