• 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 vs. Christ vs. Deism ?

ThePainefulTruth

Romantic-Cynic
Do you consider the possibility of non-dualist pantheism (God and creation are not-two); God being the core and consciousness in all of us? And that we are striving to return to that Oneness?

Not sure what you mean by "non-dualist" pantheism. I do believe that if God exists, that it is a deist/laissez-faire God, but that's as far as I see us taking the speculation. That God could be pandeistic or panendeistic as well but it's a moot point until we know God exists in the first place.

If you see a non-acting God then what difference would even that answer make?

I see a non-intervening God as the only possible God for two reasons: 1)There's nothing but hearsay evidence for the many, competing personal/intervening gods. 2) God's reason for not intervening could only be to maintain our free will--the one purpose for the universe, since an omnipotent God could do anything else instantly. But with us It needs a 13 billion year fire wall behind which It can remain out of he realm of our knowability.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Not sure what you mean by "non-dualist" pantheism. I do believe that if God exists, that it is a deist/laissez-faire God, but that's as far as I see us taking the speculation. That God could be pandeistic or panendeistic as well but it's a moot point until we know God exists in the first place.
In non-dualism (God and creation are not-two), there is no external God for us to have evidence for or against. God is really then the consciousness in all of the universe (including us).

Non-dualism differs from materialism in that non-dualism believes consciousness is primary and matter is a derivative of consciousness. Materialists believe matter is primary and consciousness is the derivative of matter. Part of the evidence for non-dualism for me comes from my study of the paranormal showing consciousness can exist without a functioning physical brain.

I see a non-intervening God as the only possible God for two reasons: 1)There's nothing but hearsay evidence for the many, competing personal/intervening gods. 2) God's reason for not intervening could only be to maintain our free will--the one purpose for the universe, since an omnipotent God could do anything else instantly. But with us It needs a 13 billion year fire wall behind which It can remain out of he realm of our knowability.

In non-dualism, the universe itself is God in action, so the question of an intervening or non-intervening God does not really apply.
 

ThePainefulTruth

Romantic-Cynic
In non-dualism (God and creation are not-two), there is no external God for us to have evidence for or against. God is really then the consciousness in all of the universe (including us).

Non-dualism differs from materialism in that non-dualism believes consciousness is primary and matter is a derivative of consciousness. Materialists believe matter is primary and consciousness is the derivative of matter. Part of the evidence for non-dualism for me comes from my study of the paranormal showing consciousness can exist without a functioning physical brain.

Aren't you then arguing for monotheism, or...monodeism? It's sort of another way of saying divine omnipresence.

In non-dualism, the universe itself is God in action, so the question of an intervening or non-intervening God does not really apply.

It depends on what you mean by God in action. If that means God acted to form Itself, or part of Itself, into the natural universe, where It could through that omnipresence, observe, Yeah. But any continuing intervention, in any way, would interfere with our free will.

I think you are where I was at one point, a deist who still believed in the possibility of divine providence (which Washington and Paine did) and fate. It was the last bastion of my former theism to fall, some 20 years after my move to (toward) deism and almost as traumatic. The first thing I gave up was prayer.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Aren't you then arguing for monotheism, or...monodeism? It's sort of another way of saying divine omnipresence.
Not really, Advaita/pantheism/non-dualism (God and creation are not-two) is saying something more than those things. It takes some time for people like myself (from a western dualist tradition) to really understand what is meant in some eastern schools.


It depends on what you mean by God in action. If that means God acted to form Itself, or part of Itself, into the natural universe, where It could through that omnipresence, observe, Yeah. But any continuing intervention, in any way, would interfere with our free will.
Here in a nutshell is what I'm saying. The only thing real is consciousness God/Brahman. Consciousness creates this play/drama of the universe in which it separates itself from itself and then returns itself to itself. So, we are actually God/Brahman trying to realize our true identity; return to Oneness/God/Brahman. So our goal is Self-Realization (with a capital 'S').

I think you are where I was at one point, a deist who still believed in the possibility of divine providence (which Washington and Paine did) and fate.
Well Washington, Paine, Jefferson, etc. were intelligent thinkers but the western world at their time was not acquainted with eastern concepts. Even today, but a few grasp what these teachings are trying to tell us. I think that is why the subjects of this thread Christianity and Deism as well as atheism all have some merit but do not sufficiently satisfy.
It was the last bastion of my former theism to fall, some 20 years after my move to (toward) deism and almost as traumatic. The first thing I gave up was prayer.
If you felt comfort in prayer, I would suggest going back to it actually. Don't think it is only THE GOD that listens and responds. There is a hierarchy of beings above the physical level that can listen and in some cases, respond in a wise way.
 

Father

Devourer of Truth
Well as for deducting its existence based on reason.

1.Creation. and the first Laws of Physics
2.How are those laws kept in power and everything, not complete Insanity?
3. if there is a multiverse. it may be apparent that different laws and origins can apply to each universe uniquely. and so the probability of there being Gods just like the probability of alien life is somewhat apparent.
4.Mathematical order of the universe being something that is seemingly created. I recall listening to a programmer and quantum physicist saying the more he looks at the universe's base structure the more it reminds him of a program or what a programmer would create.

it is through these that with our current rational can deduce an Architect is highly probable. and if not for ours for others. furthermore, if we do have an Architect it is apart based on the nature of our universe he does not interact with it at least as how the bible would describe.

as for proof, no one has proof for a God(s). its either a matter of faith or assumption. but assumptions built upon the foundation of Logic and Reasoning hold quite some stability.
 
Top