-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Jesus and Pantheism
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I don't think so, strictly speaking. There's a nuance of theological difference between all things being a manifestation of God (pantheism) and God being present within all things (Xtian mysticism). I believe the latter. I believe God is present within all things. I think what Jesus is stressing here is the unity of creation.
FooYang
Active Member
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
No.
evidently jesus and the bible doesn't limit god to being just present in everything but everything being present in god.
Isaiah 45:5
and
John 14:2
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
That's not how I read either of those two passages.
Acts 17:28 ?????
7). Indeed, the daily prayers of the Jew, from "Adon 'Olam" to the "Shir ha-Yiḥud" of Samuel b. Kalonymus, show a wide range of thought, here of rationalistic and there of mystic character, combining in a singular manner transcendentalism and immanence or pantheism as in no other faith.
OR
The foundation-stone of Ḥasidism as laid by Besh is a strongly marked pantheistic conception of God. He declared the whole universe, mind and matter, to be a manifestation of the Divine Being; that this manifestation is not an emanation from God, as is the conception of the Cabala, for nothing can be separated from God: all things are rather forms in which He reveals Himself. When man speaks, said Besht, he should remember that his speech is an element of life, and that life itself is a manifestation of God.
Muffled
Jesus in me
No. I believe It is one God in all His children. However only Jesus is one with the Father.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe there is no doubt that God is everywhere but as the ruling Spirit inside He is only in the Elect.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Yeah, but not even this is pantheism -- at least not as I understand it. Pantheism is the thought that the things themselves are gods -- trees, oceans, stars. I suppose the first two sentences of the second example night be pantheistic, but then it makes a marked transition to panentheism. Which is the Xtian idea of the "Sacramental Universe." In panentheism, all things do emanate from God, and God is present in all things. But all things are not God -- that is, not to be worshiped. It's a subtle and sometimes clouded differentiation.
"In him we live and move and have our being" is not pantheistic -- it is panentheistic.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
See, all being one in Christ is different than all things being Christ. As I said, it's a subtle and not always crystal clear demarcation. God's presence can be in a tree, but the tree is not, itself, God.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
This notion of division between "who's in" and "who's out" is an outdated, imperial notion and, frankly, power play that I believe was foisted on the early church by the Empire. It's time for that notion to be laid aside. It no longer serves either the household of Christ or the world. In fact, it runs afoul of the whole point of Matthew's Gospel. Sheep? Goats? Wheat? Weeds? Details! Never mind the perceived differences. Let God work that out in God's time.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Yeah, good point.
Seems specific, though, ie it isn't 'everything' like in usual description of pantheism.
Now, how I interpret these verses, by, and in,
Is because God isn't completely like us. His god nature is different, in other words. That's why He is a separate being, and not pantheism.
The construct is the sameness, that isn't God, in other words.
• that being said, these verses match my theistic etc belief, as opposed to 'telling me that'..
Thats how I can explain that, i already know what it means.
By the way, this is what, "theism for atheists' means, theism without faith. I presented that a while back, however its a bit advanced for these types of discussions and forum interaction..
Good finds though.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Good way of explaining that idea.
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
As a side note, this relates to why 'materialism' therefore arguments are bad, though they don't really realize why.
An anti-cosmic satanist , or a materialist, though perhaps winning a type of "moralist" argument against me, therefore would need to explain what they mean by cosmic, since they lose the materialism argument, and aren't aware that they would lose the ' non-materialism' argument', also.
In other words, they need to know more, to make a materialism argument [which wouldn't work, then make a non materialism argument, which also wouldn't work. So, perhaps they mean something else, otherwise they lose both arguments.
All they [might win, is at best, a type of moralism argument.
An anti-cosmic satanist , or a materialist, though perhaps winning a type of "moralist" argument against me, therefore would need to explain what they mean by cosmic, since they lose the materialism argument, and aren't aware that they would lose the ' non-materialism' argument', also.
In other words, they need to know more, to make a materialism argument [which wouldn't work, then make a non materialism argument, which also wouldn't work. So, perhaps they mean something else, otherwise they lose both arguments.
All they [might win, is at best, a type of moralism argument.
Last edited:
steveb1
Member
More like Jesus was a panentheist. Pantheism identifies God and world. Jesus, on the other hand - as in panENtheism - saw God both in the world and outside the world. He saw God as being both "here" (immanent) and "more than here" (transcendent) - which is the essence of panENtheism.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
What is really occuring here, is that the moralism arguments themselves, aren't good.
This can occur with christians, satanists, whatever.
This can occur with christians, satanists, whatever.