(In outline mode at this point)
Definition:
Transtheism in a
broad sense is a system of thought, philosophical, religious or
spiritually which neither is theism,
atheism nor agnosticism. In a narrower sense, transtheism is a position or
belief that the existence of deity is circumvented or transcended in some
way. Specifically Transtheism is belief in a system of thought, philosophical,
religious or spiritually, with
or without deities or gods, that divinity is attainable.
Generally transtheism has an objective pragmatic belief in
the potential existence of deity but does not have deity as the leading
principle of its system of thought.
In this paper the word God(s) will
denote the concepts of: Only one God,
god, gods, goddess, goddesses, Deity, deity, deities.
Transtheistic neutrality about
God(s):
Subjective transtheism neither accepts nor denies God(s). By
faith this is the correct position. By
doing so one keeps an open mind about the subject of God(s).
Objective transtheism neither completely asserts nor rejects
God(s). Objectively believes that this is the correct position. By doing so one
keeps an open mind to new experience’s and evidence.
Main
things to neutralize:
1. Neutralize
the concept of God(s)
2. Neutralize
the perception of God(s) existence or non-existence.
3. Neutralize
the relationship of God(s) to man.
4. Neutralize
the relationship of God(s) to reality in general.
Does God(s)
exist or not?
1. Does God(s) exist? Theists position; yes, atheists position; no,
agnostics position; unknown and the
transtheists position; neutrality,
these are all uniquely different positions.
2. To
neither completely asserts nor
rejects the existence of God(s) is the neutral position of Transtheism. In the
sense that faith, belief or knowledge is in degrees and flexible.
3. To
admit the continual possibility of God(s) is a sufficient ground for a neutral
transtheistic position of flexible belief but is an insufficient position for complete
belief in theism, atheism or agnosticism.
4. To
admit the presence or absence by way of perception of God(s) is the neutral
position of transtheist and the only degree of “existence or non-existence”
that is knowable as a personal experience.
5. To
admit the possibility or actuality of an attainable reality above or equal to
the reality of God(s). Turns the existence or non-existence of God(s) into a
non-critical question in a philosophic, religious or spiritual position.
6. The
question of God(s) existence is completely unsettled by arguments alone.
7. One
can be philosophic, religious or spiritual independent of God(s), theism,
atheism or agnosticism. As many transtheist do every day.
8. Theism,
atheism or agnosticism assume too much about the descriptive concepts of God(s)
in order to support any single positions. The neutral transtheist position can
draw on the positive of each position to form a flexible comprehensive point of
view.
9. Our idea of existence or non-existence may
not be descriptive of God(s) reality. In other words God(s) reality maybe
beyond the idea of existence or non-existence as we define it for humans.
10. The
question of God(s) existence is not a scientific problem at this point and so
has not been scientifically addressed.
Why can’t theism, atheism or
agnosticism prove their answers on the question of God(s)
existence?
1. Because the overwhelming
proof they need is not being found or provided for their position.
2. Let’s assume for the moment that we human are not totally at fault with our
fallible knowledge. As we turn to reality
or the universe we can acknowledge at least this much, that there is a
possibility that God(s) exist. Based on that fact, one is justified in neither
completely asserting nor rejecting the existence of God(s). This is the neutral
position of my transtheism; it is not the position of theism, atheism or agnosticism.
3. Next we
turn to God(s), at least this much can be acknowledged about God(s), they can
be absent. The existence or non-existence of God(s) is not a directly observable facts
but the absence of God(s) is an observable fact. Based on the fact of absence, one is justified in
neither completely asserting nor rejecting the existence of God(s). Again this
is the neutral position of my transtheism; it is not the position of theism, atheism or agnosticism.
4. Now, theism,
atheism or agnosticism is positions that cannot be supported by the two facts
that I have presented. However transtheism is supported by these facts as a
neutral position. Why can’t theism, atheism or
agnosticism prove their answers on the question of God(s) existence? Because their
answers assumer more than these two facts allow.
The Six belief
tendencies transtheist use to achieve neutrality:
1. Belief
and faith are tools or the means to philosophic, religious or spiritual freedom,
autonomy and neutrality. Generally from the control of God(s), theism, atheism
or agnosticism.
2. Reality
is not limited to existing, just because of God(s).
3. God(s)
are not limited to just being God(s).
4. God(s)
are not limited to just our reality.
5. Divinity
is not limited to just God(s).
6. Things
and creatures are not limited to just being what they are, they can become
other realities.
What transtheist commit too in
order to maintain and define their philosophic, religious or spiritual position
beyond the dogmas of theism, atheism or agnosticism are part of the concerns of
this paper.
What are
some of the attitudes a transtheist may have about theism, atheism or agnosticism?
1.
Complete commit to theism, atheism or
agnosticism is an unrealistic idea for a neutral position of transtheism.
2.
Complete committed to the idea of freedom to
believe and alternate belief at any moment is better than complete commitment to
theism, atheism or agnosticism.
3.
Complete commitment to God(s), theism, atheism
or agnosticism is not necessary for living a neutral philosophic, religious or spiritual
life.
4.
Theism, atheism or agnosticism is unsatisfactory
in their own ways as philosophic, religious or spiritual positions because of
the strife created.
5.
Transtheism is a flexible neutral philosophic, religious
or spiritual position that goes beyond but does not completely exclude theism,
atheism or agnosticism.
Different
ways transtheism achieve a neutral position beyond theism, atheism or agnosticism.
1. That
God(s) are capable of being immanent but we are not their ultimate concern so they
are mostly indifferent, we are then free in our philosophic, religious or
spiritual existence.
2. God(s)
are transcendent to the point of being indifferent or separated from our
reality, so that we are free in our philosophic, religious or spiritual
existence.
3. God(s)
may not have created our reality so they are not responsible for our philosophic,
religious or spiritual existence; we are inherently free from their control.
4. If
God(s) created our reality and created us as free will agents, we are free and
responsible for our philosophic, religious or spiritual existence. Our reword
or punishment is in our hands.
5. Being
a God(s) is not ultimate reality there are realities above them, even they can
attain.
6. There
is no ultimate one god, ultimate reality or truth is not a sentient being. It
is the goal of all things and God(s) to have union with the ultimate monadic reality
or truth.
7. A
belief that we can become equal to or greater than God(s) in certain ways, just
as God(s) can become equal to or greater than other God(s) in certain ways. Godliness
can be transcended.
8. The
God(s) above the idea godliness, the descriptive doctrines, concepts,
perception and so on of godliness in theism, atheism or agnosticism are
transcended by the higher reality that they are trying to describe but can’t.
9. Our
philosophic, religious or spiritual purpose is our relationship with higher
purposes or principles that makes us into better being, not to God(s) just
because they exist.
10. God(s)
are or can be just ideas as metaphorical archetypes that represent phenomena or
virtues. The phenomena or virtues transcend the metaphorical representation
because the phenomena or virtues are objective realities and the metaphorical
archetypes are not. Theism is then
transcended because the God(s) are metaphorical, atheism is transcended because
no objectively existing God(s) are involved and agnosticism is transcended
because the phenomena or virtues are known.
11. The
God above the gods that exist is a Non-God(s). In order for God to be beyond
the capabilities of other gods to be equal or surpass God. God must be greater
than a god or something other than but greater than a god. That is to say, a Non-God(s)
or God has passed beyond to the greater Non-God(s). This is how to neutralize
theism, atheism or agnosticism. Transtheism advance the idea of the of Non-God(s)
“existence” transcending the idea of God(s) existence.
12. One
absolute God that exists is a Non- God. A God that absolutely transcends
everything is the only being that can surpass itself and become a greater Non-God.
That is to say God transcends being God and becomes a Non-God(s). Again, this is how to neutralize theism,
atheism or agnosticism. Transtheism advance the idea of the of Non-God(s) “existence”
transcending the idea of one absolute God.
13. Absolute
faith that transcends the need for theism and God(s). Theism and the need for
God(s) are transcended when faith as a reality of our being is equal to the
reality of God(s) being. In theory our
faith-reality is a phenomenon of our philosophic, spiritual or religious being.
So when one achieves absolute faith or whatever degree of faith is needed to
equal God(s) being. We have been freed
from the necessity of God(s) aid and the theisms about God(s).
Sources:
Transtheism
on the web.
Transtheistic is a term
coined by philosopher Paul
Tillich or Indologist Heinrich Zimmer, referring to a system of thought
or religious
philosophy which is neither theistic, nor atheistic [1] but is beyond them.
Zimmer
applies the term to the theological system of Jainism, which is theistic in the limited sense
that the gods exist, but become immaterial as they are transcended by moksha
(that is, a system which is not non-theistic, but in which the gods are not the
highest spiritual instance). Zimmer (1953, p. 182) uses the term to describe
the position of the Tirthankaras
having passed "beyond the godly governors of the natural order".
The
term has more recently also been applied to Buddhism,[2]
Advaita Vedanta[3] and the Bhakti movement.[4]
Nathan
Katz in Buddhist and Western Philosophy (1981, p. 446) points out that
the term "transpolytheistic" would be more accurate, since it entails
that the polytheistic gods
are not denied or rejected even after the development of a notion of the Absolute that
transcends them, but criticizes the classification as characterizing the
mainstream by the periphery: "like categorizing Roman Catholicism as a
good example of non-Nestorianism". The term is indeed informed by the fact
that the corresponding development in the West, the development of monotheism, did not
"transcend" polytheism, but abolish it, while in the mainstream of
the Indian religions,
the notion of "gods" (deva) was never elevated to the status of Brahman, but adopted
roles comparable to Western angels.
"Transtheism", according to the criticism of Katz, is then an
artifact of comparative
religion.
Paul Tillich uses
transtheistic in The Courage to Be (1952), as an aspect of Stoicism. Tillich
stated that Stoicism and Neo-Stoicism
are
the way in which some of the noblest figures in later antiquity and their
followers in modern times have answered the problem of existence and conquered
the anxieties of fate and death. Stoicism in this sense is a basic religious
attitude, whether it appears in theistic, atheistic, or transtheistic forms.[5]
Like
Zimmer trying to express a religious notion that is neither theistic nor
atheistic. However, the theism that is being transcended in Stoicism according
to Tillich is not polytheism as in Jainism, but monotheism, pursuing an ideal of human courage which has
emancipated itself from God.
The
courage to take meaninglessness into itself presupposes a relation to the
ground of being which we have called "absolute faith." It is without
a special content, yet it is not without content. The content of absolute faith
is the "god above God." Absolute faith and its consequence, the
courage that takes the radical doubt, the doubt about God, into itself,
transcends the theistic idea of God.[6]
Martin Buber
criticized Tillich's "transtheistic position" as a reduction of God
to the impersonal "necessary being" of Thomas Aquinas.[7]
It's
a word for a belief system that neither accepts nor rejects the idea of the
existence of God(s). For example, neo-Paganism is a nature-based religious
grouping, and it can be said to be transtheistic because both theism and
atheism are compatible with its general beliefs. Some Pagans believe in God(s)
and some don't, but it has no bearing on the basic tenets of their beliefs.
Transtheism has also been used to describe Buddhism, Jainism, etc.
Source(s):
I've
studied religious anthropology.
transtheistic
[edit] English
Wikipedia has an
article on:
[edit] Etymology
From
trans- and theistic; coined by
philosopher Paul Tillich and Indologist Heinrich
Zimmer (see quotes).
[edit] Adjective
transtheistic (comparative
more transtheistic, superlative most transtheistic)
(of a belief
system) Transcending
theism.
Transtheism
Doctrine
Transtheism assumes the
existence of God as an absent Deity and the ultimate concept of God’s existence
is transcendent and external to all other forms of existence, which implies an
impersonal, non-anthropomorphic, non-universemorphic or even non-cosmosmorphic
being and view of God. In transtheism, God has one primary attribute,
transcendence. Transtheism is the view that God did not create the universe and
does not interact with it; emphasis is on the Deities ultimate transcendence.
The cosmos exists simultaneously with God’s existence and exists as a result of
the transcendent existence of God.
Transtheist
position on the absence of God:
·
We
must exist.
·
We
are not God.
·
Therefore
God is absent.
Transtheism
refers to a system of thought or religious philosophy which is neither
theistic, nor atheistic. Indologist Heinrich Zimmer applies the term to the
theological system of Jainism, which is theistic in the limited sense that the
gods exist, but become immaterial as they are transcended by moksha (that is,
it is a system which is not non-theistic, but in which the gods are not the
highest spiritual instance). The term has more recently also been applied to
Buddhism, Advaita Vedanta and the Bhakti movement.
I'm
considering two names for this phenonemon. Transtheism or Supratheism. I like
Transtheism because "trans" has two connotations: across and
above/beyond. This is nice because it suggests that the believers could
understand that a cross-over between our universe and the otherworld is
possible, in terms of the spilling over of the otherworldly god into our
universe (as our spirits) and/or the sending of an emissary from the otherworld
to assist with salvation and/or our journey "home" to the otherworld.
Supratheism is also possible, although it may indicate too much of a complete
transcendence and separation of the God, as if the otherworldly God has no contact
with this world (which is not the case in these systems).
First
of all we have to distinguish between atheism, nontheism, apatheism and so on.
Atheism is a statement that one does not belive in the existence of Deity.
Several
religions dont have a central God but this leaves them either nontheistic or
transtheistic Crowley mentions that we dont know wether God(s) exist or not (and
it is not relevant to the great work any more than faith is ).
Buddhism
and Taoism are fundamentally and originally nontheistic, or in short, religions
without a central or creating Deity.
Later
versions ,syncretized with local polytheistic cults have made them rather
transtheistic. Meaning that there is no ultimate God. Ultimate truth is not a
sentient being or “God” but a “state” (actually not even that term
suffices….since no term does). Their Gods are in a sense like man (though on a
“higher” level), on the way to the same goal, the same union or henotheosis
with the ultimate.monadic truth.
Similar
thoughts could be found in ancient Greece among several philosophers.
Terms
like Kether (Kabbalah), Bythos (Gnosticism), Monad (Neoplatonism) and in the east
Moksha, Nirvana and so on being this first emanation without duality (and thus
obviously without a “personality” too).
"On
this path, there are three notions one should never lose sight of: that
appearances are the deity, sounds are mantra, and thoughts are wisdom. These
points are of crucial importance." - Chökyi Nyima Transtheism: Utilizing
deities as a means to an end, as opposed to the deity being the end of critical
thought (regarding what one uses as a means for ends.)
I
like her term "Transtheism". Allow me to quote her blog
"My proposal is to... (study) those groups of religious people in the ancient world that worship a god who is spatially beyond our universe and who is not identified as the immediate creator and ruler of our universe. Instead, these roles are attributed to subordinate powers who are not being worshiped."
"My proposal is to... (study) those groups of religious people in the ancient world that worship a god who is spatially beyond our universe and who is not identified as the immediate creator and ruler of our universe. Instead, these roles are attributed to subordinate powers who are not being worshiped."
The
basic idea of transtheism is
1) There is a higher constant in reality than God, hence God is no longer a top the apex and therefore not principle to a belief system.
2) When you remove all logical contradictions present in the idea of God and simultaneously extend some implications of a natural materialism the universe with and without a God are the same, hence the position transends theism
3)transtheism is ignostic, that is the terms atheism and theism don't really mean much because the concept 'god' your are trying to make statements about is beyond our paradigm of understanding and therefore not applicable
Its not an easily concept to grasp but it became move obvious to me when Enso who would classically be consider theist as a very similar set of metaphysical ideas as myself who would classically be described atheist. The dividing line was so small and indistinct I looked for another word and my Taoist buddies help me out with that. Panetheism and pantheism are similiar schools of thought and if I'm honest they are rather blurry with what they do and do not described
1) There is a higher constant in reality than God, hence God is no longer a top the apex and therefore not principle to a belief system.
2) When you remove all logical contradictions present in the idea of God and simultaneously extend some implications of a natural materialism the universe with and without a God are the same, hence the position transends theism
3)transtheism is ignostic, that is the terms atheism and theism don't really mean much because the concept 'god' your are trying to make statements about is beyond our paradigm of understanding and therefore not applicable
Its not an easily concept to grasp but it became move obvious to me when Enso who would classically be consider theist as a very similar set of metaphysical ideas as myself who would classically be described atheist. The dividing line was so small and indistinct I looked for another word and my Taoist buddies help me out with that. Panetheism and pantheism are similiar schools of thought and if I'm honest they are rather blurry with what they do and do not described
But
does transtheism deny that existence is pointless? A transtheist doesnt just
'lack belief' in anything right?
Basically what your post has conveyed to me, is that there is something 'going on' but this is something that cannot be expressed linguistically because it is irrational to express this with something so limited as language, and also somewhere where logic and rationality cannot penetrate due to themselves, having linguistic barriers.
Pantheism though simply suggests God became the universe, and not separate. Transtheism differs because it implies the existence of 'something' which we cannot call God because we are in no position to ascribe predicates to such an entity?
Basically what your post has conveyed to me, is that there is something 'going on' but this is something that cannot be expressed linguistically because it is irrational to express this with something so limited as language, and also somewhere where logic and rationality cannot penetrate due to themselves, having linguistic barriers.
Pantheism though simply suggests God became the universe, and not separate. Transtheism differs because it implies the existence of 'something' which we cannot call God because we are in no position to ascribe predicates to such an entity?
I'd
also add that a transtheist considers atheism a starting point, not the
unequivocal logic and evidence based viewpoint. I'd say transtheists were once
atheists at one point but 'evolved' beyond simply lacking belief or arguing
with theists.
A transtheist acknowledges the pitfalls of human religions, but rather than argue wth them, they can see that both athest and theist are unable to see reality 'as it is' due to paradigm incommensurability. A transtheist is really ahead of everyone else in this regard.
There are other sorts of beliefs too like panpsychism which acknowledges scientific method and reductionism are useful tools but are limited in describing various aspects of reality like consciousness and the experiential.
I think beliefs such as these are the beginnings of a new paradigm shift.
A transtheist acknowledges the pitfalls of human religions, but rather than argue wth them, they can see that both athest and theist are unable to see reality 'as it is' due to paradigm incommensurability. A transtheist is really ahead of everyone else in this regard.
There are other sorts of beliefs too like panpsychism which acknowledges scientific method and reductionism are useful tools but are limited in describing various aspects of reality like consciousness and the experiential.
I think beliefs such as these are the beginnings of a new paradigm shift.
Transtheism
makes no comment regarding the meaning of existence. Being transtheist would
qualify you as atheist toward an religious or anthropomorphic idea of god, so
in that sense they do 'lack belief'. If a transtheist holds any idea of God
then it is likely to be so far removed from the theistic idea that most theists
would consider them atheist.
The value of things is imo a different area and not directly related to god existence, personally my opinion is that many people get confusion what what value actually is and hence falsely feel the need to objectify it. But thats a different topic.
The value of things is imo a different area and not directly related to god existence, personally my opinion is that many people get confusion what what value actually is and hence falsely feel the need to objectify it. But thats a different topic.
Transtheism is the belief
in one or more deities or gods who transcend the universe and are yet immanent in
it. Western and Eastern variants of Transtheism exist, with the emphasis on the
individual relative to God being greater in the Western. Immanence is a
religious and philosophical concept. ...
In its extreme form it assumes the existence of God as an absent Deity and the ultimate concept of God’s existence is transcendent and external to all other forms of existence, which implies an impersonal and theomorphic view of God. God's primary attribute is transcendence. Transtheists have the view that God did not create the universe and does not interact with it, which distinguish it from Deism. The cosmos exists simultaneously with God’s existence and as a result of God's transcendent nature. This article discusses the term God in the context of monotheism and henotheism. ... Look up deity in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. ... Look up ultimate, penultimate, antepenultimate in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. ... In religion, transcendence is a condition or state of being that surpasses, and is independent of, physical existence. ... For other uses, see Ceremonial Deism. ...
Contents
|
The
transtheistic elements in religions are often contrasted or counter balanced by
theistic elements. Religions that emphasize an Apophatic theological method generally stress the
transtheistic attributes and focus on the transcendent, impersonal, absent,
ineffable, absolute, solitary, theomorphic… nature of divinity. Where as
religions that emphasizes the Cataphatic theological method may stress the Theistic
aspects and focus on the immanent, personal, present, effable, relative,
intimate, anthropomorphic… nature of divinity. Another important contrast is
the mode of existence that the divine being has. Transtheism’s posit other
forms of existence’s from humanity for divinities. Theism’s generally posit
some form of shared existence of deities with humanity. Atheism the
non-existence of deities. However, generally within a given religion,
transtheism could be viewed as a doctrine that teaches that the true nature of
Deity transcends the descriptive doctrines of that religion. Monotheism,
Polytheism,
Pantheism...
and perhaps even Atheism,
each having descriptive doctrines, comparatively they have strengths and
weakness and each disputes the accuracy of the other. Transtheism differs from Agnosticism
in that while the latter claims to be unable to make any definitive statements
concerning Deity. Transtheism assumes the existence of Deity and asserts that
there are specific instances in which the aforementioned doctrines may be
accurate but are subject to human apprehension. Apophasis is a rhetorical
figure of speech wherein the speaker or writer invokes a subject by denying
that it should be invoked. ... Cataphatic (sometimes spelled kataphatic)
theology is the expressing of God or the divine by what is or expressing God
through positive terminology. ... Theism is the belief in one or more gods or
goddesses. ... For the Celtic Frost album, see Monotheist (album) In theology,
monotheism (from Greek one and god) is the belief in the existence of one deity
or God, or in the oneness of God. ... Polytheism is belief in or worship of
multiple gods or deities. ... Pantheism (Greek: πάν ( pan ) = all and
θεός ( theos ) = God) literally means God is All and All is God. It is the
view that everything is of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God; or that
the universe, or nature, and God are equivalent. ... “Atheist†redirects
here. ... Agnosticism (from the Greek a, meaning without, and Gnosticism or
gnosis, meaning knowledge) is the philosophical view that the truth value of
certain claims—particularly metaphysical claims regarding theology, afterlife
or the existence of God, gods, deities, or even ultimate reality—is unknown
or, depending on the form of agnosticism...
Views on Transtheism
Augustine's
famous phrase from De Trinitate: “We can know what God is not, but we cannot
know what he is”
The Cappadocian Fathers of the 4th century said that they believed in God, but they did not believe that God exists. God is beyond existing or not existing: these "relative" terms have no meaning where the absolute is concerned. Look up absolute in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. ...
The Summa Theologiae of Thomas Aquinas (Western Catholic Church):”In this life what God is is unknown to us [even] by the revelation of grace; and so [by grace] we are joined to him as to something unknown.”
Bishop Kallistos (Eastern Orthodox Church): "God is absolutely transcendent. ‘No single thing of all that is created has or ever will have even the slightest communion with the supreme nature or nearness to it” (Gregory Palamas, PG 150, 1176C)
Maimonides ( (Spanish philosopher considered the greatest Jewish scholar of the Middle Ages who codified Jewish law in the Talmud (1135-1204)) : "God's existence is absolute and it includes no composition and we comprehend only the fact that He exists, not His essence. Consequently it is a false assumption to hold that He has any positive attribute... still less has He accidents, which could be described by an attribute. Hence it is clear that He has no positive attribute whatever. The negative attributes are necessary to direct the mind to the truths which we must believe... When we say of this being, that it exists, we mean that its non-existence is impossible; it is living - it is not dead; ...it is the first - its existence is not due to any cause; it has power, wisdom, and will - it is not feeble or ignorant; He is One - there are not more Gods than one. Thus, every attribute predicated of God denotes either the quality of an action, or, when the attribute is intended to convey some idea of the Divine Being itself - and not of His actions - the (The speech act of negating) negation of the opposite."
Existence of God in Transtheism
By
assuming the existence of God as an absent Deity, Transtheism develops a view
that the majority of arguments against or for the existence of God are mainly
indirect arguments for the absence of God, when in relationship to our
existence. Ontological arguments about the nature of God’s being, which dictate
by definition a necessary existence seem to be exempt from this point of view.
So that it can be said by Transtheist that:
·
Arguments
against the existence of God only provide inferences for the absence of God.
·
Arguments
for the existence of God only provide inferences for the results of God’s
absence.
Transtheists
may consider credible evidence for or against the existence of God is absent.
So it is a shorter logical step to declare God absent from the universe, rather
than existent or non-existent. Following on this we are presented with a
choice, to believe between a possible objective reality beyond our universe
(another existence) or no possible objective realities beyond this universe (assuming
this universe is all there is). Transtheism define God's existence, as an
objective occurring entity (beyond our universe), which is considered the
natural disposition of reality (entities have objectivity) within the relative
state of this universe. Transtheism defines the universe and God as separate
objective realities. The absence of one in the other is a logical consequence
of this point of view.
Transtheism
- Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (1052
words)
|
|
Transtheism assumes the
existence of Deity
and asserts that there are specific instances in which the aforementioned
doctrines may be accurate but are subject to human apprehension.
|
|
Transtheism develops a
view that the majority of arguments against or for the existence of
GOD are mainly indirect arguments for the absence of GOD, when in
relationship to our existence.
|
Transtheism
by Sergei
Skryabin
My religion is a
Transtheism.Even more, I do believe that I am a founder of this religious
thought.
Transtheism
respects every religion,so I can experience their revelations.
Once, when I
visited the Jerusalem I was plunged into the state like the conscious dream.
The mood of the
unknown ancient Middle East religion gave me a way of
the perception of the Western Wall like a Pantheon of the almighty Gods, where every God
was represented by its own solid block overfilled with something like a strong magnetic field.
the perception of the Western Wall like a Pantheon of the almighty Gods, where every God
was represented by its own solid block overfilled with something like a strong magnetic field.
There was the
sensation that the blocks can move changing the strength of
the field on the different sides.Just few seconds I prayed to this Pantheon
in ecstasy and arrived again to the present reality psychically exhausted but
filled with the unbelievable joy.After this event, I didn't get eventhe desire to make
any enquiry about what this religion is,so fully I was satisfied.Standing before the
Western Wall I turned my face to the East to the Mecca,and the hope
gently touched my heart that,maybe,some future development will make it possible to
see the holy Kaaba.
the field on the different sides.Just few seconds I prayed to this Pantheon
in ecstasy and arrived again to the present reality psychically exhausted but
filled with the unbelievable joy.After this event, I didn't get eventhe desire to make
any enquiry about what this religion is,so fully I was satisfied.Standing before the
Western Wall I turned my face to the East to the Mecca,and the hope
gently touched my heart that,maybe,some future development will make it possible to
see the holy Kaaba.
P.S.From this
point I got an attractive idea that the Ark of the Covenant
was the Quantum Brain of the Orion civilization.
was the Quantum Brain of the Orion civilization.
God is the term
used to denote the Supreme Being ascribed by many religions to be the
creator, ruler and/or the sum total of, existence. Conceptions of God vary
widely, despite the common use of the same term for them all.
God
- Concept of God
In
many Western religions, God is usually said to have a specific and clearly
defined relationship to, and interest in, the happenings of this world and
the lives of those in it. Metaphors for God's relationship to the visible
world often include that of ruling authority (king, ruler), and (in
most Abrahamic religions) judge of individual activity therein.
By
contrast, many Asian and Oriental religions and philosophies consider that
there is an ultimate intelligence, purpose or awareness beyond this world,
but without necessarily conceptualizing it in such a human-oriented manner or
positing it as having created the world predominantly for human beings.
The
term "God" is a label or linguistic symbol, for the ultimate being
or truth of existence whom many people believe exists [1] [2], and different
people subsume within that term their different concepts about the nature and
attributes of such a being.
God
- Attributes of God
·
God may be Supreme but is not necessarily a
Being.
·
Some concepts of God may include anthropomorphic attributes,
gender, particular names, and ethnic exclusivity (see Chosen people), while
others are purely transcendent or philosophic concepts.
·
The concept of God is often embedded in
definitions of truth, where the sum of all truth is equated to God.
·
There are variations on defining God either as a
person, or not as a person but as an ambiguous impersonal force (see Absolute
Infinite). Also at stake are questions concerning the possibilities of
human/God relations. There are countless variations in traditions of worship
and/or appeasement of God.
·
Some concepts of God center on a view of God as
ultimate, immanent, transcendent, eternal Reality beyond the shifting and
constantly mutable multiplicities of the sensible world.
·
In much religious and philosophic thought, God is
considered the creator of the universe.
·
Some traditions hold that the creator is also the
sustainer (as in theism), while others argue that their God is no longer
involved in the world after creation (as in deism).
·
The common definition of God assumes omnipotence,
omniscience, omnipresence, and omnibenevolence. However, not all systems hold
that God is necessarily morally good (see summum bonum). Some hold that God
is the very definition of moral goodness and that God is equivalent to love.
Others maintain that God is beyond morality.
·
Negative theology, sometimes called apophatic
theology argues that no true statements about attributes of God can be made
at all (because this asserts that the essence of God's being can be expressed
accurately within the limits of human language), while agnostic positions
argue that limited human understanding does not allow for any conclusive
opinions on God whatsoever. Some mystical traditions ascribe limits to God's
powers, arguing that God's supreme nature leaves no room for spontaneity.
·
The concept of a singular God is characteristic of
monotheism, but there is no universal definition of monotheism. The
differences between monotheism and polytheism vary among traditions (see also
dualism, and henotheism).
·
Some espouse an exclusionist view, holding to one
sole definition of God. Others hold an inclusionist view, accepting the
possibility of more than one definition of God to be true at the same time.
·
There are also atheistic explanations for the
concept of God that can include psychological and/or sociological factors.
See
also theology below.
Allah,
Atheism, Agnosticism, Ayya Vaikundar, Baal, Deism, Existence of God, God and
gender, God complex, God in Buddhism, God realm, Jesus, Jehovah, Krishna,
List of appearances of God in fiction, Natural theology, Nontheism,
Pantheism, Polytheism, The Higgs boson, the God particle, Spiritism,
Theism, Transtheism, The Urantia Book, Planes of existence, Yahuah, Yazidi
http://www.thetreesarefake.com/1/post/2013/02/transtheism.html 
In todays society we tend to want to label things, individuals in particular.
So when asked my label when it comes to a believe in a god, what should I say? My choices have been in the past: theist, deist, atheist, and pantheist. But I've had trouble coming to one of those labels because my "feelings" tend to be every label on the list above, yet much more. I'm an atheist to every god invented by mankind this includes the current frontrunner gods: Yahweh, Jesus, and Allah. I'm a deist when it comes to the idea of "contact" with god or gods through miracles or so-called revelations. And I'm a deist also in my manner of rejection of truly limited gods of mankind. I'm a pantheist in that this being (beyond mans crude concept of god) not only resides outside the confines of what we call time-space, but also penetrates the very essence of our minds. In other words: To find god one must only look within. Finally I'm a theist in the faith of a personal connection with an outside being, for not only is it "outside" but "within." So how does one come to a single label with all of these interconnecting themes? After I spent some time researching other terms of describing something beyond theism and atheism, I came across transtheism. It can mean different things, but to me it first means the joining of the above into a label. Secondly, it means the courage to be in the face of non-being. Presented here is a quote from philosopher Paul Tillich which I think most eloquently states my feeling: "The courage to take meaninglessness into itself presupposes a relation to the ground of being which we have called "absolute faith." It is without a special content, yet it is not without content. The content of absolute faith is the "god above God." Absolute faith and its consequence, the courage that takes the radical doubt, the doubt about God, into itself, transcends the theistic idea of God." |
Archive for September 2012
Advaita and Buddhism
http://satyoga.podbean.com/2012/09/
Excerpt: “All experience occurs
within the Self and can be modified by the Self because it is actually
all part of the Self, and a creation of the Self. But the Self never
appears as an object, and the Self, to all intents and purposes to the
scientific mind, does not exist. And this is why many have called
Advaita and Buddhism forms of religious atheism. You could say that, but
they are not atheism in the same sense as the materialist [who] doesn’t
believe in God. The materialist is simply refusing to believe in Sunday
school stories. But if the materialist had to actually consider what is
the ultimate transcendental condition of experience, then that would be
a different matter. So when the atheists attack God, they’re attacking a
straw God, a false God. But when you ask ‘Who is doing the attacking?’
‘Who is the source of the consciousness with that attitude?’ you can
take that consciousness back to a level which cannot be understood. But
it is fair to say that Advaita and Buddhism are forms of transtheism
because no concept of God can ever capture the Self, not even the word
Self. And that is why we often will say the Self is no self. And the
metaphor is often used that what the Self is, is the space in which
consciousness occurs. But even that is only a metaphor because the Self
constitutes whatever space it is in which experience occurs but is not
Itself that space. And therefore the Self is absolutely transcendent of
all conceptualization, and the only way to reach it is by letting go of
the attempt to do just that.” Recorded on the evening of Thursday, September 13, 2012.
http://christiananswersforthenewage.org/Articles_TheShack.html
More specifically, the phrase that God is "the ground of all being" comes from philosopher/theologian Paul Tillich
(1886-1965). Tillich is regarded by many as being a nontheist, that is, one who does not believe in God as a personal being, but rather is "being" itself -- the source of all that exists. In fact, Tillich said that "god is not a being, but being itself." Others view him as a panentheist, one who believes that all is contained in God although God also transcends all. One writer calls Tillich a "transtheist." Whatever term is used, Tillich's concept of God effectively renders God impersonal, even if Tillich still claims God to be personal. Tillich stated in his Systematic Theology that "God does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him"(205).
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt245742.html
The 9th century Catholic theologian and philosopher, John Scotus Eriugena, shocked his contemporaries when he claimed he believed in a non-existent God. He believed in a non-existent God because he believed God transcended existence. In other words, for John Scotus, God was a super-existent being who created existence along with the universe and everything else. This is, I believe, a profound metaphysical position. Rather than a binary classification of things into existence and non-existence, he uses a trinary classification into super-existence, existence and non-existence. Like all metaphysical statements, it is unverifiable (and meaningless) but is it impossible?
 Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 12:14 pm Post subject: |
 |
A DRUIDS THOUGHTS
http://valleyoakblog.wordpress.com/category/druidry/
I want to feel Deity rather than think about it, and one of the reasons I have continued to be a spiritual seeker for so many years is because I have, on occasions, had mystical experiences in which I feel I have experienced Deity. So I have faith and belief in my heart, but when it comes to how I conceive of Deity in my mind, then I am a transigtheist. Ignosticism, or igtheism, is the theological position that every other theological position (including agnosticism) assumes too much about the concept of god and many other theological concepts. Transtheism refers to a system of thought or religious philosophy which is neither theistic, nor atheistic. Ideologist Heinrich Zimmer applies the term to the theological system of Jainism, which is theistic in the limited sense that the gods exist, but become immaterial as they are transcended by moksha (that is, it is a system which is not non-theistic, but in which the gods are not the highest spiritual instance). This may seem an overly subtle or even evasive reply to the question, but my point is that I don’t think we can think about this – deity truly is a mystery that can be experienced, but not rationally or analytically explained or understood.
Did Immanuel Kant believe in God?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080421002054AAz21xx
He believed only because he concluded he MUST. He himself proved that there was no proof of God, and no NEED of God except as part of a "system" that he thought was necessary to the workings of the human mind.
"Kant gets rid of the usual foundation for reality, that is, God, and replaces it with a web of transcendental conditions."
"As such, these conditions are the 'source of all truth'..."
" There are three ideas of reason: self, world and God. God is the Ideal of Reason..."
"The Ideal of Reason does not satisfy the transcendental conditions and so cannot be considered objectively real. "
Therefore, Kant said God is not "objectively real." But he contradicts himself: "Consequently, Kant first discusses the transcendental proof of God's existence, arguing that the other proofs ultimately depend on it."
"Kant's rejection of all possible proofs of God's existence and his moving God out of the sphere of ontology, rules out the traditional ground of a systematic universe."
"The principle of God is not needed to explain nature. All that is needed is the principle of systematicity."
"Despite this status, Kant claims that we need the idea of systematic unity, that we "must" assume [God's existence.]"
WE MUST ASSUME GOD'S EXISTENCE because it fits a system! Kant's belief in God is because man's mind needs a "system" and God fits that system! How is that for "belief"?
God is "fiction".....
"This [system] preserves the concept of God as a regulative principle or model. In the Critique, Kant allows the concept of God to remain meaningful in the context of cognition, but only as an investigative fiction. "
"The Critique of Pure Reason, then, moves God out of the realm of ontology and into that of epistemology. The concept of God is involved in cognition, but is merely an analogical image. From the standpoint of speculative reason, God has no objective reality. Yet Kant posits two types of reality, the cognitive and the moral. These two points of view are tied together by reason. The concept of sensation is not simply a negative boundary to stop us from bringing up: something that lies behind sensation. Kant wants us to leave this something completely unspecified in the realm of cognition. God is indeterminable in the sphere of understanding, determinable in the sphere of reason, and determinate in the sphere of moral experience. There are then two view points, the cognitive, which includes understanding and reason, and the realm of moral experience. Kant retains the reality and determinability of God in the sphere of moral experience. Only the reality of God makes morality possible. In terms of empirical cognition, however, we cannot go beyond the bounds of the a priori conditions. Only Kant's analysis of moral experience lets us go beyond the analogical level. "
All above quotes are from http://www.mun.ca/phil/codgito/vol3/v3do...
"One of Kant's major goals was to save religion (including the essence of religious morality) from the onslaughts of science. "
Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels, 31.
"The man who … closed the door of philosophy to reason, was Immanuel Kant …
"Kant's expressly stated purpose was to save the morality of self-abnegation and self-sacrifice. He knew that it could not survive without a mystic base—and what it had to be saved from was reason."
"For the New Intellectual," For the New Intellectual, 30.
"I have," writes Kant, "therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge, in order to make room for faith."
Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels, 32
"Kant gets rid of the usual foundation for reality, that is, God, and replaces it with a web of transcendental conditions."
"As such, these conditions are the 'source of all truth'..."
" There are three ideas of reason: self, world and God. God is the Ideal of Reason..."
"The Ideal of Reason does not satisfy the transcendental conditions and so cannot be considered objectively real. "
Therefore, Kant said God is not "objectively real." But he contradicts himself: "Consequently, Kant first discusses the transcendental proof of God's existence, arguing that the other proofs ultimately depend on it."
"Kant's rejection of all possible proofs of God's existence and his moving God out of the sphere of ontology, rules out the traditional ground of a systematic universe."
"The principle of God is not needed to explain nature. All that is needed is the principle of systematicity."
"Despite this status, Kant claims that we need the idea of systematic unity, that we "must" assume [God's existence.]"
WE MUST ASSUME GOD'S EXISTENCE because it fits a system! Kant's belief in God is because man's mind needs a "system" and God fits that system! How is that for "belief"?
God is "fiction".....
"This [system] preserves the concept of God as a regulative principle or model. In the Critique, Kant allows the concept of God to remain meaningful in the context of cognition, but only as an investigative fiction. "
"The Critique of Pure Reason, then, moves God out of the realm of ontology and into that of epistemology. The concept of God is involved in cognition, but is merely an analogical image. From the standpoint of speculative reason, God has no objective reality. Yet Kant posits two types of reality, the cognitive and the moral. These two points of view are tied together by reason. The concept of sensation is not simply a negative boundary to stop us from bringing up: something that lies behind sensation. Kant wants us to leave this something completely unspecified in the realm of cognition. God is indeterminable in the sphere of understanding, determinable in the sphere of reason, and determinate in the sphere of moral experience. There are then two view points, the cognitive, which includes understanding and reason, and the realm of moral experience. Kant retains the reality and determinability of God in the sphere of moral experience. Only the reality of God makes morality possible. In terms of empirical cognition, however, we cannot go beyond the bounds of the a priori conditions. Only Kant's analysis of moral experience lets us go beyond the analogical level. "
All above quotes are from http://www.mun.ca/phil/codgito/vol3/v3do...
"One of Kant's major goals was to save religion (including the essence of religious morality) from the onslaughts of science. "
Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels, 31.
"The man who … closed the door of philosophy to reason, was Immanuel Kant …
"Kant's expressly stated purpose was to save the morality of self-abnegation and self-sacrifice. He knew that it could not survive without a mystic base—and what it had to be saved from was reason."
"For the New Intellectual," For the New Intellectual, 30.
"I have," writes Kant, "therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge, in order to make room for faith."
Leonard Peikoff, The Ominous Parallels, 32
No comments:
Post a Comment