Vancouver (photo from trekearth.com)
All is one and one for all. The Guru Musketeer
From:
http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2006/01/mphil-wales-2003.html
Pantheism
D.A. Carson stated:
Once again, there are many variations. The heart of the matter, however, is that this structure of thought insists that "god" and the universe are one. There is no chasm between creator and created. All that is, is god; god is whatever is.
In this worldview, not only adopted by most Hindus but the working assumption of the entire New Age movement, god is not a transcendent "other" who is personal, who can come from beyond to help us. The entire universe belongs to one order. Within this universe, however, there are levels of attainment. What Christians see as sin or evil, pantheists are likely to see as imperfections in reality that need to be removed by progressive self-realization, progressive self-improvement. The goal of human beings is not to have their sins forgiven and to be reconciled to a God who holds them to account, but to spiral up the cycle of life, perhaps through reincarnation, but certainly through meditation, self-focus, self-improvement. Carson (1990: 32)
Simon Blackburn stated concerning pantheism: "The view that God is in everything, or that God and the universe are one." Blackburn (1996: 276)
There are two major reasons why I, philosophically, dismiss pantheism. One, to me it is illogical to propose that an impersonal God can create, or somehow cause, personal beings. It makes sense that an infinite personal being could create finite personal beings with some similar characteristics, but for an impersonal being to create beings with personality seems untenable.
Two, Carson mentioned that the removal of evil in pantheism is believed to take place through self-progression. Without an objective personal God, however, what basis does pantheism have to call something evil? How is pantheism to determine what is out of order with the cosmic order? It would seem to me that an impersonal "it" that creates the Universe does not have character and is amoral, and thus it is neither good nor evil. The cosmos resulting from it would be amoral and nothing should be seen as evil within it.
It should be noted that there is a difference between God being in everything in pantheism, and God being omnipresent in Christianity. Pantheism assumes monism, God and Universe are one, God is everywhere and in everything so that each human being is in fact God. Christianity assumes God is everywhere but yet separate from his creation. What is the difference? Why am I not God? God is present where my spirit and body are present, yet he wills that I have a will separate from his, a life separate from his, the same is true for all his created beings. Therefore, I could, hypothetically, think that there is no God. As well, I could disobey him and sin.
Whereas in pantheism, those who do wrong are considered to be misunderstanding what they are a part of, however, I think this is untenable. If indeed we were part of God we could not depart from what we were, and there would be no fracture. The fact that we sin demonstrates that although God is infinite we still have the power to will not to be one with him in obedience, and thus evil exists.
The evil that exists in the world is a much greater testament to human separation from God as opposed to the concept of human union with God with misunderstanding. Human beings sin against God because their will is apart from him although his infinite being is always present, however, he can be present yet still have disobedience exist in his creation.
To make a convincing argument of how humanity, being divinity, fails to realize this fact and act accordingly, is very difficult. For divinity to remain pure and able to reincarnate human beings, for example, seems almost intellectually impossible to accomplish, when human beings within divinity continue to commit wrong actions. Pantheism does not make sense because it fails to separate God’s nature from that of his creation. If the nature was indeed the same, there would be no fracture.
BLACKBURN, S. (1996) Pantheism, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
CARSON, D.A. (1990) How Long, O Lord?, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
Please leave a comment.
However, if you want to be an evil clown on this blog. I probably will not publish your comment.;)
A photo by Sherry from Facebook. At Christmas time she is asking me to smile...
I think I needed a shave. Once I have my sleep apnea related surgery for a receding jaw, I shall have a new less 'kingpinnish' look. The lower mandible bone will be moved forward and my face will be restructured. I will appear to have more of a neck, although it is presently 20 inches in circumference. I take it the circumference of my neck is so large at the present that it contributes very much to my serious sleep apnea problems.
From:
http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol2/circumference.html
My neck, sort of...
The distance around a circle is called the circumference. The distance across a circle through the center is called the diameter. Pi is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to the diameter. Thus, for any circle, if you divide the circumference by the diameter, you get a value close to Pi.
The radius of a circle is the distance from the center of a circle to any point on the circle. If you place two radii end-to-end in a circle, you would have the same length as one diameter. Thus, the diameter of a circle is twice as long as the radius.
http://satireandtheology.blogspot.com/2008/04/presumed-funny-
celebrity-statements.html
I'd say nice pic, but you aren't smiling, so not a nice pic...he he!! Anyways, I am glad that there is a God separate from me...I am glad for my free will & that I am not god....I am glad that in this fallen world & as I fall from time to time, that I can go to GOD HIMSELF and be lifted up & made complete in Him, and be made whole as He abides in me. :() :() :() :() :()
ReplyDeleteI was not smiling, because:
ReplyDelete1. You had not commented, and do not comment on this blog enough.;) You are wise to seek God in this fallen world, and thank you very much for the comment.
2. I did not know at the time that my mandible surgery would be covered by the government health plan.
3. Our friend Philosophy Man was sort of getting the show under way at 11:30 p.m. His wife the Bulgarian Princess was attempting to change the agenda and he was resisting with the vigour of a rebellious teen.
Russ;)
A moment on the pantheism question- shows us how encompassing is the template in Romans 1 about the decline of mankind, of a given nation, or of an individual from the Living God. So John warns the Church, "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world, for if any ..love the world the love of the Father is not in Him," as Jesus affirmed Moses, "..and thou shalt love the Lord ..with all..." That's the love affair that God is calling us to!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Robert. Very good.:)
ReplyDeleteIn light of Romans 1-3; to know the true God is to reject any idea of pantheism. God is separate from and yet controls his creation which has experienced the fall and corruption.
If "god" is everything, then basically, god is nothing. If, when we die, we simply become energy, or become a part of the great circle of life, or something similar, then that's really no different than saying we return to the dust, and we rot away; because energy has no consciousness. Therefore, those ideas can only logically end in despair, not hope.
ReplyDeleteReincarnation really makes no sense when you think about it. Since we wouldn't have any recollection of past lives, then how could we learn from the mistakes in our past lives?
And if there is no such thing as sin, but rather, if we are merely unenlightened or ignorant or not understanding or making a mistake; then why should any criminal be punished? After all, they are merely mistaken. Why punish someone for ignorance?
I like Sherry's comment. If people were gods, or all part of god, I sure would not have much like for 'god,' or much respect either. And if I was god or part of god, then what happens when I am in trouble or in need of serious help? People fail you all the time, so I don't want to only rely on other people. And I fail as well, so I don't want to rely only on myself. Praise God that we have a Lord, Creator, Master and Savior Who is infinitely greater than all of us; Who is infinitely wise, omnipotent, omnipresent and (yes, I'm being redundant) omniscient. The comfort and joy I often have because of this God Who is a Being unique from any other being, is more than I can express in words. And the purpose in life that I gain from knowing that I am here to serve Him is a greater sense of purpose than anything else can offer me.
...because energy has no consciousness. Therefore, those ideas can only logically end in despair, not hope.
ReplyDeleteYes, it provides as much hope as atheism, and slightly less hope perhaps, than deism.
Reincarnation really makes no sense when you think about it. Since we wouldn't have any recollection of past lives, then how could we learn from the mistakes in our past lives?
As, I have noted as well.
And if I was god or part of god, then what happens when I am in trouble or in need of serious help?
Even if you were the most powerful and a generally, but not perfectly good God, you could be overruled and overpowered by enough evil gods. Think of Marvel and DC comics...it would be that type of world.
Thanks, Jeff.
these theories run rampant in Europe - alas... I find them running more and more rampant in USA - I have only a few friends in Canada - so I am clueless as the that culture.
ReplyDeleteThat surgery sounds dangerous - I will pray for your quick recovery.
Thanks, for comments and prayers, MM.
ReplyDeleteI would think typical Canadian culture is much like the liberal aspects of American culture.
The surgery is somewhat risky, and as with my previous two sleep apnea surgeries I will be recovering in the intensive care unit.
Russ:)
Russ,
ReplyDeleteEven if you were the most powerful and a generally, but not perfectly good God, you could be overruled and overpowered by enough evil gods. Think of Marvel and DC comics...it would be that type of world.
Yeah, being Thor (i.e., a Norse god) would be cool, but not if Loki was after you all the time. Being Hercules (i.e., a Greek demi-god) would also be cool, but not if your dad and mom were constantly angry at you and trying to destroy you. (Both Thor and Hercules are also Marvel characters.)
Hey, what are you holding in your hand in that photo? It looks like a bent cigarette. Russ, you're not one of those chain-smoking theologians, are you? ;) I mean, I think I've seen pictures of C.S. Lewis smoking a pipe; and I know Bilbo Baggins in Tolkein's "The Hobbit" loved to smoke a pipe, but hey, that doesn't mean YOU have to smoke!! :) LOL
Cheers, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteSmoking came to my mind in regard to the photo as well, but I have never smoked anything in my life. I think I am holding and eating a cookie. Besides, with my sleep apnea it would be very unwise for me to smoke.
No chains, and no chain-smoking for thekingpin68.:)
Glad to hear it.
ReplyDeleteYes, no smoking or heavy drinking for me.
ReplyDeleteBut, others in my family have made up for yours truly.
Thankfully pain killers in any abundance make me vomit, and so I will not get hooked on those either. I found out with the pain from my first two sleep apnea surgeries that I cannot handle pain killers well. After awhile the pain of the surgeries is preferable to the upset stomach and vomiting from the pills.
Wow.
ReplyDeleteFrom:
ReplyDeleteRuss on Wead site
In regard to religious freedom, as a theologian it is of course important to me, and your cause seems worthy. There are discussions with churches here in Canada if eventually reasonably presented conservative type Christian views will be opposed by the state if it attempts to appease certain groups. I have no desire to intellectually attack anyone, but only am required to present an objective, reasonable and scholarly analysis of differing world-views, including religious ones. I expect to be reviewed in the same manner. Certainly as a Reformed Christian, if I am reviewing material from, or in dialogue with, Roman Catholics, Jewish persons, and Latter-Day Saints, for example, this should be done with respect and an open-mind.
My pastor in Vancouver has stated previously that since the federal government has brought in same-sex marriage legislation, some ministers locally have been pressured to perform homosexual marriages by officials. If traditional Biblically focused churches are not protected from performing same-sex marriages as they are supposed to be with BILL C-38: THE CIVIL MARRIAGE ACT C. Religious Marriage (Clause 3), then churches here may need to consider performing religious marriage ceremonies only, allowing the state to perform the actual legal marriages.
Russ:)
Good writing. My DH (dear husband) worked with man who professed to be Hindu. One day as they were talking outside a bug landed on the religious Hindu and he instinctively slapped it dead lol.
ReplyDeleteIn reference to your last comment, I think the future of "real" believers is outside of the denominations. Those churches who have joined in with the "IHS" council/group or whatever it's called, are part of the ecumenical/new age movement. Before Constantine (you know he was also a high priest of the pagan religion Mithraism) took Christianity a new direction the true believers did not join with anything pagan, we need to be like them. Found a new pdf book online which is really convicting: http://www.coyhwh.com/books/The%20Great%20Falling%20Away.pdf
Thanks for stopping by again :) Are you having a problem with evil clowns commenting on your posts? Will pray that your surgery goes well.
Thanks for the comments.
ReplyDeleteThe Hindu story in funny.
I agree that Christians should not participate in any non-Christian religious ceremonies. There is only one God to worship, and publicly and privately it should be the God of the Bible. Although, I of course reason that in a democracy others have the right to reason and act otherwise.
I have not had many clowns attempt to post on here, but I reason there would be a few more if I did not have comment moderation. I like having friendly blogs for everyone who is friendly. Thanks very much for the prayers. I have to fight very hard for most things God wills for me to have for gain, and it appears health is one of those things.
Russ:)
Hi Russ,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment over at my place. BTW, I'm Pearlie, not Kevin, though if I am guy, I won't mind being called that :D
I live in a country where Hinduism is a religion widely practiced, and it has become so much of a given to them that it is very rare to find someone who has actually thought it through – at least I have not met any who has. Religion is very much an inherited thing here.
I agree with your thoughts on pantheism but it is very attractive nonetheless – if one can meditate and be one with the world, if one can feel the inner peace because he is in control, because he is god in his own right. Moreover, not all Asians would really adhere to linear logic. Things can be thought out in a circular manner and it would be still acceptable. Once in my Theology class, I was told that Hebrew thinking could well be circular as well, if we look at how Jesus spoke. I tried to look for the verses, but I cannot remember which ones he was referring to. Might be the ones about the Father loving the Son and abiding in the Son in the Gospel of John, but that looks quite linearly logical to me now! haha
Have you heard of Ravi Zacharias? I am not sure if he was once a Hindu but he is now a very prominent Christian apologist.
Hi Russ,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment over at my place. BTW, I'm Pearlie, not Kevin, though if I am guy, I won't mind being called that :D
Hello, Pearlie.
I left another comment on your blog. I know...what a moron I was.;) A possible peril of my scan reading, since I have so much to read, is that type of situation. When I saw the name Kevin at the end of your post I did not notice that it was the name of the photographer. I even got your sex wrong!:)
Moreover, not all Asians would really adhere to linear logic.
I was taught this in Missions class at Canadian Baptist Seminary. I think a rejection of logic and reason is spiritual poison.
Have you heard of Ravi Zacharias?
Yes, I have listened to him on-line several times.
I hope we can blog link, and thanks for supporting my article.
Russ:)
Russ,
ReplyDeleteI see you left the same comment on that other site twice.
You really are on 'Wead'!
"View Points: Al Gore's Environmental Spirituality
ReplyDeleteBerit Kjos
Contributing Writer
Though I appreciate Al Gore's good intentions, I'm concerned about his beliefs. If he becomes vice president, will his convictions fuel America's growing enchantment with earth-centered religions?
The personable spokesman for global environmentalism voices some genuine concerns, but would his earnest, articulate answers blur the meaning of Christianity?
"I am a Baptist," he tells us, but how does he view God? Could his beliefs spur the timeless tendency to dilute truth with pagan persuasions?
Gore's best-selling book, Earth in the Balance; Ecology and the Human Spirit, offers some alarming clues. In it, he:
FINDS ANSWERS IN PANTHEISTIC CONNECTEDNESS: "A modern prayer of the Onondaga tribe in upstate New York offers another beautiful expression of our essential connection to the earth: `O Great Spirit, whose breath gives life to the world and whose voice is heard in the soft breeze make us wise so that we may understand what you have taught us'" (p. 259).
SEEKS WISDOM FROM PAGAN RELIGIONS: "The richness and diversity of our religious tradition throughout history is a spiritual resource long ignored by people of faith, who are often afraid to open their minds to teachings first offered outside their own system of belief.
"But the emergence of a civilization in which knowledge moves freely and almost instantaneously throughout the world has spurred a renewed investigation of the wisdom distilled by all faiths.
"This panreligious perspective may prove especially important where our global civilization's responsibility for the earth is concerned" (p. 258-259).
VALIDATES GODDESS WORSHIP: "The spiritual sense of our place in nature predates Native American cultures; increasingly it can be traced to the origins of human civilization.
"A growing number of anthropologists and archeo-mythologists argue that the prevailing ideology of belief in prehistoric Europe and much of the world was based on the worship of a single earth goddess, who was assumed to be the fount of all life and who radiated harmony among all living things.
"Much of the evidence for the existence of this primitive religion comes from the many thousands of artifacts uncovered in ceremonial sites. These sites are so widespread that they seem to confirm the notion that a goddess religion was ubiquitous throughout much of the world until the antecedents of today's religions - most of which still have a distinctly masculine orientation - swept out of India and the Near East, almost obliterating belief in the goddess. "The last vestige of organized goddess worship was eliminated by Christianity.
"It seems obvious that a better understanding of a religious heritage preceding our own by so many thousands of years could offer new insights" (p. 261).
BLENDS CHRISTIANITY AND PANTHEISM: "My own faith is rooted in the unshakable belief in God as creator and sustainer, a deeply personal interpretation of and relationship with Christ, and an awareness of a constant and holy spiritual presence in all people, all life and all things" (p. 368).
"My understanding of how God is manifest in the world can be best conveyed through the metaphor of the hologram; I believe that the image of the Creator, which sometimes seems so faint in the tiny corner of creation each of us beholds, is nonetheless present in its entirety" (p. 265).
Conclusion
Earth-centered spirituality and pantheistic gods sounds good to people who don't know Scripture - but they can never heal the earth. The true God is separate from His creation, not in or part of it.
Al Gore's well-meant manual for global salvation will only deepen our problems. Feminine or earth-centered spirituality may be "politically correct" today, but it mocks biblical Christianity.
Like Israel who witnessed God's miracles and settled in the promised land, America is turning from God's Word to the beliefs of pagan neighbors within one generation."
from:
http://www.watchman.org/reltop/gore.htm
"Gnosticism of the 20th Century: The New Age Or An Old Lie?
ReplyDeleteCraig Branch
Many people are becoming aware of what is commonly referred to as "The New Age Movement." To most people, these diverse beliefs and practices seemed to grow out of nowhere.
The term "New Age" is somewhat misleading as it actually refers to a coming new era, a new state of existence - the "dawning of the Age of Aquarius."
Adherents claim that this new state of utopian global bliss and consciousness will occur when enough people are converted or initiated.
Actually the beliefs and practices are very, very old. Their root lies in the dawn of time and began to grow and branch out throughout Biblical and modern history.
As Brooks Alexander writes, "...these presuppositions have been systematically expounded in such esoteric disciplines as astrology, alchemy, reincarnation, yoga, magic, Taoism, tantra and Zen. Today, because of the wide spread cross-fertilization of these and other schools of thought, new forms of this basic world view are being created," (Special Collection Journal, Spiritual Counterfeits Project, Vol. 6 Number 1, 1984, p. 14).
This basic world view states that all reality is one undifferentiated cosmic energy or consciousness (monism). There is no personal God, but all is God; or God (an impersonal force) is all (pantheism).
Man is therefore a divine entity and "salvation is equated with the discovery of this higher Reality with its laws," (Ibid, p. 16).
The attainment of this experiential knowledge (gnosis) leads to self-realization which "Leads to the mastery of spiritual technology and the attainment of psycho-spiritual power," (Ibid).
Matter, sin, and finiteness are therefore an illusion.
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines gnosis and gnosticism as the gaining of spiritual knowledge reserved only for special initiates, "Distinguished by the conviction that matter is evil and that emancipation or salvation comes through this special knowledge."
Closely related and associated with gnosticism is occultism.
Classically the word "occult" means hidden or secret teachings and practices. But "by `secret' it is not meant that the positions taken are not available in most instances. Rather, the beliefs and practices are secret in the sense that performance of the rites is considered to be effective only when performed by those who are deeply initiated in the lore of the cult," (Cults, World Religions, and the Occult, Ken Boa, p. 139).
Therefore, a working definition of the New Age would be a revival of ancient eastern mystical/occult beliefs and practices based on gnostic roots.
It involves the belief that spirituality or godhood is gained by the use of magical/mystical practices which transcend the illusory physical universe and senses.
This pagan philosophy has its historical root in Genesis 3:1-5. Satan in his temptation of man seduces Eve by questioning the character, benevolent rule and word of God (vs.1).
Satan also denies the reality of death (as does reincarnation), and promises that if man partakes of the forbidden, secret knowledge (occult/gnosis) then he will be raised up on the level of God, independent of Him (vs. 3-5).
"...the tempation of the autonomous and infinitized self remains the alpha and omega of spiritual pride," (Special Collection Journal, p. 22).
From this unfortunate beginning, the embodiment of this philosophy can be historically traced through the Bible. Ancient Babylon in its mystery religions consistently reflects this heresy.
Throughout the Old Testament, these practices are exposed and condemned (Deut. 18:10-14; Isaiah 47:8-15).
For instance, the Ziggurats of Babel (Genesis 11) and the entire Chaldean culture were deeply rooted in the esoteric science of astrology.
This philosophy expressed in the Samarian and Egyptian cultures as well. God lays bare the deceitfulness of this paganism in Isaiah 47:8-10.
Eschatologically, mystery Babylon demonstrates that it is preeminently a religious system throughout the ages culminating in the final judgment (Revelation 17 and 18).
Continuing to trace the history of this heresy, Paul addresses the Stoic philosophers at Athens (Acts 17:16-34) who were the pantheists of that day. Paul also confronted this heresy in Ephesus (Acts 19:17-20).
Sections of the New Testament, especially in Colossians and 1 John were written specifically responding to the gnostic beliefs of that day.
In more modern times, this gnostic/occultic philosophy has continued to evolve in expressions like Indian Shamanism, transcendentalism, spiritism and spiritualism, New Thought, Rosicrusianism, Theosophy, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, Zen, Kabala, Sufism, Yoga, Christian Science, Mind Sciences, Unity, Silva Mind Control, Edgar Cayce, Transcendental Meditation, Witchcraft, firewalking, Church Universal and Triumphant, parapsychology and many more.
"That which has been is that which will be, and that which is done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun," (Ecclesiastes 1:9).
Historically the effect of the perennial heresy has always been death and so it will be in the future: "For this reason in one day her plagues will come, pestilence and mourning and famine, and she will be burned up with fire; for the Lord God who judges her is strong," (Revelation 18:8).
As C.S. Lewis cogently remarked, "And Pantheism in that sense has, in the long run, only one really formidable opponent - namely Christianity," (Miracles, pp. 84-85)."
from:
http://www.watchman.org/reltop/gnostic.htm
"Re-imagining God
ReplyDeleteCraig Branch
A number of what appeared to be unrelated issues began to naturally converge in Minneapolis, in November 1993. The result was the very controversial and very revealing "Re-imagining 1993" Conference, attended and supported by leadership and members of several mainline denominations.
Many grassroots members of the Presbyterian (PCUSA), Lutheran (ELCA) and United Methodist churches were shocked to their core when they heard about their denomination's participation in the themes and content of the conference which ranged from direct attacks on traditional Christian doctrine and the celebration of homosexuality, to overt paganism, witchcraft, and New Age/Occult ritual.
The Re-imagining conference drew feminist and radical feminists, ostensibly as a convocation to discuss women's issues. The conference was held in conjunction with the World Council of Churches' Decade of Churches in Solidarity (Christianity Today, 4 April 1994, p. 74).
The conveners' stated purpose was "to re-imagine what belief in God and life together in community means from a Christian-feminist perspective" (Christian News, 21 March 1994, p. 1). Johanna Bos, a feminist professor at Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary stated, "We have not come here to jump on the feminist band wagon, but to upset the patriarchal apple cart" (Christian American, February 1994, p. 19).
The conference drew over 2000 participants from 27 countries, 49 states and 15 denominations. Records show that 405 Presbyterians (PCUSA), 391 United Methodists, 313 Lutherans (ELCA), 234 Roman Catholics, 144 United Church of Christ, and American Baptists had the largest numbers in attendance. One third were clergy (Washington Post, 4 June 1994, p. C8).
Part of the reason for such a negative response from grassroots and conservative laymen to this conference was that their national organizations were officially involved and financially supportive. The PCUSA contributed $86,000 and had 24 of their national staff there (Christian American, February 1994, p. 19; Christian News, 21 March 1994, p. 1).
The United Methodist Church had over 50 officials in attendance (Charisma, May 1994, p. 76). The ELCA also helped to finance the conference (Christian News, 28 February 1994, p. 1).
The Presbyterian Layman, a conservative, independent, renewal organization in the PCUSA, sends its newspaper to over 500,000 subscribers. Executive editor Parker Wilkinson, an ordained Presbyterian minister, described some of the significant conference themes as "antithetical to the Christian faith seismic shifts in theology, implying that since God is a product of one's imagination to begin with, so He can thus be re-imagined" (Washington Post, p. C7).
What and How?
What was the content of this conference? How could it have occurred? What is its significance?
As stated earlier, a number of what appeared to be unrelated issues converged at the Minneapolis conference. The mainline denominations besieged for many years by liberalism, neo- orthodoxy, and neo-liberalism, have become a greenhouse for nurturing such destructive elements in our culture as neo-paganism, witchcraft, New Age Movement with its corollary deep ecology Gaia (Goddess/Mother Earth), and social/political radical feminism and lesbian movements.
The farther one drifts from the plenary inspiration and inerrancy of the Scripture, the more inevitable the drift will be into depravity and paganism. As C.S. Lewis observed from history, "Pantheism is congenial to our minds not because it is the final stage in a slow process of enlightenment but because it is almost as old as we are. It may even be the most primitive of all religions. It is immemorial in India. The Greeks rose above it only at their peak; their successors relapsed into the great Pantheistic system of the Stoics. Modern Europe escaped it only when she remained predominately Christian".
"So far from being the final religious refinement, pantheism is in fact the permanent level below which man sometimes sinks, but above which his own unaided efforts can never raise him for very long. It is the attitude into which the human mind automatically falls when left to itself. No wonder we find it congenial. [It] has, in the long run, only one really formidable opponent <197> namely Christianity" (Miracles, 1947, pp. 84-85).
New Age and Occultism
Of the 27 main speakers, most of them had published works on feminist theology from several perspectives (Washington Post, p. C8). Some were lesbians, some radical feminists, and a "menagerie of gnostics, tree, wind, fire, water, and nymph worshippers,animist followers of a superstition that all objects possess an indwelling soul, including trees, plants, animals, stones, etc." (Christian News, 21 March 1994, p.1).
The majority of speakers attempted to re-imagine Scripture, the church, and theology to fit their own radical feminist bias. Asian radical feminist, liberation theologian Chung Hyum Kyung, a Korean and graduate of Union Theological Seminary in New York, put it best, "The Christian Church has been very patriarchal. That's why we are here together, in order to destroy this patriarchal idolatry of Christianity" (Presbyterian Layman, January-February 1994).
Speaker Kyung drew substantially from New Age and animistic religions, expressing God as an all-encompassing energy force in nature. She instructed conferees in prana (psychic energy) exercises such as going to a tree and asking it for "some of your life" (Ibid.).
She repeatedly lead the group throughout the 4-day event in singing, "O great spirit, earth and wind and sea, you are inside and all around me" (Ibid.). Kyung's authority for the many Occultic beliefs and practices were the church-rejected gnostic gospels which promoted pantheism (Christian News, 21 March 1994, p. 1).
Lesbian Rights
Francis Wood, of the National Council of Churches, and Elizabeth Bettenhausen, of the ELCA, both lectured promoting abortion rights and homosexuality. Other lesbian speakers were Christine Smith, a professor at United Theological Seminary; Jane Spahr, a Presbyterian activist; Mary Hunt, a Roman Catholic theologian who promoted substituting sexual intimacy among friends in place of family; Melanie Morrison, co-convenor of CLOUT (Christian Lesbians Out Together), led a demonstration calling lesbians and bisexuals to come forward and receive a song from the conferees celebrating their lesbianism.
Judy Westerdorf, a lesbian Methodist minister, spoke stating, "The Church has always been blessed by gays and lesbians, witches and shamans" Lesbian feminist Virginia Mollenkott of the National Council of Churches suggested that it may be necessary for women to leave denominations in order to create a new holistic church (Presbyterian Layman).
Blatant Heresy
Mollenkott also led the way for many overtly heretical attacks on the nature of God, the Person of Christ and His atonement. She claimed that we are equal with Jesus and the only sense that He is our "elder brother" was that "he was the first to show us that it is possible to live in oneness with the divine nature" (Ibid.). Mollenkott also claimed that the idea of Jesus' atonement was "the ultimate in child abuse and a model of human child abuse" depicting "God as an abusive parent" (Ibid.).
Aruna Gnanadson, of the World Council of Churches, and Dolores Williams, professor at Union Theological Seminary in New York, both condemned the idea of Christ's atonement as an abusive patriarchal system with the comment, "I don't think we need folks hanging on crosses dripping blood and weird stuff (Ibid.).
Perhaps the most overtly heretical speeches came from two leaders in the World Council of Churches (WCC). African feminist Mercy Oduyoye, deputy general secretary, taught that we all have mothers in the spirit world avenging us and that the dead are all around us "in the rustling of trees, in the groaning woods, in the crying grass, in the moaning rocks" (Ibid.).
The other WCC spokeswoman, Chinese feminist Kwok Pui-Lan, had also been a featured speaker at a PCUSA Theology and Worship Conference in 1992. She explained that the Chinese reject the depravity of or sinfulness of humans and dismissed Christ for Confucius who emphasized "the genuine possibility for human beings to achieve moral perfection and sainthood" (Ibid.).
She also rejected the doctrine of the Trinity. She preferred her culture's 722 gods saying only one God was oppressive. She, too, quoted the gnostic "gospels" saying that salvation was a matter of "bringing out what is within you". Pui-Lan justified quoting from these New Age sources by saying that it was men who decided the canon, therefore, she was not obliged to accept that (Ibid.).
There were regular convocations during the conference to the goddess Sophia, the source of everyone's divinity, the creator god who dwells within all, instead of God the Father (Ibid.).
The culmination of the conference was an obvious substitution for the Lord's Supper or Communion. In a ritual called "Milk and Honey" participants were asked to pray that oppression of women would cease and a new religion would emerge replacing the old patriarchal Christianity. The chant was repeated, "Our Maker Sophia, we are women in your image, with the hot blood of our wombs we give form to new life; with nectar between our thighs we invite a lover; with our warm body fluids we remind the world of its pleasure and sensations" (Ibid.).
The Body of Christ Responds
As news of the conference began to reach the local church level, reaction ranged from concern to outrage. By April, PCUSA headquarters had received well over 8,000 individual letters and calls as well as notifications of possible withholding of budget funds from 185 congregations. Projected budget shortfall was estimated at $3 million. The United Methodist church officials had received more than 1,000 protests (Christianity Today, 4 April 1994, p. 74; World, 7 May 1994, p. 28).
These figures had grown by June to 520 PCUSA churches protesting the conference and a new estimated shortfall of between $8-12 million (Washington Post, 4 June 1994, p. C8).
A number of retired United Methodist bishops expressed anger. Earl Hunt stated "no comparable heresy has appeared in the church in the last 15 centuries". Mack Stokes added that the conference was "theologically ignorant, ontologically superstitious, Christologically blasphemous [and] ecclesiastically irresponsible" (Christianity Today 4 April 1994, p. 74).
Even top leaders of the liberal American Baptist Churches agreed that some aspects of the conference were inconsistent with historical Christianity. In a prepared statement which supported the "positive empowerment of women", it went on to "emphatically go on record affirming our commitment to the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and to express our conviction that salvation is in no one else" (Religious News Service, 16 March 1994).
Damage Control
The hierarchies of the denominations as well as conference organizers began to respond to a range of charges and demands for apology, discipline, or excommunication of the organizers and participants.
The PCUSA Theology and Worship Office issued a "theological appraisal" which took strong exception to a number of activities at the conference, especially the invocations of Sophia, which amounted to "an alternative employed in distinction form the Triune God" (Religious News Service, 25 February 1994).
Yet when the PCUSA General Assembly council met, they issued a 6-page statement which stated that no violations of church policy occurred and no discipline would be taken. The council especially defended associate director Mary Ann Lundy, who was a main planner of the event, from continual protests and calls for her dismissal (Ibid.). Mrs. Lundy has since resigned as associate director of churchwide planning, claiming that "circumstances have made her goal of effective service to the church unattainable" (Washington Post).
In a statement supporting the Re-imagining conference, leaders of the another ecumenical organization, Church Women United, said they uphold "the absolute right of women to develop theological understandings rooted in their own realities and experiences" (Christianity Today, 4 April 1994, p. 74, emphasis mine).
The United Methodist commission on the Statue and Role of Women responded to criticism writing, "It saddens those of us who rejoice in the diverse expressions of faith, culture, and God when other voices misunderstand and misrepresent such a unifying gathering" (World, 26 March 1994, p. 29).
It is not those who protest this event that misunderstand. What is truly sad is that a significant number of the leadership of these denominations have lost touch with the "faith once and for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3).
To emphasize this point, observe what United Methodist clergywoman Rev. Kathi Austin Mahle, one of the conference organizers, had to say in response to the complaints, "We wanted speakers who were doing cutting-edge theology [the meeting] was definitely in a Christian context we wanted to set it within a Biblical context, both the Old and New Testament" (Birmingham News, 2 June 1994).
The conference was not consistant, historically or doctrinally, with anything done in the name of Christ for 2,000 years of church history. If they were at all consistant, the conference orgainizers were cosistant with what they have learned from their liberal and neo-orthodox tutors who first challenged the hisorisity, inspirition, infallibility, or accuracy of the biblical record.
This camp postulates a "Christianity" that is void of absolutes and simply evolves to reflect the changing views of culture. Christianity's true uniqueness is found in its historic insistance that the trancenent and eternal God became man in the person of Christ Jesus who singularly atoned for the sins of the world as faithfully and accurately recorded in the Bible. If the Bible is not accurate, then it should not be authoritative. If the Bible is not authoritive, then humans must look within to find truth. Such a journey always "discovers" a god made in the image of the seeker. This is the epitome of idolatry (Romans 1:18-28).
Participants in this confernce represent denominiations that have historically stood on the priniciples biblical orthodoxy. But they have abandoned the essential truths that their denominations have stood for and lost touch with Christians in the pew who hold to biblical orthodoxy. What is truly amazing is how quickly scholars and leaders in major denominations can fall from from orthodoxy to paganizm. What begins with questioning the accuracy of the Bible and ends with goddess worship is a short trip down a slippery slope.
Now perhaps Christians are beginning to see the inevitable and predictable effects of such a hermeneutic. If the Church and Scripture doesn't challenge the culture, shape it, and call it to repent, then culture will continue its course in moral decay and retreat into paganism."
from:
http://www.watchman.org/reltop/reimagin.htm
Russ,
ReplyDeleteI see you left the same comment on that other site twice.
You really are on 'Wead'!
No,:) WordPress did not acknowledge that my first comment attempt with the link was received, or the second. I tried posting again without the link and it acknowledged the comment. There was only one comment listed. Then the next morning it had four comments on there. It was a screw up by WordPress. If it will not accept html code in comments initially, it should tell the commenter. WordPress blogs have been difficult to deal with in my view, and I am glad I am on Blogger.
But I appreciate my WordPress links just as much as my Blogger ones.
I do not have the time presently to give your other comments more than a scan read, but thanks for the information as it is helpful and generates blog interest.
I have been setting up my friend Darren Morrey with MP3 music on his myspace site. Please check it out in my links.
Cheers, Jeff.
Pantheism does not allow God to be a supreme being who has a personality. Therefore God is not personal,is not self-conscious, and He has no self-determination. The problem is that we humans are interpersonal beings, who communicate and who have the ability to have self-reflection and self-determaination; we think and we act. I believe we are made in God's image, how can He therefore be less then what we are?
ReplyDelete-Peek a boo theology-
Yes, it has been stated previously in Christian academic circles that the god of pantheism would be inferior to human beings in nature, as it would not have a conscious mind and personality.
ReplyDeleteCheers.:)
Hi Russ,
ReplyDeleteAs mentioned, it's ok :) and I acknowledge the perils of scan reading and hope I don't dig myself a hole.
I think a rejection of logic and reason is spiritual poison.
I am a linearly logical adherent myself but just wondering if circular logic isn't logic as well.
Yes, of course we can blog link - I will add yours to mine too, but I have already put you into my Google Reader.
God bless!
Thanks, Pearlie.
ReplyDeleteSomething is logical as long as there is not contradiction within.
I shall link you now.:)
Russ,
ReplyDeleteInteresting and well defined posting on pantheism.
My problem with pantheism concerns the nature of identity. What does a pantheist mean by saying that there is no distinction between himself and God/Brahman/whatever?
Evidently we have some sort of freedom of thought; attitude; action; direction; agenda. If we are independent in these, then in what sense are we of one being with another, even a supreme, being.
Most pantheists, to my knowledge, believe that we share some sort of non-material substance with God/Brahman/whatever, and with the rest of the universe. They believe that each part of the universe is made up of some of this non-material substance, which was originally contained within God/Brahman/whatever.
Even assuming there was a positive reason why we should accept this, is seems like a pretty weak argument for identifying us fully with God/Brahman/whatever. Its like saying that an identical twin has no autonomy from her sister, or that a plant grown from a cutting is not a distinct organism, even though it functions as one.
My problem with pantheism concerns the nature of identity. What does a pantheist mean by saying that there is no distinction between himself and God/Brahman/whatever?
ReplyDeleteA reasonable and important point.
Evidently we have some sort of freedom of thought; attitude; action; direction; agenda. If we are independent in these, then in what sense are we of one being with another, even a supreme, being.
A major problem for pantheism.
Its like saying that an identical twin has no autonomy from her sister, or that a plant grown from a cutting is not a distinct organism, even though it functions as one.
Very good points, and in agreement with what I have read as well.
Robin, the comments are very much appreciated.