YAY, A TAOISM FORUM!!!!!!! (hell, pray, God, heaven, prayer)

[LeNinjaChic]

Right...

This is the translation of the Tao Te Ching that I read:

1

The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name

So again....please remember that I come from a very Western mindset, from which I am finally freeing myself. In addition to that, I enjoy studying various religious traditions, and pulling the things out that are similar, then comparing them.

But how I interpreted this was that there is an Ultimate Energy/Creator, which cannot be named. From This, all things spring forth (which, if it could be understood, would blend perfectly with science).

The tao (with a small 't') is the spiritual and physical realms that we can perceive and/or put a name to. Some call the spiritual realm "God" and others call it the "Divine." Some still call it "Self."

Since my deconversion, I am seeing all religions in a whole new light. If we could put each religion's "truth" on a transparency, then lay each transparency, one on top of the other, it would be interesting to see which religions' truths line up with the other. (Does that make any sense at all? Makes perfect sense to me! LOL)

[Master Vigil]

"But how I interpreted this was that there is an Ultimate Energy/Creator, which cannot be named. From This, all things spring forth (which, if it could be understood, would blend perfectly with science)."

Very good, simple but you are starting to get the idea. (this would be more like the idea of god, but still not the same)

"The tao (with a small 't') is the spiritual and physical realms that we can perceive and/or put a name to. Some call the spiritual realm "God" and others call it the "Divine." Some still call it "Self."

Very good again, but you must however understand that the Tao cannot be compared to god. They are two completely different ideas. The natural tao, would be more like nature, and nature spirits. Taoists beleive it is what creates chi. But yes, "self" resides here.

If you read the rest of the first passage you begin to understand the duality and the nature of the Tao. As the origin of heaven and earth it is nameless, this part of the tao we do not understand. But as the mother of all things it is nameable. We can understand its creations, and understand its affects on the world. So as ever hidden, we should look at its inner essence. This comes from within you first, but the understanding the nature of the Tao comes after a while. And as always manifest (nature) we should look at its outer aspects (its creations). These two flow from the same source (Tao), though differently named (Eternal, Natural). And both are called mysteries, the mystery of mysteries is the door of all essence (Tao).

You see it being referred to as the father of all things in passage 4. But this is the basic idea of the Tao and its affect on the world. Not the same as god.

[LeNinjaChic]

Very good again, but you must however understand that the Tao cannot be compared to god. They are two completely different ideas. The natural tao, would be more like nature, and nature spirits. Taoists beleive it is what creates chi. But yes, "self" resides here.

Yessir ;o)

I actually see the Tao (capital T) as bigger than the Westernized/Christian "God." The reason for this is because while Christians claim "you can't put God in a box," we still are able to put a name and a nature to him. The Judaic/Christian God, if he exists or ever existed, came from the Tao. This same Judaic/Xian God would fit better in with the tao than the Tao. At least, that is my initial reaction to reading the Tao Te Ching.

[Master Vigil]

Well, when you think of god being omnipotent and omnipresent, then it would become close to the idea of Tao, but when you start to put labels on it and giving it human characteristics it would then fall into being a creation and therefore like tao.

[LeNinjaChic]

True, but you and I both know the xian god is neither omnipotent nor omnipresent. I'm sure you've heard the arguments, haven't you? ;o)

[Master Vigil]

Actually no, please enlighten me.

[LeNinjaChic]

Ahh...well. It's something to the effect (and different examples can be used) of: If God is all powerful then can He create a rock that He cannot, Himself, lift? Or on the issue of omniscience, if God knew that the 'original sin' was going to take place, why did He not take steps to prevent it, knowing full well that billions of His children would perish in the eternal flames of hell?

As far as omnipresence goes, you might want to check out THIS WEBSITE

Also, taken from ANOTHER WEBSITE

Is god omnipresent? Well, there's this little thing called the Pauli exclusion principle which states that no two particles can occupy the same space at the same time. They don't even need to be the same kind of particle. If god is in the same place as a particle at the same time, he can not interact with the particle in any way--in essence, he would have to be outside the universe. And such a god would then have no influence whatsoever over the universe, and thus also would not be omnipotent.

[Runt]

Now that I think about it, I don't think the rock question really proves that the Christian God CANNOT be all-powerful. If he is all powerful to begin with, he could create a rock too difficult for him to lift, but by doing so forfeits his ALL-powerful-ness ( 8) ) and immediatly becomes only VERY powerful. But while he was all powerful, he could indeed create a rock too heavy for himself to lift.

[LeNinjaChic]

Originally Posted by Runt

Now that I think about it, I don't think the rock question really proves that the Christian God CANNOT be all-powerful. If he is all powerful to begin with, he could create a rock too difficult for him to lift, but by doing so forfeits his ALL-powerful-ness ( 8) ) and immediatly becomes only VERY powerful. But while he was all powerful, he could indeed create a rock too heavy for himself to lift.

Yes, and that is exactly the point. Once he has created such a rock, then he is no-longer omnipotent. So is he or isn't he? If he CAN create such a rock, then the answer is no, he's not.

[Runt]

If he CAN create such a rock, then the answer is no, he's not.

No, I think if he CAN create such a rock he is still all-powerful, but if he DOES create such a rock he becomes limited as soon as he has completed the act of creation.

Kind of like... I can see... until I poke out my eyes. Then I cannot see, and the former reality is now forever out of my reach. That doesn't change the fact that BEFORE I poked out my eyes, I COULD see.