4 ms·

Some seem to intuit that divine freedom is in competition with creaturely freedom. The assumption is that when God is acting, that necessarily drives out the ac

by jact 8mo ago

Some seem to intuit that divine freedom is in competition with creaturely freedom. The assumption is that when God is acting, that necessarily drives out the action and initiative of creatures, and vice versa. The ancient Christian conception is that human freedom cooperates (synergizes) with God. Jesus illustrates this concept most clearly, being both divine and human and fully free in both respects. This union is an essential part of the whole plan in this view, that God would be present in His own creation and not infinitely apart from it. In this model the free action and cooperation of created things is essential to accomplishing the divine purpose. On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” That sounds like atheism with steps.

lukan 8mo ago
"On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” " Yes, or mysticism. We all exist within the mind of god. I do like those concepts more to be honest, but is indeed a quite different concept from the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe.
- 1718627440 8mo ago
  I do not think I share your view of what mysticism is, but this: > the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe is what e.g. the olympic gods were, i.e. something that Christianity decries as idols, doesn't accept to be the truth and intends to overcome.
  - lukan 8mo ago
    But the olympian gods surely were not portrayed as perfect or almighty, but full of flaws.
    - 1718627440 8mo ago
      Not as perfect, although their origins were, but almighty as in unaccountable, unquestionable, and above any natural limits, yes.
- jact 8mo ago
  As the other reply said neither the classical Jewish or Christian view is that God is some guy literally up in the heavens sitting around all day.
  - lukan 8mo ago
    Hm, as far as I know, it is sort of debated what the "classical christian view" is. But I certainly have seen lots of pictures from god in churches portrayed as the bearded guy up in the sky. It is definitely the common concept. Father, son and holy spirit. Plays a strong role with catholics
    - 1718627440 8mo ago
      Maybe you can educate as what other "classical christian view" you know of. The pictures show a symbol for a property of God, they are not supposed to be taken literally, or do you also think, that Mary used to stand on a sickle on top of a miniature earth holding baby Jesus, which in turn holds a golden apple with a cross and in the other hand a lance that he pokes at snakes? Or that the Holy Spirit is a literal pigeon? That's not what is depicted in those images, but that would be the literal description.
      - lukan 8mo ago
        Well, I don't believe any of it. But other people certainly do. And it is not just pictures, the lords prayer literally starts with "Our Father in heaven.."
        1718627440 8mo ago
        > the lords prayer literally starts with "Our Father in heaven.." Yep. It however does not say "Our Father in sky". In English you literally have that distinction.
      - B1FIDO 8mo ago
        This is actually the crux of the argument for iconoclasm. This is why faiths like Judaism and some sects of Islam strictly forbid any representation of creation or humanity, especially to "represent" the divine or spiritual realities. If you begin personifying everything, if you represent spiritual/invisible concepts in concrete, human terms, if you reduce transcendent concepts to the pragmatic and the visible product of a sculptor's hands, people can get really confused. I promise. People can lose sight of that transcendence and eternal meaning behind the symbols. They can get really wrapped up in the physical manifestations. This is also the central problem with the autism spectrum and such. Aniconism attempts to free the mind from these limiting images. If you're Muslim and you contemplate a building with nothing but artistic words and text scrawled all over it, you obtain a far different result than contemplating a richly symbolic statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Many people have the intellect and the insight to go beyond that concrete imagery, but not all.

by jact 8mo ago

lukan 8mo ago

"On the other hand, if God really does just determine everything, you basically get pantheism where everything is an immediate and direct expression of “God.” " Yes, or mysticism. We all exist within the mind of god. I do like those concepts more to be honest, but is indeed a quite different concept from the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe.

1718627440 8mo ago
I do not think I share your view of what mysticism is, but this: > the creator up in the clouds ruling the universe is what e.g. the olympic gods were, i.e. something that Christianity decries as idols, doesn't accept to be the truth and intends to overcome.
- lukan 8mo ago
  But the olympian gods surely were not portrayed as perfect or almighty, but full of flaws.
  - 1718627440 8mo ago
    Not as perfect, although their origins were, but almighty as in unaccountable, unquestionable, and above any natural limits, yes.
jact 8mo ago
As the other reply said neither the classical Jewish or Christian view is that God is some guy literally up in the heavens sitting around all day.
- lukan 8mo ago
  Hm, as far as I know, it is sort of debated what the "classical christian view" is. But I certainly have seen lots of pictures from god in churches portrayed as the bearded guy up in the sky. It is definitely the common concept. Father, son and holy spirit. Plays a strong role with catholics
  - 1718627440 8mo ago
    Maybe you can educate as what other "classical christian view" you know of. The pictures show a symbol for a property of God, they are not supposed to be taken literally, or do you also think, that Mary used to stand on a sickle on top of a miniature earth holding baby Jesus, which in turn holds a golden apple with a cross and in the other hand a lance that he pokes at snakes? Or that the Holy Spirit is a literal pigeon? That's not what is depicted in those images, but that would be the literal description.
    - lukan 8mo ago
      Well, I don't believe any of it. But other people certainly do. And it is not just pictures, the lords prayer literally starts with "Our Father in heaven.."
      - 1718627440 8mo ago
        > the lords prayer literally starts with "Our Father in heaven.." Yep. It however does not say "Our Father in sky". In English you literally have that distinction.
    - B1FIDO 8mo ago
      This is actually the crux of the argument for iconoclasm. This is why faiths like Judaism and some sects of Islam strictly forbid any representation of creation or humanity, especially to "represent" the divine or spiritual realities. If you begin personifying everything, if you represent spiritual/invisible concepts in concrete, human terms, if you reduce transcendent concepts to the pragmatic and the visible product of a sculptor's hands, people can get really confused. I promise. People can lose sight of that transcendence and eternal meaning behind the symbols. They can get really wrapped up in the physical manifestations. This is also the central problem with the autism spectrum and such. Aniconism attempts to free the mind from these limiting images. If you're Muslim and you contemplate a building with nothing but artistic words and text scrawled all over it, you obtain a far different result than contemplating a richly symbolic statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Many people have the intellect and the insight to go beyond that concrete imagery, but not all.