7thangel

Let me speak of what I believe:

Take for example a person named, 7thangel. He is a human being. When he cut his hair, do you say that the cut hair is 7thangel? No. In fact, every part of the body does not actually represent 7thangel, but rather as a whole. But again, does the whole physical being represent 7thangel? Again, No. Because their are natures ouside of the physical being of 7thangel acting or responding as a whole.

Very same way God is represented as the Word. The Bible speak of the Word being "IS" and "WITH" God. You see, as humans, we have nature outside of our physical being. The same way the "Word," being physical, have a nature outside of its physical being. And, of course, each part of the Word cannot really represent God as a whole.

We usually refer to the head representing 7thangel; as we usually do to refer to represent a person. Christ is represented as the head representing the very God. But do we really mean that a single part represent the very wholeness of God? Of course no. As Christ, being the head, represents God, the wholeness of God is actually represented by the Father, in which all the physical things, Christ included, are being represented. Same way we speak of 7thangel.

I wish this will help you.

Hawkingfan

I don't think the question is meaningless at all. The bible says, "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." But where did God dwell before there was the heavens and the earth? It's a valid question.

Hawkingfan

That is an unproved assertion.

7thangel

Human have nature differ in behaviour from fishes, animals, and birds. Humans behave different from each other.

Probably, you are thinking of other things. Or correct me I used an inappropriate discription of what I thought.

Hawkingfan

Yes, we have some different behaviors from fishes, birds, other animals... And we sometimes behave differently than each other. I was thinking that you were implying the existence of the soul or something along those metaphysical lines.

Jinto

This is, I think, where we split. As a linguistic convention, we tend to hold information seperate from the matter which stores it: this sentence refers to a different thing than the pattern of light and dark which you see on your monitor. The reason for this convention is that the same information could concievably be represented by a different configuration of matter. For example, you could print out this post, and instead of glowing dots of phosphor you now have ink on paper, yet the information is exactly the same. Yet, while we hold the information seperate from the matter representing it, this does not mean that there is anything to that information other than the configuration of matter - all this information is is the meaning we infer from that configuration of matter, and not actually indicative of a seperate nature. Similarly, I would hold that the pattern of information that you know as Jinto is not actually the result of anything more than electrochemical impulses in a biological computer, even though we will seperate it linguistically on the grounds that this same information could concievably be duplicated on a different configuration of matter, such as a silicon chip (note that we are still about 20-30 years away from being able to accomplish this in practice). But, as with my words, the fact that "Jinto" represents a different concept than the sum of the parts does not mean that there is something else here beyond the physical.

So what? Well, if pantheists view nature as being the manifestation of God, but do not postulate the supernatural (laws of nature temporarily being suspended as per God's will, body-independent souls, etc.), then the pantheist theory is essentially positing "God" as being the meaning inferred from the configuration of the parts. Thus, this flavor of pantheism and atheism are actually the same theory given different names.

YourNeonGod

I appreciate the replies.

This is an idea that I have been working around in my head for awhile now. I have gone into much more detail in my personal writing; however I wanted to present it in a paraphrased manner.

I am open to and desire responses contrary to what I have posted; it helps me in developing what I am aiming for.

7thangel

I do agree, there is nothing else beyond the physical. As we speak of 7thangel, and Jinto, without their physical movements we cannot say whether they are wise, loving, or of good character. So is in knowing God, without the "Word" coming into reality of existence, we cannot define God. In fact that is what it means of the Word being "IS", and "WITH", God. The Word came unto us in physical existence to represent the head, brain, and thought of God.

As you can see, humans are different from other creatures, and each creature have a behaviour which is quite distinct from others. I really do not know why each of each's brain make them as they are. Or even the plants, on why do they grow as they are. It does not make much of a mystery to me if the Word be where the mind of God is, and of the reason why the world exist as it is.

I guess the above will certainly differ patheism to just mere atheism.

Jobar

Jinto:
There's one catch I have with pantheism - if God = that which is, then what is the difference between pantheism and atheism?

None.



But remember, an equals sign works both ways. It means that atheism is also a path to wisdom, and, yes, enlightenment.