Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Last week
  2. Heathens! 2

    this one paris nicely with the signed copy of the Bible
  3. This Week's Lectionary

    Jan 14, 2017 John 1:43-51The Message (MSG) 43-44 The next day Jesus decided to go to Galilee. When he got there, he ran across Philip and said, “Come, follow me.” (Philip’s hometown was Bethsaida, the same as Andrew and Peter.) 45-46 Philip went and found Nathanael and told him, “We’ve found the One Moses wrote of in the Law, the One preached by the prophets. It’s Jesus, Joseph’s son, the one from Nazareth!” Nathanael said, “Nazareth? You’ve got to be kidding.” But Philip said, “Come, see for yourself.” 47 When Jesus saw him coming he said, “There’s a real Israelite, not a false bone in his body.” 48 Nathanael said, “Where did you get that idea? You don’t know me.” Jesus answered, “One day, long before Philip called you here, I saw you under the fig tree.” 49 Nathanael exclaimed, “Rabbi! You are the Son of God, the King of Israel!” 50-51 Jesus said, “You’ve become a believer simply because I say I saw you one day sitting under the fig tree? You haven’t seen anything yet! Before this is over you’re going to see heaven open and God’s angels descending to the Son of Man and ascending again.”
  4. Software Upgraded to version 4.2.7

    A small upgrade involving a security patch and bug fix has been installed. As usual, please keep me informed of any new problems. Thanks, Joseph
  5. Heathens! 2

    They keep getting better and better..........
  6. Earlier
  7. Ignosticism

    You assume I missed your point - I believe I didn't. Even with the explanations you asked for - you don't assume something 'more' exists because you don't believe 'it' does.
  8. Ignosticism

    Not necessarily. You seemed to have missed my point completely. Let us assume you believe in something "more" and yet that something "more: does not exist. Then that something "more" is imagined ... however vaguely (and believed).
  9. That damn mushroom!

    Welcome to the forum Timothy, Apologies, but I don't have much to offer in either area, but I hope you might find some assistance here. Cheers Paul
  10. Ignosticism

  11. That damn mushroom!

    Brrrr.... Its cold in Minnesota. Much better here in FL. Hi Timothy, Welcome to the forum. Sorry i can't help you with any knowledge of the John Hopkins study but perhaps someone else here might be more knowledgeable and chime in. Joseph
  12. Panentheism 101

    For me they are aligned more with the sciences. In fact natural philosophy spawned science.
  13. Panentheism 101

    Explains a lot. Philosophy and theology are arts, not sciences. They are aligned with painting, poetry and music. The goal is to put emotion and experience into form so that it may be shared with others.
  14. That damn mushroom!

    Greetings everyone! I have been trying to reorganize my theology after participating in a Johns Hopkins Study for Religious Leaders almost 2 years ago. I have been in the "organized?" section of the religious grocery store, fuctioning as a pastor in the ELCA for 25 years. The experience has opened me up in ways I had never thought possible. I have been reading Paul Tillich's three volume tome and keeping my eyes open for new writers/thinkers of that flavor. I came across one of Spong's books in a used bookstore. In my old life I would never have touched that book but now it speaks wagon loads of truth to me. I have been intrigued enough to continue following this magical thread of new discovery that was opened for me with the help of psilocybin and the great folks at Johns Hopkins. I was open with my council about participating in this study. Out of 10 people there were two that didn't want me to do it. One of the two has left the church because pastors shouldn't be taking drugs! The other has forgotten about it. Meanwhile I have been enjoying the freedom that exegetical philosophy injects into my Christian Theology. A world has opened up to me that didn't exist before. I am married to a wonderfully creative and beautiful woman whom I love and with whom we have four beautiful children (2boystwins&2girls) and one extra beautiful grandson. I am exceptionally interested in talking to anyone who may have also participated in the Johns Hopkins study for religious leaders or in one of the other research driven studies which use psilocybin or LSD, that are currently being conducted in research sites throughout the world.
  15. Ignosticism

    I agree with you, if we take the (a) narrower definition of theism. But it is certainly not true for the word pantheism. I am a little amused by this thormas. If I were to accuse of having no imagination then you would also be affronted. Lets assume for the moment the "more" in transcendence does not exist or is very different from what you have imagined that more to be. So in this sense by definition the transcendence is imagined. A similar argument could placed for immanence ie an "in dwelling". You can't point to that "in dwelling" without some imagination. Also even if your hypothesis is true you can only imagine what this transcendence or immanence is. Of course you will argue transcendence and immanence exist in the sense of conceptions. Much in the same way unicorns exist as conceptions or imaginings. With the added bonus we can have fluffy dolls to bolster our imaginings. These concepts exist on paper or a lecturer's brain where he transmits the concepts via air vibrations or maybe to a chalk board (in the 70s) to your brain where your brain imagines it has received the concept. A far more profane example is the red London double decker bus. We think of it as red. But if you paid attention in classes that the redness was due to some wavelengths of light being adsorbed by the surface and some reflected. the light then being focused on the three types of cones in your retina where photochemical reactions occur and allow the "red" signals are transmitted as charge ions and compounds down your optic nerve to the brain. Where the signals are interpreted and imagined as red.
  16. Panentheism 101

    It may well be for you Burl. But for me the point is more along the lines: Getting better descriptions and understanding of the way the universe ticks. Providing and honing tools to do this: eg formalized logic, scientific method, and on occasion asking novel and increasingly complex questions.
  17. Panentheism 101

    The whole point of philosophy is to ask novel and increasingly more complex questions. Answering life valued questions and reducing them to their lowest common denominator is looking through the wrong end of the telescope.
  18. Ignosticism

    Let me help you: Theism holds that God is not identical with creation and/or that creation does not become God. traditionally, many thought of transcendence as a spatial separation of God from man: God was in his supernatural world, man in his natural world and miracles were the primary means by which God entered into man's world. A more contemporary understanding of transcendence (God beyond, not identical with creation) is not that God is separate (spatial), but that God is 'more' than (non spatial) creation; God 'transcends' creation. traditionally, many accepted that God was (also) immanent: in/with creation. However, classical theism had an overemphasis on transcendence that seemed to overshadow the immanence of God. Not so in contemporary theology: immanence means that God, even though not identical with the world/creation, is present and active 'in' (and 'with') it. God is not only (or not at all) in the miraculous moments but in the 'ordinary, the everyday life of the world/man.' The God who transcends creation is in creation. Not my imagination my friend as I first learned the concept in college (70s) philosophy classes (metaphysics and ontology) and later (early 80s) in theology and it has been a constant, found in the works of many major theologians - up to and including today. I'll let you do your own research.
  19. Agnosticism

  20. Panentheism 101

    The explanations are not in my imagination and actually found in contemporary theology. I leave you to do the research and see for yourself. However you do seem to have a bubble fetish. Thanks for the offer but I don't indulge. You asked me to leave God out of it and give an explanation of 'love.' Then once your request is granted, you bring God back in and ask yet again about love. Yet you ignored the other explanation that you were after: immanence. Try combining the two but I'm not hopeful as it might take a bit of imagination:+}
  21. Agnosticism

    I want evidence for what exactly? Some theists claim they do know. Not at all. A strong theist believes god exists and perhaps even knows god exist (gnostic theist). You have not burst my bubbles at all. This of course is nonsense ... in fact I more or less said the opposite here: No it is evidence that people claim they know god exists. To what exactly? I will eventually get to the rest of the post ... I hope it will depict my replies more accurately. You are welcome
  22. Agnosticism

  1. Load more activity
×