[Damian]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

The mind of the God of the Bible is immeasurable, i.e. infinite.

We have already been through this. "Immeasurable" is not the same as "infinite." The God of Open Theism requires time to process his thoughts. Therefore, by placing your God in time, you have rendered your God finite - at least in respect to his mental capacity. And if you feel that I am "mocking" your God by making this argument, then I would remind you that you are the one who has placed him in time.

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Damian

We have already been through this. "Immeasurable" is not the same as "infinite."

You are splitting an infinity.

[Damian]

Originally Posted by genuineoriginal

You are splitting an infinity.

I trust that you are having fun on the "demonic" thread.

[genuineoriginal]

Originally Posted by Damian

I trust that you are having fun on the "demonic" thread.

I think you should have added this smiley to your post: :devil:

[freelight]

Originally Posted by Damian

I trust that you are having fun on the "demonic" thread.

It has been the habit of primitive man to 'demonize' anything he doesnt understand, or appears as 'contrary' to his concept of 'God' or theology. The 'religious ego' always needs something to attack and/or defend.


pj

[Damian]

Originally Posted by freelight

It has been the habit of primitive man to 'demonize' anything he doesnt understand, or appears as 'contrary' to his concept of 'God' or theology. The 'religious ego' always needs something to attack and/or defend.

Whose "religious ego" are we talking about here?

[freelight]

Originally Posted by Damian

Whose "religious ego" are we talking about here?

The statement was concerning a 'religious ego' in the general sense...those who believe they have the only version, right interpretation, absolute conception of 'God' or spiritual reality down pat - throw in a standardized/orthodox version of the gospel too, or any other dogma, doctrinal belief.

I'd assume you know what a 'spiritual ego' might be, a particular form of 'ego' even more cunning than the general sense of 'ego' (in this case a false-sense of 'self', concocted by one's own imagination, further projecting an 'image' of God which is worshipped). Are you taking the 'general' statement in a personal way for some reason or just truly curious about what was meant? I thought it might go without saying such was directed towards genuineoriginal, since he's the one on the witchhunt so to speak, demonizing everything.

As far as what the 'ego' is...I'd gather as a student of ACIM you'd be quite conversant. - some added insights on the subject were expected, assuming such a subject had some relevance. - remember,...I come from the approach of 'creative dialogue', so seeing what 'creative discourse' could ensue......after all,....this forum is for 'dialogue'. Or did I just fall off a turnip truck?

If anything the whole experience of discussion here, could very well be an exercise of how much we are operating from 'ego' or 'truth', so its can be of great service to us, at least from an ACIM perspective (debate of how or why God's MIND is infinite might be a mere accessory).




pj

[Damian]

Originally Posted by freelight

The statement was concerning a 'religious ego' in the general sense...those who believe they have the only version, right interpretation, absolute conception of 'God' or spiritual reality down pat - throw in a standardized/orthodox version of the gospel too, or any other dogma, doctrinal belief.

I'd assume you know what a 'spiritual ego' might be, a particular form of 'ego' even more cunning than the general sense of 'ego' (in this case a false-sense of 'self', concocted by one's own imagination, further projecting an 'image' of God which is worshipped). Are you taking the 'general' statement in a personal way for some reason or just truly curious about what was meant? I thought it might go without saying such was directed towards genuineoriginal, since he's the one on the witchhunt so to speak, demonizing everything.

As far as what the 'ego' is...I'd gather as a student of ACIM you'd be quite conversant. - some added insights on the subject were expected, assuming such a subject had some relevance. - remember,...I come from the approach of 'creative dialogue', so seeing what 'creative discourse' could ensue......after all,....this forum is for 'dialogue'. Or did I just fall off a turnip truck?

If anything the whole experience of discussion here, could very well be an exercise of how much we are operating from 'ego' or 'truth', so its can be of great service to us, at least from an ACIM perspective (debate of how or why God's MIND is infinite might be a mere accessory).

I think it is important to recognize that everyone here falls prey to the "religious ego" (yours truly included).

I forgive you for my sins.

"What you must recognize is that when you do not share a thought system, you are weakening it. Those who believe in it therefore perceive this as an attack on them. This is because everyone identifies himself with his thought system, and every thought system centers on what you believe you are. If the center of the thought system is true, only truth extends from it. But if a lie is at its center, only deception proceeds from it." - "A Course in Miracles"

[freelight]

Originally Posted by Damian

I think it is important to recognize that everyone here falls prey to the "religious ego" (yours truly included).

I forgive you for my sins.

"What you must recognize is that when you do not share a thought system, you are weakening it. Those who believe in it therefore perceive this as an attack on them. This is because everyone identifies himself with his thought system, and every thought system centers on what you believe you are. If the center of the thought system is true, only truth extends from it. But if a lie is at its center, only deception proceeds from it." - "A Course in Miracles"

Well of course, - note that I've never excluded myself from the deception or delusion of egoity, since its a universal illusion (it includes all that is unreal). - I merely brought it up, because the situation called towards its awareness. - one is free to appropriate such where it might apply.


pj

[Desert Reign]

Originally Posted by Damian

We have already been through this. "Immeasurable" is not the same as "infinite." The God of Open Theism requires time to process his thoughts. Therefore, by placing your God in time, you have rendered your God finite - at least in respect to his mental capacity. And if you feel that I am "mocking" your God by making this argument, then I would remind you that you are the one who has placed him in time.

Yes, we have been through this and I have refuted your OP. You have given no answer to my refutation, as indeed you cannot.

[freelight]

Originally Posted by Damian

We have already been through this. "Immeasurable" is not the same as "infinite."

Depends on how we define 'infinite'.

Having no boundaries or limits.
Immeasurably great or large; boundless:

Mathematics.
Existing beyond or being greater than any arbitrarily large value.
Unlimited in spatial extent: a line of infinite length.
Of or relating to a set capable of being put into one-to-one correspondence with a proper subset of itself.

SYNONYMS infinite, boundless, eternal, illimitable, sempiternal. These adjectives mean being without beginning or end.

'infinite', 'infinitely' are derived from the Latin word infinitus meaning 'without limit' (Latin finis 'end'), and this is the proper meaning of these words in English. In practice, however, they tend to be used in the weaker senses 'very great' and 'very much'; this use is acceptable in informal English but is best replaced in more formal contexts by alternatives such as extensive, vast, substantial, considerable, immense, enormous, or in some cases even simply great or huge (or their adverbial equivalents).

- Answers.com

Perhaps a clarification/explanation on how God's Mind is infinite in contrast to the standardly accepted definition of what 'infinite' means would be helpful.

The God of Open Theism requires time to process his thoughts.

Again,....'time' is a 'referential perception' relating movements of space, energy, mind, spirit.....so it would appear even thoughts born out of an infinite Mind transpire in 'time', as long as such 'thinking' is a mental procession, a 'relating activity'. -Wherever there is movement within space,...a sequence of time is inferred.... relating such with other processes, forms, images, information, etc.

Therefore, by placing your God in time, you have rendered your God finite - at least in respect to his mental capacity.

Not so sure here, but it would indicate that God is involved in the creative unfolding of time, which is the movement of creation. Remember there being an 'aspect' of God that involves itself as immanent within the cosmos (The UB calls it 'God The Supreme' (The Supreme is the totality of all involving and evolving infinite/finite relationship potentials).

As far as mental capacity is concerned,....Infinite MIND would naturally exceed all finite limitations of mind, being infinite in nature.

And if you feel that I am "mocking" your God by making this argument, then I would remind you that you are the one who has placed him in time.

Some just happen to be referencing 'God' thru the lens of 'time', which is natural, is it not? (not too many think from the perspective of infinite consciousness, except a few of us transcendentalers ). Theology, mythology all has its play within the spectrum of time, within eternity. (more semantics). We could wax poetic and allow readers to draw their own insights and conclusions, shifting their viewpoint, looking out from different perspectives. God includes all, is All. The Infinite ONE....includes all that is infinite and finite, indefinite and definitive, absolute and relative. Such is the Divine Paradox.

I've come to 'ground' myself somewhat recently in the more finite aspect of things (omg, lol....check his pulse ), even the concept of 'The Finite God' has its place, in as much as God is actually involving/evolving His Presence thru the creative movement and relativity of space/time. Yes...imagine that. While you and I are essentially mystics at heart, disposed towards 'non-dualism'...we cant deny this relative-reality, even if it is 'maya', for it is our playground nonetheless. Our revelry in space/time is the sport of eternity, an engagement of the infinite...with-in the finite. Back to the 'divine paradox'.

seedoflife7.jpg

In-joy!


pj

[Damian]

Originally Posted by freelight

Depends on how we define 'infinite'.

You have already expressed your view that the God who has time limitations is the finite God. Indeed, you employed the Urantia Papers (which appears to be the primary influence of your spiritual beliefs) to support this view.

[freelight]

Originally Posted by Damian

You have already expressed your view that the God who has time limitations is the finite God. Indeed, you employed the Urantia Papers (which appears to be the primary influence of your spiritual beliefs) to support this view.

Any who know me know I draw from a variety of schools, being an eclectic spiritualist merging schools of both east and west. The Urantia Papers are just one resource of significant revelatory value, in this case sharing a composite view of how the cosmos is an interaction of both the infinite and the finite, hence my sharing of 'God The Supreme', which is that aspect of Deity involving and evolving with the growth/expansion of the finite universes of space/time, being the culmination of creature-Creator relationships, the experiential values and perfection-potentials therein. This is looking at the cosmos from the viewpoint of its exquisite interactions of space/time relativity, the actual engagement of creation. On this level of universe-activity, space and time perception is inevitable, and obvious, for there is movement of space, matter, mind, energy, spirit! - as these "relate"...the 'referential-perception' of 'time' arises. (we can even call this the 'sensation' of creation )

Only in an infinite stillness, void, or timeless state of Being (that non-dual realm of pure Existence),...could we assume no relativity, differentiation or duality existing, and this is that essence of pure God-Being or Awareness that is spaceless/timeless, the Infinite I AM Presence (which I enjoy sharing about quite often),...but I've steered the discussion more into the involvement of 'God' within finite dimensions of existence, evolving in the context of space/time. I include both 'infinite' and 'finite' aspects of Life in my cosmology, the non-dual and the dual, because I consider the Totality of reality, which includes all. 'All' includes no-thing and every-thing This totality-viewpoint has its advantages as most comprehensive of the All, at least in my current view.

I'll be trying to finish up Peter Dziubans book, "Consciousness is all", which focuses purely upon infinite consciousness itself, which he presents as wholly spaceless/timeless/measureless/boundless....pure non-dualism,...even saying from this perspective that time never began! - so this an extreme view taking 'non-duality' to even more profound extents, considering oneSelf as pure infinity, time being an illusion altogether.

Remember, apart from pure awareness itself,...all 'else' is point of view.


pj

[Desert Reign]

Originally Posted by freelight

Some just happen to be referencing 'God' thru the lens of 'time', which is natural, is it not? (not too many think from the perspective of infinite consciousness, except a few of us transcendentalers ). Theology, mythology all has its play within the spectrum of time, within eternity. (more semantics). We could wax poetic and allow readers to draw their own insights and conclusions, shifting their viewpoint, looking out from different perspectives. God includes all, is All. The Infinite ONE....includes all that is infinite and finite, indefinite and definitive, absolute and relative. Such is the Divine Paradox.

I've come to 'ground' myself somewhat recently in the more finite aspect of things (omg, lol....check his pulse ), even the concept of 'The Finite God' has its place, in as much as God is actually involving/evolving His Presence thru the creative movement and relativity of space/time. Yes...imagine that. While you and I are essentially mystics at heart, disposed towards 'non-dualism'...we cant deny this relative-reality, even if it is 'maya', for it is our playground nonetheless. Our revelry in space/time is the sport of eternity, an engagement of the infinite...with-in the finite. Back to the 'divine paradox'.
In-joy!
pj

Thank you for saying that Paulie. It is not always easy to admit to a change of viewpoint. Anything that is real must be defined in relation to other things that are real. It is the act of a mind to make these distinctions, to create order where previously there was just raw chaos. It is the act of mind to say "This is sky and this is earth".

So if the universe consists of the set of all real things, then the universe as a whole must remain undefined. (This is absolutely logically necessary because a real definition of the universe (the set of all real things) as a whole would have to be in relation to other real things. Which is a self-contradiction because the universe already contains all real things. If the definition of the universe is real then it must a part of itself.

Using this logic, you can easily (I hope) see how you can maintain a belief in a totality that cannot be defined whilst also acknowledging the reality, the definition, of all real things. These are two sides of the same coin. This is the only way to avoid dualism (IMHO). It is also the basis for openness theology and ethics.

[freelight]

Originally Posted by Desert Reign

Thank you for saying that Paulie. It is not always easy to admit to a change of viewpoint. Anything that is real must be defined in relation to other things that are real. It is the act of a mind to make these distinctions, to create order where previously there was just raw chaos. It is the act of mind to say "This is sky and this is earth".

So if the universe consists of the set of all real things, then the universe as a whole must remain undefined. (This is absolutely logically necessary because a real definition of the universe (the set of all real things) as a whole would have to be in relation to other real things. Which is a self-contradiction because the universe already contains all real things. If the definition of the universe is real then it must a part of itself.

Using this logic, you can easily (I hope) see how you can maintain a belief in a totality that cannot be defined whilst also acknowledging the reality, the definition, of all real things. These are two sides of the same coin. This is the only way to avoid dualism (IMHO). It is also the basis for openness theology and ethics.

Definitely - Coming from the perspective of the Totality, both what is indefinite and definite is included, for such comprises the All, the One. Hence my sharing resources such 'The Kybalion' and 'The Urantia Papers' as wonderful discourses covering such relationships. (no exuse for ignorance folks).

From an a more mystical, unitive, non-dual perspective however, Damian and I share a similiar nuance of understanding of the 'eternal/infinite'...which is beyond any space/time definities, a state of Oneness that is 'timeless',....although we still end up using 'language' to 'point' to such a state or divine condition.

Even as we contemplate 'God' in His pure essential Being as undimensional, spaceless, timeless, unchanging, indivisible, incorporeal, infinite existential nature,....nevertheless...within the context of 'Creation',....this 'God' is 'engaging' the play of space and time, relating within the movements of space. - herein is where the perception of relativity comes into view, by virtue of its own reality (even if its 'relative' as compared to absolute stillness).

As mystics we contemplate also that original aspect of pure Spirit which is 'Absolute' in nature, unchanging, beginningless, endless, infinite, timeless...for this Infinite Being is prior to and transcends all finite dimensions or conditions of space/time. In the quietness of meditation, or as that ever-present reality always Being,...the absolute always IS, the core-reality, the permament unchanging ISness, eternal NOW. This essential Self-existence (the I AM) is free of the conditioning of space/time anomolies or distortion,...being pure Awareness in its original stainless purity. (See 'Our Real Nature'). It does not change, but allows thru the power of mind the awareness of all that is changing in the conditional worlds of existence (nature, phenomena, etc.).

When one sees this synthesis as included in the fabric of the Universe....he is not so afraid to see there that there is an aspect of a 'Finite God' so to speak, since Spirit is involving itself somehow in creation. - but that's back to referencing such relationships in time, which is unavoidable as long as such is being 'perceived' and experienced. 'Experience' itself includes space/time perception/relativity! - but it also includes mystical perception or 'knowing' of the eternal/infinite Being Itself, as Itself, the unchanging Presence behind all change.

But lest I wax on ...........

There's so much more to explore



pj