Re: Pantheism nurturing global following

>
> Wicca is a religion that gives recognition to and worships supposed gods.
> Everyone and their dog calls themselves a Wiccan these days. The world
wide web
> is the last place to learn about their beliefs and practices as the least
> qualified to speak do most of the ranting.
>

This is probably true, not just of Wicca, but of any topic.  I have come to
see the internet as the great realm of no accountability.  Therefore it is a
realm where liars prosper.  (that and Washington DC)

However the source was a magazine quoting a book.  No connection to the web.




> > Yes, and rightfully so.  When we change the definition of God we
dishonor
> > Him.  He deserves to be identified as He is, not as we want Him to be.
> > Therefore sources of authority, that is who or what we believe as a
source
> > of information about God becomes crucial.  I believe the Bible.  I
reject
> > any perspective which comes down to human reason standing alone without
the
> > aid of revelation.  (To explain that further, I reject a use of
intellect
> > that begins and ends with human reason, but instead believe that God
must
> > reveal Himself to us in a manner that clearly thwarts our desire to
> > 'redesign' Him.  I believe this is one of the main purposes of
Scripture.)
>
> Your cherished god is but a supposition. If "he" were real, "he" would
manifest
> and all this childish bickering would go away.

I don't know that I would agree with either statement.  God is mot simply a
suppostion if I am concluding rightly that He revealed Himself in Scripture
and in the life of Jesus Christ.  And this of course is a manifestation as
per your second statement.  The problem for many is that they reject these
as fanciful, and not from God. I believe they are from God.  And after
examination took them as evidence, not guided by a presupposition of God,
but to create a "supposition" of God



>
> I for one consider it most rude for any religious adherent to force feed
their
> conjectural gods to the world.
>

It is not my desire to force feed.  But I do sometimes undertake to discuss.
If you believe me wrong to discuss then please notice the root post.  That
it was sent to four newsgroups.  Three of which were of opposing viewpoints.
So if anyone was force feeding it was not I feeding Christianity, but the
original poster feeding pantheism, which you notice is a viewpoint of God or
rather god.




> >
> >
> > >
> > > However, without a personal notion of God, people can experience the
> > > divine more freely, pantheist Katherine Peil said. "We see God in all
> > > of nature, which liberates religion and eliminates the need for
> > > intermediaries," said Peil, a Seattle psychologist. "You don't need
> > > Scripture, or popes, or channelers, and you don't need devils."
> >
> > Here she does a great job of stating the authority issue I mentioned.
She
> > begins with the assumption that God is not personal, and then builds the
> > authority or revelation of God to be from nature.  However if God is
> > personal then all of the ideas built forward of the assumption are
false.
> > Or at least built upon a poor foundation.
> >
> > Notice also that the quote refers to Scripture as an intermediary.  This
is
> > not the normal terminology I would use, but if you use her terminology
then
> > in fact is she not simply replacing the Bible with Nature and making it
her
> > intermediary?  That is to say her source of authority is nature, but she
too
> > is relying on something to indicate God to her the same that I use
> > Scripture.
> >
> > PC
>
> Most of humankind need a crutch to lean on. It is easier to dream up a god
than
> to assume self responsibility.

A good understanding of Christianity includes self-responsibility, and care
for the environment.  Unfortunately most people would settle for a less
thorough understanding.

But whether or not Christianity is a crutch, probably so.  It was a crutch
designed and given by God to lovingly heal a wound.  Whether being a crutch
makes it a bad thing has to do with whether or not the wound was real.  (Of
course I believe it was and that the evidence of the wound is the evil in
our world)

Dream up a God?  Of course many do this.  But notice my ideas present the
need for revelation, that is I believe that God chooses to reveal Himself,
and I believe that it must be that way because of the tendoncy of humanity
to create God the way they want Him to be.



>
> Just my opinion. Don't burn me at the stake!
>
>                     Jim
>
>

I won't burn you at the stake, nor do I intend any of my statements to sound
caustic.


PC