Spinoza Pantheism Defined

2 Peter 1:21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.Revelation 19:10 At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."Luke 11:47 "Woe to you, because you build tombs for the prophets, and it was your forefathers who killed them.Luke 11:48 So you testify that you approve of what your forefathers did; they killed the prophets, and you build their tombs.Why does the word of God, so enrage you Phat? Why are my words not clear?

More off topic nonsense.The Topic is "Spinoza Pantheism Defined".Since it is obvious you cannot comprehend the topic of a thread, it is equally obvious that you are unable to read a Bible with comprehension.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

complaints about moderation are to be taken to the appropriate thread,http://EvC Forum: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0 -->EvC Forum: General Discussion Of Moderation Procedures 9.0do not discuss mod actions in this thread. it ain't the topic.

Rob:1. I have to agree with Anglagard, AdminPhat and Jar that you're derailing this thread in a preachy off topic manner. There's a place to share the gospel if that's the topic. It's not here.2. When citing a long link, in most cases, best to either put up the link or the link along with a relatively brief segment pertaining to the link.abe: Do not respond to this message in this thread. Edited by AdminBuzsaw, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Empty yourself of everything.
Let the mind become still.
Watch with your whole being as all things around you rise and fall.
They multiply and flourish and return to the source.
Returning to the source brings stillness. This is the way of nature.
The way of nature is constant.

---

quote:

---

Knowing constancy is insight.
Not knowing constancy leads to disaster.
Knowing constancy the mind is open.
Keep an open mind and you will be openhearted.
Being openhearted you will act royally.
Being royal you will attain the divine.
Being divine you will be at one with the Tao.
Being at one with the Tao is eternal.
And though the body dies the Tao will never pass away.

​

Tao Te Ching, 16

---

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Thanks, Kuresu. I forgot that item in my admin message. I was typing as you posted.

That is beautiful and refreshing, brings back memories of simpler days and a peace I can relate to. Perhaps my 'programming' in Western concepts stops me just short of the sacred, but it stirs something inexplicable.I believe there is an immortality and eternity of truth/God. Some of the differences in world philosophies seem to be in whether or not we as humans are part of 'truth/God' and if so, is that something granted at birth, gained in part or in full during life, or attained in part or full in death?I have edited this a great deal since it rambled all over, but I will leave this question;What does Spinoza mean by 'more parts will become immortal'?Edited by anastasia, : No reason given.

Maybe the common idea is that you have the ephemeral and the eternal. One prepares for immortality by keeping the ephemeral in perspective and sowing to the eternal.How 'personal' is that? Good question.__Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Yes IMO, the Tao represents the beautiful poetry, while Spinoza represents the cold logic, of the same truth.To me, the three most beautiful works on religion I have read are the Tao, the Bhagavad Gita, and the New Testament. Each speaks eternal truths to an identical need but different culture. It is the exclusionary nature of some Christians (among other religions) and some denominations, sects, or cults which by their very actions and statements alone disprove any claim to love or knowledge of God. Edited by anglagard, : clean up

Spinoza definitely comes at it as a logician, yes. It's telling that Lao Tzu strikes our ears as poetry, though. For its day it isn't. The sentences are ruthlessly concise. It's a philosophical treatise.That seems to be the way it goes with the genre. Images from earlier times, especially in pre-scientific texts, strike modern readers as more 'artistic' than the images that stand closer to us in time. The concepts of one generation become the metaphors of the next. As concepts are metaphors, ultimately, I guess the shift is built in.(Will today's talk of black holes and strange attractors fall on the ears of future generations as poetic? Will people read Hawking's prose and say 'Wow. Scientific language was so much more artistic in those days'?)I'm noticing parallels between Spinoza's thought and the ideas of Ralph Waldo Emerson as well. (Here's another writer who didn't think he was being poetic, either. The noble, rolling sentences in his essays are looking more and more like period art as time passes.) How much is kown about the influence of Spinoza's thought on the American Transcendentalists?__Edited by Archer Opterix, : clarity.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

double postEdited by anastasia, : No reason given.

Does every artist belong in retrospect to some 'movement' or another, or some 'school' or another? Are there any pioneers, or just revivalists?Anyway, from what I see, the American Trascendentalists were quite aware of Spinoza's ideas. They didn't agree with all of them, or even with each other. But that awareness definitely seems to have been influential, even if Spinoza wasn't directly credited. Good observation there!Here is what I understood; the Puritanical ideas of human depravity had become so absolute, and there was such a chasm in between Maker and Made, that it was thought to be foolish to even try to bridge that gap. Amos Bronson Alcott was an interesting character. He did an outlandish deed for his time; he taught children to understand the Bible without ever reading or memorizing anything. He taught them to use reason and their senses to reach knowledge of God. No big deal for us, eh? We like to have a happy harmony; trust in our human abilities, and awareness of our 'nothingness'. I believe trascendentalism is another term for christian pantheism. The transcendentalists put just a little of the divine back into men.If you remember that the Puritans were greatly influenced by Calvin, you will see that the Calvinistic Fundementalists here think along similar lines. They emphasize depravity and the deplorable condition of men. They emphasize Bible flash cards, repetition, back pocket inspirationals. Depravity has its place...as you say, putting the ephemeral into perspective and sowing to the eternal. But, it can too easily lead to despair and distrust of everything which comes not directly from the Bible and therefore, God. It doesn't trust 'man-made' religion, and fears human tendencies as 'pagan'.

why does that sound like Rob?as to your question, I argue that there are pioneers. we just put them all into a common movement. HG Wells could be called a pioneer of the sci-fi genre. it didn't exist, really, until he and a few others (like Verne) started writing.Locke was the pioneer of British Empiricism (not Imperialism).
Rousseau brought the idea of collective good and general will to France--ideas generally foreign to the West.Edited by AdminPhat, : helping kuresu with spelling

Ravi Zacharias - Wikipedia

quote:

---

Ravi Zacharias (full name Frederick Antony Ravi Kumar Zacharias, born 1946) is a Canadian-American Christian philosopher and apologist.

​

Zacharias descended from a line of Hindu priests (of the Nambudiri Brahmin caste).[citation needed] In one of his lectures, he explained that a Swiss-German priest spoke to one of his ancestors about Christianity, and thereafter that branch of the family was converted and the family name was changed from Nambudiri to Zacharias.

---

Interesting, but not surprising. Conversions happen all the time from any religion to any religion.Perhaps this is evidence that no religion is satisfactory to all people, eh?Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

Interesting post anglagard. Thanks. At it's most basic all Deism requires is that god be uninterested in interfering with what is going on: they could be observing, they could be completely subsumed into creation. This last is close to my belief\concept.I can't help you on your definition quest - I'm afraid you'll need others of similar mind. I can think of one from another forum (screen-name SwanModule) that I can try to contact if you are interested. Mathematician, philosopher and dylan fan.Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.