God And Change

[Yvonne]

In “Tomorrow's Catholic”. Michael Morwood writes:

 

God works in and through what God has to work with. There is limitation here and adaptability, as well as unimaginable diversity and possibilities...Wherever the presence of God is one would expect to find variety, spontaneity, change, growth, development, new possibilities, adaptability, and even disorder (the price of freedom and chance encounters.)

 

I've pondered this bit repeatedly, and the question I first asked is the one I'm still asking: Why? I may have come up with some semi-satisfying answers for myself. Maybe. What are your thoughts?

[Guest billmc]

I've pondered this bit repeatedly, and the question I first asked is the one I'm still asking: Why? I may have come up with some semi-satisfying answers for myself. Maybe. What are your thoughts?

 

Hmm. My initial thought is that I really need to read some Morwood.

 

Secondly, I believe that, in a sense, God has *everything* to work with, being the Creator and all. If our world and the universe teaches us anything about God, it is that God loves variety. The snowflakes may all look the same to us, but I’ve heard that no two are exactly alike. The stars may all look the same from our distant point-of-view, but each one is unique. The same is true of us. There is only one of each of us in the universe as far as we know (even twins are not the same person) and we are, therefore, extremely rare and valuable.

 

As I believe the presence of God is everywhere, I do see the qualities that Morwood mentions, from the tiniest atoms to the largest galaxies. Why? I don’t know. But I suspect it is because life means change. Maybe energy can neither be created nor destroyed, I’m not a physicist. But it sure relishes, as Spock’s old motto said, Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combinations. Nature not only abhors a vacuum, it seems to disdain sameness or status quo.

 

How pleasurable would a symphony be if it consisted of only one note played by one instrument for an entire hour? How interesting would a painting be if it consisted of only one shape of one color? How inspiring would a story or a sonnet be if it consisted of only one word? How transcendent would a dance be if the dancers remained as motionless as statues?

 

The more a thing changes, the more we refer to it as being alive. The less a thing changes, the more we refer to it as being dead. God, imo, seems to favor life.

[JosephM]

Why? Why usually demands causality or a consequential relationship between two events OR a reason or premise in support of an argument. Perhaps there is no sufficient why to your question? Perhaps there just IS what IS.

 

Why?, in such matters of God seems to me to be a construct of the thinking mind always seeking a cause that transcends itself. In my view, it will never be satisfied more than momentarily in its seeking because real causality is not within its (the thinking mind) scope of vision. The eye does not 'see' for itself nor does it know why it does what it does. Likewise the ear does not 'hear' for itself and know what it hears. They are just a channel to the mind that records the imprints of them both. The mind processes the data but the mind cannot see past its own processing or self constructs nor understand the why of its existence or purpose. It can only do what it was designed to do in a dance with the whole.

 

In my experience, only the One who watches and provides the life source for the experience knows. And when mind is still and subjectively experiences the One that is always present that knows, all questions of why become mute and disappear.

 

To me, the simplest answer to your question is a non answer to the mind being ... Because life here is as it is designed.

 

Oh well, your bound to get some strange answers like this when you ask a question here.

Joseph

[glintofpewter]

God works in and through what God has to work with.

I guess I start here because it suggests that God is separate from the universe and that God is limited by that. I don't think God is separate in a useful sense (maybe I will change my mind) and I don't think God is limited by the nature of the universe. In God are all potentialities attained by evolution at any moment. It is only changing from potential to actual can we imagine any limitation. Limitations due to specificity of time space materials. Since it is impossible to know what didn't come into existence that's all we have. Change is an inherent characteristic of evolution. Why is usually a question of intent. What did God have in mind? Relationship.

 

Let me write my own Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God wanted relationship and had no idea what that meant. 1:2 God gave of God's self so that there might be an evolving universe. 1:3 Every thing else God 'learned' through the evolving relationship with the universe.

 

Why? Relationship

Why change? So that God and the universe can learn about relationship. It all began with "Hi, I would like to get to know you" and has been getting more complex ever since.

 

That's one way I would tell the story.

 

Dutch

[soma]

Dutch I like your touch on the relationship. I feel God is playing hide and seek. He/She/It hides in us to see if we can find ourselves.

[glintofpewter]

I feel God is playing hide and seek. He/She/It hides in us to see if we can find ourselves.

 

Soma,

This strikes me as very intimate.

[soma]

Dutch you are right this game is very intimate and that is why I find spiritual beings are so passionate. It is harder to live and play with enthusiasm and passion than to die a spiritual sluggish life that suffers from the failure to grow. I don't think Jesus suffered for our sins because pain is not suffering. He rejoiced in a triumphant life that was popping and crackling with individuality, meaning and value.

[JenellYB]

In it's root meaning, to suffer meant to bear, to experience. Period. Not neccessarily pain, as we generally think of it now.

 

Jenell