faith and fear

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
chansen said:
Is there anyone here who thinks doubt is not the first step, or a common first step, on the path to non-belief?
Click to expand...
Seems logical enough.

However, I agree with @Mendalla . . . non-belief is only one possible outcome of doubt.

Many people of faith (myself included) see doubt as part of faith. Questioning and doubt can lead to atheism for sure but they can also lead to a more mature and nuanced faith perspective.
 
Mendalla said:
I would say, based on accounts I have read, that it is also a common first step on the path to faith (or back to faith). Anyone of any philosophical or theological stripe who doesn't question their beliefs and understandings from time to time is missing a chance to follow Socrates' maxim that "the unexamined life is not worth living".
Click to expand...

But ... one step at a time ... mortals can only take limited bounds ... especially the blanched archetype ...
 
And there's nothing intrinsically wrong with atheism. I would describe my "beliefs" as completely non-theistic, and more similar to chansen's than anyone's.
 
BetteTheRed said:
And there's nothing intrinsically wrong with atheism. I would describe my "beliefs" as completely non-theistic, and more similar to chansen's than anyone's.
Click to expand...

One can certainly live as a moral person in the here-and-now as an atheist. One can do great good on the horizontal plane as an atheist.
 
BetteTheRed said:
I would describe my "beliefs" as completely non-theistic, and more similar to chansen's than anyone's.
Click to expand...

And, yet, you also describe as "panentheistic" at times. Panentheism necessarily requires transcendence. It means "All is in God" meaning there is transcendent "God" that circumscribes and penetrates existence. Most panentheisms regard that transcendence as at least somewhat personal, too (e.g. process with it's notion of God "luring" existence). How do you reconcile "more similar to chansen" with that? Or do you really mean "pantheistic" in it's impersonal form, that you regard nature and the universe as worth of reverence (which is basically my position)?
 
Mendalla said:
And, yet, you also describe as "panentheistic" at times. Panentheism necessarily requires transcendence. It means "All is in God" meaning there is transcendent "God" that circumscribes and penetrates existence. Most panentheisms regard that transcendence as at least somewhat personal, too (e.g. process with it's notion of God "luring" existence). How do you reconcile "more similar to chansen" with that? Or do you really mean "pantheistic" in it's impersonal form, that you regard nature and the universe as worth of reverence (which is basically my position)?
Click to expand...

For me, all this is awesome. As long as Most High gets the glory and credit for the creation.
 
Bolt_upright said:
For me, all this is awesome. As long as Most High gets the glory and credit for the creation.
Click to expand...

Well, a pantheist generally believes that the universe itself is "Most High". The word literally means "all is God". So glory is given to the universe itself as the source of our existence.
 
Mendalla said:
Well, a pantheist generally believes that the universe itself is "Most High". The word literally means "all is God". So glory is given to the universe itself as the source of our existence.
Click to expand...

And where did the universe come from Mendalla?
 
Mendalla said:
Well, a pantheist generally believes that the universe itself is "Most High". The word literally means "all is God". So glory is given to the universe itself as the source of our existence.
Click to expand...

I tend to lean on the image and likeness of mankind to put an image and likeness of Most High.
I don't think there is an "image" of "Spirit" but we can relate to the "likeness" of Most High in our hearts.
 
Okay, there are certain roads I do not go down anymore on WC2 (or elsewhere). They are well-trodden and offer no novelty or learning for me. Creation debates are one of them. Enjoy yourselves.
 
Mendalla said:
Okay, there are certain roads I do not go down anymore on WC2 (or elsewhere). They are well-trodden and offer no novelty or learning for me. Creation debates are one of them. Enjoy yourselves.
Click to expand...

Really, you're right Mendalla. Such debates are fairly useless. In my experience, no one ever changes another person's mind on such topics. It's just all bickering back and forth.
 
Bolt_upright said:
You may find this odd, but When scripture referred to the creation process, it describes when the " let the earth bring forth" or "the waters bring forth" it almost sounds as if there is a shared elemental event process or relational process involved in "bringing forth" of both "earth born" or "water born" creation.

Cheers
Click to expand...
sounds like God calling by His word creation into existence and all creation and laws there of obeying His will
 
Jae said:
Which of the Creation accounts in Genesis do you love most?
Click to expand...

I am still floored at the possibility that Adam may have had a hand or "voice" in the creation process.
This is my belief and some may not see it in scripture but it really does deserve a closer look.
 
I think the panentheist is my wishful thinking...like reincarnation. I really like reincarnation, but I know it's because that's what I'd like to happen. And like heaven. It's clearly a self-soothing device.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top