Absolute Truth

[setter]

I understand that is your faith. In my faith it is impossible for a human to contain, manifest and express the whole of Divine Love.

Thus the ultimate irony and paradoxical limitation of pantheism, for the Christian God of the bible is a personal God, a person God, a man-God, who is fully human and fully divine, He is relational, three Divine Persons in one God, a Triune God …a personally touchable mystery to His finite creatures made in His image and likeness …full of goosebumps, speechless awe, and humility at having been gifted with such a faith.

 

[cheddarsox]

cheddar

In my opinion, it would be immoral to wipe out humanity, but it would not be absolutely immoral, because “absolute” describes something that is so without human reference, and morals do not exist outside of human reference.

I don’t know about that. When we are debating objectivist morality, as Ayn Rand would have debated it (she was an atheist) she obviously wouldn’t rely on God to substantiate any objectivist (absolutist) moral point of view. Rand abhorred subjectivism (relativism). So I think there is possible an atheist human (rather than divine) base for moral absolutes (objective realities) among which it would be absolutely wrong in all places and at all times and for any reason to annihilate the human race.

Surely a Christian and an atheist can agree on this as an absolutely wrong thing to do.`

If absolute morality exists, then God would also be subject to it, because it would be absolute. Clearly there are acts that are ascribed to God that most of His followers would consider immoral for a person to commit, yet find it appropriate for God to commit. At what point do morals become absolute? How do we know what are morals for humans, and absolute morals?

I am not an atheist, so I can’t speak to what a Christian and atheist can surely agree on.

I do think thata human annihilating the human race is wrong. Whether or not it falls into the category of “absolute” is what I am not sure of. Without human reference…why would it be wrong? Would the rocks cry out? Would the whales care? Would the sun mourn for us? Thing are and have been anihilated by other species, changes in climate and cataclismic celestial events…are those thing acting in an immoral manner? I think most of us agree that morals apply only to humans. If something has limited application, by definition, it is not absolute.

cheddar

 

[setter]

If absolute morality exists, then God would also be subject to it, because it would be absolute.

God is absolute Truth and morality – that is nature of His being. The same as that humans need breathe air to exists, God cannot exist apart from the morality that He is. Unlike man suffering from the effects of original sin, God has perfect integrity. The reason that Jesus came and died on the cross was to make atonement for man’s break with integrity, i.e., make man again ‘at-one’ with his created nature, and to make provision for man to be restored to the original integrity of his creature status made in the image and likeness of God. God cannot deny Himself or He would cease to be God.

“…if we endure, we shall also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us; if we are faithless, he remains faithful – for he cannot deny himself.” 2 Timothy 2: 12-13

I think most of us agree that morals apply only to humans. If something has limited application, by definition, it is not absolute.

cheddar

My creature manual provided by my Creator only applies to humans in an absolute sense. It would be non-sensible to conclude that because my creature manual does not apply to other non-spirit creatures (ex., horses) then this renders absolute morals (which can only apply to moral beings, i.e., those being with a spirit) as “limited application”, they just simply do not apply.

 

[cheddarsox]

Thus the ultimate irony and paradoxical limitation of pantheism, for the Christian God of the bible is a personal God, a person God, a man-God, who is fully human and fully divine, He is relational, three Divine Persons in one God, a Triune God …a personally touchable mystery to His finite creatures made in His image and likeness …full of goosebumps, speechless awe, and humility at having been gifted with such a faith.

I don’t understand what you mean by the irony of pantheism.

The Divine is in all things. Relates through all things. No, the whole of the Divine cannot be contained in part of the Divine, how is that ironical?

I’m not sure what you mean by paradoxical limitation either.

People in my faith also have awe, humility, etc. etc. but you are right, we do not have a personal God who presents Himself as a human.

The universe if full of mystery, wonder and awe. I’m glad that you are comfortable and gifted with a faith that has warm fuzzies. Pantheism isn’t a warm fuzzy faith, but I don’t believe according to whether or not a faith makes me feel personally attended to.

The Divine isn’t going to make things go the way I would have them (thank goodness, my limited understanding would make a hash of even small things), nor will it swoop in and save me from…whatever. But that is what is, and what is, is awesome and deserving of honor and worship, even if it doesn’t make me feel personally cozy. The universe is not about me. I and the human race are not the purpose and reason for all that is. Talk about humility…pantheism has that in boatloads. Awe and wonder, at the myriad ways in which the Divine takes form, and gratefulness that we get to be a part, and aware (to whatever limited degree) of this truth.

I’m not interested in playing “my god’s better than your god” with you. You have a strong faith that fulfills you and makes you a better person, and I have one that does the same. Neither of us is likely to change our faiths. And I have no interest in trying to shake yours.

Our understandings of what is true differ. But neither of our limited understandings of the truth, alter the truth. It is, what is. For that I am grateful. Pantheists worship What Is ,including the pieces that we can’t wrap our minds around. I can’t abandon What Is, for what I wish things were.

cheddar

 

[setter]

I don’t understand what you mean by the irony of pantheism.

The Divine is in all things. Relates through all things. No, the whole of the Divine cannot be contained in part of the Divine, how is that ironical?

I’m not sure what you mean by paradoxical limitation either.

People in my faith also have awe, humility, etc. etc. but you are right, we do not have a personal God who presents Himself as a human.

The irony of pantheism being that it cannot co-entertain the reality concepts of a God that is in all of His creation, while at the same time fully God, fully present and completely contained in the man-God person of Jesus Christ. A rather blantant missing the tree before one’s eyes by only focusing on the forest at hand.

The paradoxical limitation of pantheism is trying to become one with the all of God, while failing to realize/accept that the only way of becoming divinized is by retaining one’s individual personality and identity and entering into union with God through the person of Jesus Christ.

“In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.” Hebrews 1: 1-4

“His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, that through these you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion, and become partakers of the divine nature.” 2 Peter 1: 3-4

The universe if full of mystery, wonder and awe. I’m glad that you are comfortable and gifted with a faith that has warm fuzzies. Pantheism isn’t a warm fuzzy faith, but I don’t believe according to whether or not a faith makes me feel personally attended to.

There is nothing warm and fuzzy about a relationship of total giving that requires violence to self in taking up one’s cross in imitation of the person of Jesus Christ.

The Divine isn’t going to make things go the way I would have them (thank goodness, my limited understanding would make a hash of even small things), nor will it swoop in and save me from…whatever. But that is what is, and what is, is awesome and deserving of honor and worship, even if it doesn’t make me feel personally cozy. The universe is not about me. I and the human race are not the purpose and reason for all that is. Talk about humility…pantheism has that in boatloads. Awe and wonder, at the myriad ways in which the Divine takes form, and gratefulness that we get to be a part, and aware (to whatever limited degree) of this truth.

Pantheism avoids and denies the responsibility and burden of a personal accountibility and relationship of faith. It is easy to be good and honorable in a relationship with an (name removed by moderator)ersonal entity, whereas a personal relationship is infinitely more demanding (and rewarding), as anyone knows from our human relationships.

I’m not interested in playing “my god’s better than your god” with you. You have a strong faith that fulfills you and makes you a better person, and I have one that does the same. Neither of us is likely to change our faiths. And I have no interest in trying to shake yours.

Would you not agree that God afflicts those who are comforted and comforts those who are afflicted for His greater purpose and glory; while understanding that we are made to glorify and praise our Creator?

Our understandings of what is true differ. But neither of our limited understandings of the truth, alter the truth. It is, what is. For that I am grateful. Pantheists worship What Is ,including the pieces that we can’t wrap our minds around. I can’t abandon What Is, for what I wish things were.

cheddar

I just cannot get all excited about some impersonal concept of a God who cannot relate to and touch my daily struggles. Faith is relationship, and one cannot have a relationship with a non-person.

 

[mrs_abbott]

I believe there is absolute truth, but no way for humans (limited in ability to observe, and understand) to ever know if they have it.

We will probably always only have partial understanding even of that which we can observe.

Sometimes, even the things we are sure we know, that hold up to testing and experience, further observation overturns!

What a great universe!

I’m sure glad we’re not in charge of it.

cheddar

:yup: I totally agree with you on that!

 

[setter]

Originally Posted by **cheddarsox **
I believe there is absolute truth, but no way for humans (limited in ability to observe, and understand) to ever know if they have it.

We will probably always only have partial understanding even of that which we can observe.

:yup: I totally agree with you on that!

Nothing really to get all that excited about. I prefer to know, strive to live and to be held accountible to the truth, the truth being a Person. That is what I was made for. This is what the Catholic Church teaches and offers as our experiental faith:

2466 In Jesus Christ, the whole of God’s truth has been made manifest. “Full of grace and truth,” he came as the “light of the world,” he is the Truth. “Whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness.” The disciple of Jesus continues in his word so as to know “the truth [that] will make you free” and that sanctifies. To follow Jesus is to live in “the Spirit of truth,” whom the Father sends in his name and who leads “into all the truth.” To his disciples Jesus teaches the unconditional love of truth: “Let what you say be simply ‘Yes or No.’” (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

The original post concerning absolute truth starts out this way:

Does it exist. If yes, do we know what it is? What are the criteria for determining absolute truth?

So my assumption is that we are talking about absolute certainty of whether a thing is true or false, right or wong, etc. I think I can say, without referencing God, that anihilating all human life through nuclear weapons is absolutely wrong. That is, there are no changing conditions of time, place, or circumstance that would make it right as opposed to wrong.

I should think an atheist and a pagan and a Buddhist and a Muslim and any old fool could agree on this … that there is no circumstance justifying the anihilation of the human race through nuclear weapons…

 

[rafaelcatolico]

Empirically there are no absolute truths!

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Empirically there are no absolute truths!

Are you sure that is true?

 

[cheddarsox]

The irony of pantheism being that it cannot co-entertain the reality concepts of a God that is in all of His creation, while at the same time fully God, fully present and completely contained in the man-God person of Jesus Christ. A rather blantant missing the tree before one’s eyes by only focusing on the forest at hand.

The paradoxical limitation of pantheism is trying to become one with the all of God, while failing to realize/accept that the only way of becoming divinized is by retaining one’s individual personality and identity and entering into union with God through the person of Jesus Christ.

“In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.” Hebrews 1: 1-4

“His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, that through these you may escape from the corruption that is in the world because of passion, and become partakers of the divine nature.” 2 Peter 1: 3-4

There is nothing warm and fuzzy about a relationship of total giving that requires violence to self in taking up one’s cross in imitation of the person of Jesus Christ.

Pantheism avoids and denies the responsibility and burden of a personal accountibility and relationship of faith. It is easy to be good and honorable in a relationship with an (name removed by moderator)ersonal entity, whereas a personal relationship is infinitely more demanding (and rewarding), as anyone knows from our human relationships.

Would you not agree that God afflicts those who are comforted and comforts those who are afflicted for His greater purpose and glory; while understanding that we are made to glorify and praise our Creator?

I just cannot get all excited about some impersonal concept of a God who cannot relate to and touch my daily struggles. Faith is relationship, and one cannot have a relationship with a non-person.

So basically the irony and limitation of my faith is that it is not the one you believe to be true. Thanks for clearing that up and offering your opinion.

You seem to think that pantheism has the same “goals” as Christianity, and somehow fails at them, but that is not the case. No one has to seek to become one with the Divine, we are already part of it, and there is no seeking to be divinized in my faith either.

From your statements, it appears that you can only see pantheism in reference to your own faith. It is not as good, because it is not like yours. You say it avoids and denys the responsibility and burden of a personal relationship. If there is no personal deity with which to have a relationship…then there is no avoidance and denial. And there is no honor in creating a personal deity in order to have whatever satisfaction may come from such a relationship.

No, I do not agree that God afflicts the comfortable and comforts the afflicted. However, I do think that FAITH can and does often serve that role. A faith can shake us out of complacency and comfort us when we are in despair.

I agree that we are made to glorigy and praise!

Of course you cannot get excited over a non personal Divine. You don’t believe in it, have awareness of it, or appreciate it. If you did have belief and awareness, your experience of it would not seem at all as if it does not touch you personally. You are speaking as a non believer, just as a non Christian might not be able to get excited by the idea of a carpenter King, without the gift of faith to see what you see in the person of Jesus Christ.

Faith is a relationship? not sure I agree with that, faith is a set of beliefs. Practicing that faith can be a living out of the awareness of a relationship. I live very much in relation with the Divine. No, it is not a personal relationship like one might have with another human, or with a personal deity. But it is a relationship none the less. That fact that you don’t understand it does not in any way demean the reality of it.

The Divine is intimately involved in every aspect of my life, not in any way remote or out of touch. The only concept of Divine you are willing to entertain, even in discussion, is your God. You seem unable to imagine or conceive that any type of meaningful faith can exist outside of that. Yet it does.

cheddar

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

cheddar

If there is no personal deity with which to have a relationship…then there is no avoidance and denial. And there is no honor in creating a personal deity in order to have whatever satisfaction may come from such a relationship.

These are the same arguments of an atheist. You do not know if there is no personal deity. Nor do you know for certain that we have created a personal deity. You speak with conviction but without proof.

*You are speaking as a non believer, just as a non Christian might not be able to get excited by the idea of a carpenter King, without the gift of faith to see what you see in the person of Jesus Christ.
*
But how do you know you have not been given the same gift, and have simply refused to open it and use it?

 

[cheddarsox]

cheddar

If there is no personal deity with which to have a relationship…then there is no avoidance and denial. And there is no honor in creating a personal deity in order to have whatever satisfaction may come from such a relationship.

These are the same arguments of an atheist. You do not know if there is no personal deity. Nor do you know for certain that we have created a personal deity. You speak with conviction but without proof.

I am speaking only of my faith. Not claiming that your faith created a personal deity. There would be no honor in my faith, that recognizes the Divine, but not as a person, because it has not revealed itself to us as a person, to assign a personage to it. Nor would there be any honor in your faith, which recognizes the Divine as a person, to strip it’s personage from it.

*You are speaking as a non believer, just as a non Christian might not be able to get excited by the idea of a carpenter King, without the gift of faith to see what you see in the person of Jesus Christ.
*
But how do you know you have not been given the same gift, and have simply refused to open it and use it?

I can’t answer your final question directly, because it does not “fit” my life and experience. I spent 20 years as a Catholic and 10 years as a non denominational Christian. I don’t reject Christianity or teach that it is false or wrong. Revelations, experiences and events have brought me to a different set of religious understandings.

I do not understand Christ the way you do. And I know that to many Christians, they will argue that is essentially the same as rejecting Christ outright and saying Christianity is wrong. But life and belief are not logic arguments. You cannot logic someone into faith, or logically conclude that they are “out of faith”. The human mind and heart are capable of simultaneously holding a paradoxical assembledge of beliefs and understandings. Such a messy and amorphous reality is not favored by Catholicism, but it is a reality for many people.

I don’t lable myself Catholic or Christian out of respect for those who hold those faiths in a much more organized manner than I. But neither do I think that everything Catholic or Christian is wrong or false.

I am a pantheist. My understanding of Absolute Truth is different than yours. I have been given, and opened, some gifts of understanding from the Divine that have led me in other directions, but I did not refuse the gift of Christian faith when it was given to me.

cheddar

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

cheddar

*You cannot logic someone into faith, or logically conclude that they are “out of faith”. The human mind and heart are capable of simultaneously holding a paradoxical assembledge of beliefs and understandings. Such a messy and amorphous reality is not favored by Catholicism, but it is a reality for many people.
*
Not many Catholics would disagree with this, since paradox is at the heart of Catholicism too.

 

[setter]

So basically the irony and limitation of my faith is that it is not the one you believe to be true. Thanks for clearing that up and offering your opinion.

You seem to think that pantheism has the same “goals” as Christianity, and somehow fails at them, but that is not the case. No one has to seek to become one with the Divine, we are already part of it, and there is no seeking to be divinized in my faith either.

From your statements, it appears that you can only see pantheism in reference to your own faith. It is not as good, because it is not like yours. You say it avoids and denys the responsibility and burden of a personal relationship. If there is no personal deity with which to have a relationship…then there is no avoidance and denial. And there is no honor in creating a personal deity in order to have whatever satisfaction may come from such a relationship.

My personal bias is apparent. I do not mean to be disrespectful, but once one has experienced the real thing, all else pales by comparison.

BTW – Jesus is not a pseudo-fabrication or extension of my alter ego. I am very well individuated thank you.

No, I do not agree that God afflicts the comfortable and comforts the afflicted. However, I do think that FAITH can and does often serve that role. A faith can shake us out of complacency and comfort us when we are in despair.

I agree that we are made to glorigy and praise!

This is saying a lot about a concept of faith. Question: In the pantheistic belief, what is the role of and to whom does the glory and praise go to?

Of course you cannot get excited over a non personal Divine. You don’t believe in it, have awareness of it, or appreciate it. If you did have belief and awareness, your experience of it would not seem at all as if it does not touch you personally. You are speaking as a non believer, just as a non Christian might not be able to get excited by the idea of a carpenter King, without the gift of faith to see what you see in the person of Jesus Christ.

I just cannot experientially grasp the concept of being “personally touched” by a non-personal theism. Even in Christian mysticism, a soul to soul encounter and mystical union with God is a personal encounter with a three Person triune God.

Faith is a relationship? not sure I agree with that, faith is a set of beliefs. Practicing that faith can be a living out of the awareness of a relationship. I live very much in relation with the Divine. No, it is not a personal relationship like one might have with another human, or with a personal deity. But it is a relationship none the less. That fact that you don’t understand it does not in any way demean the reality of it.

The Divine is intimately involved in every aspect of my life, not in any way remote or out of touch. The only concept of Divine you are willing to entertain, even in discussion, is your God. You seem unable to imagine or conceive that any type of meaningful faith can exist outside of that. Yet it does.

cheddar

I just don’t get it. Maybe you can help me better understand. How can one claim to have an authentic “relationship with the Divine” and “I live very much in relation with the Divine” whereby “The Divine is intimately involved in every aspect of my life, not in any way remote or out of touch”; when the Divine of pantheism without personality. How does a human being have a relationship with a non-personalistic entity? It seems to me like one claiming to have an intimate relationship with their employer entity General Electric Company, and not with the CEO or the individuals who comprise the company. Maybe need to change your wording to reflect the reality of this non-personal “relationship” with a non-personal Entity?

 

[JimO]

Empirically there are no absolute truths!

Is your statement absolute? If not, then you could be wrong.

 

[cheddarsox]

My personal bias is apparent. I do not mean to be disrespectful, but once one has experienced the real thing, all else pales by comparison.

BTW – Jesus is not a pseudo-fabrication or extension of my alter ego. I am very well individuated thank you.

This is saying a lot about a concept of faith. Question: In the pantheistic belief, what is the role of and to whom does the glory and praise go to?

I just cannot experientially grasp the concept of being “personally touched” by a non-personal theism. Even in Christian mysticism, a soul to soul encounter and mystical union with God is a personal encounter with a three Person triune God.

I just don’t get it. Maybe you can help me better understand. How can one claim to have an authentic “relationship with the Divine” and “I live very much in relation with the Divine” whereby “The Divine is intimately involved in every aspect of my life, not in any way remote or out of touch”; when the Divine of pantheism without personality. How does a human being have a relationship with a non-personalistic entity? It seems to me like one claiming to have an intimate relationship with their employer entity General Electric Company, and not with the CEO or the individuals who comprise the company. Maybe need to change your wording to reflect the reality of this non-personal “relationship” with a non-personal Entity?

Setter,

As I said in my response to GK above, when I referenced creating a personal deity, I was not referring to Christianity or implying that Christians created the person of Jesus. I was speaking only to say there would be no honor in pantheism creating a personal deity…just for the purpose of having one.

The role of praise…I suppose is because praising is how humans celebrate and honor that which they appreciate. It is like laughter…what purpose does it serve…hard to pin down, but it is our natural reaction none the less. Praise and glory flow from a grateful heart. They honor the Divine, even if it’s not personal…this is a lame comparison but…when a woman sees a dress and says “oh, aren’t you beautiful.” or a man sees a great car and “says, sweetheart, come to daddy…” whom are they praising? and for what purpose? It is just their automatic reaction. Praising does the praiser good, and it calls attention to the thing being praised. Maybe that is the purpose, that others may be made aware of how awesome the Divine is.

I don’t know how to explain it to you, if you truly can’t conceive a critical relationship to something that doesn’t have a personality.

Think of your relationship to the earth. It supports you. All your sustenance comes from it. Your life depends on it. Maybe you never think of it that way…I don’t know. But I do. The Divine is in all things, causing them to operate together to bring about what is. I see it, feel it and experience it. I don’t have a human to human type relationship with it, but I have a Divine to human relationship with it. It plays the
Divine role, and I respond in my human way.

What can be more intimate than my relationship with that which sustains me and IS me, brings me forth? Everything that interacts with me, is the Divine interacting with me.

Do Jesus and God talk to you everyday? Do they give you a hug, a smile, call to chat, drop by? Or do they interact with you in another style, a style that is beyond human, that is Divine, but clearly recognizable to you?

Most people I know have relationships with things that are not human. A pet, a place, their home, car, food, sports.Sometimes these relationships are very important and meaningful. I guess it is like that…but more so.

I’m not sure there is any way to fully explain it to someone who has never had that type of experience. Like trying to desribe what being in love feels like, or what chocolate tastes like, or what the color red looks like…to someone who’s never experienced it.

My words acurately reflect my experience. I can’t change what is true because it does not please or make sense to someone else.

If you don’t think a person can have an intimate and meaningful relationship with something non personal, stop breathing for several minutes. Pretty soon you will recognize how intimate your relationship with the air is, and how awesome it is, and how grateful you are to be reunited with it. Sometimes we take air and breathing for granted. Most of the time we don’t think about the exchange of molecules that is taking place. We ignore the relationship, but that doesn’t mean it is not there.

Pantheism is not a dualistic faith. We don’t divide the world into physical seperate from spiritual. So…we don’t just consider relationship to be something we have just between personalities. We exist in relation to all things. We are in relationship with all things, individually, and as a whole. The physical and “spiritual” are not seperate and divided. Part of the practice of pantheism is to be aware of that.

cheddar

 

[setter]

Setter,

I don’t know how to explain it to you, if you truly can’t conceive a critical relationship to something that doesn’t have a personality.

Think of your relationship to the earth. It supports you. All your sustenance comes from it. Your life depends on it. Maybe you never think of it that way…I don’t know. But I do. The Divine is in all things, causing them to operate together to bring about what is. I see it, feel it and experience it. I don’t have a human to human type relationship with it, but I have a Divine to human relationship with it. It plays the
Divine role, and I respond in my human way.

What can be more intimate than my relationship with that which sustains me and IS me, brings me forth? Everything that interacts with me, is the Divine interacting with me.

What you describe can only feel impersonal, albeit stirring, but not an intimate knowing personal relationship. Sort of like a benevolent, but distant, Benefactor who takes care of all your sustenance needs and lavishes good things that conjure a sense of caring, closeness, revelation, …but all the time never personally knowing this person, but presumming to know about the person who absorbs and subsumes your personal identity.

Do Jesus and God talk to you everyday? Do they give you a hug, a smile, call to chat, drop by? Or do they interact with you in another style, a style that is beyond human, that is Divine, but clearly recognizable to you?

Most people I know have relationships with things that are not human. A pet, a place, their home, car, food, sports.Sometimes these relationships are very important and meaningful. I guess it is like that…but more so.

I’m not sure there is any way to fully explain it to someone who has never had that type of experience. Like trying to desribe what being in love feels like, or what chocolate tastes like, or what the color red looks like…to someone who’s never experienced it.

My words acurately reflect my experience. I can’t change what is true because it does not please or make sense to someone else.

If you don’t think a person can have an intimate and meaningful relationship with something non personal, stop breathing for several minutes. Pretty soon you will recognize how intimate your relationship with the air is, and how awesome it is, and how grateful you are to be reunited with it. Sometimes we take air and breathing for granted. Most of the time we don’t think about the exchange of molecules that is taking place. We ignore the relationship, but that doesn’t mean it is not there.

I can encounter and communicate with Jesus, God the Father and the Holy Spirit everyday. Though I do not see or touch them physically, my relationship interaction with the three Persons of the trinity is to me more real and substantial than any other personal relationship that I have. However, I am not having a personal relationship with the transcendent whole of God or His creation, as I am but a finite person and can only extend as far as my voice can carry, my arms can extend. Otherwise, it is but a spectator gaze and sentimental realization of the nature of God, but not a personal encounter, though I do recognize the Personhood behind all His creation.

I appreciate you sharing your experience, as it helps me understand better.

 

[eliasaph99]

There is absolute Truth. There must be because the opposite, that there is not, is a self-refuting statement.

Here is my ‘Proof by Contradiction’ that there is absolute truth.

Assume that there is no absolute truth.

It then follows that it is absolutely true that there is no absolute truth.

But this contradicts the assumption that there is no absolute truth. So the assumption must be false.

In particular, there is absolute truth. Q.E.D.

A favorite science fiction author of mine is Philip K. Dick. I believe that he was an atheist (although I’m not sure), but he summed up reality pretty well with this statement:

“Reality is that which continues to exist even when you stop believing in it.”

Nice and pithy, just like I like’em.

eliasaph99

 

[eliasaph99]

You can’t, through reason, conclude with certainty that there is a creator. You can believe. YOu can assume that nothing that exists is self creating. But of course, if you believe in the Creator, then you believe is something that exsts that is self creating (God). So if you can believe God is self creating then why not believe that the universe was self creating?

I, for one, do not believe that God was self-creating. This is non-sensical.

How can anything which does not exist, will itself into existence?

I believe, and the Catholic Church teaches, that God is eternally existent.

What that means, in strict terms, can be discussed at great length.

Certainly, the easiest intrepretation of this statement for the human mind to grasp is that there never was a time when God was not.

Of course, a fine point to consider is that, at least in Catholic theology, God created time and exists independent of it, so of course the previous statement is true.

Naturally I think this leads to the question of eternity. God apparently exists there. So what is it?

I think I’ll start a thread on that.