Re: Praying for Rain

[Terry]

aleggett wrote:
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Greg Crawford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'insights-l'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 14, 2004 2:59 PM
Subject: RE: Praying for Rain

 

Yes. And I at no time suggest that God is limited in time and space and
     

to
 

only existing within the universe. The point is that I don't so much see
     

God
 

as  "a being" but "the essence of being."
     

OK, that is a little clearer for me. I think I can distinguish between
   

such a
 

God and say, my understanding of Paul Davies suggestion that the material
universe is somehow predisposed to develop in a particular way that
   

includes
 

living beings, consciousness and intelligence. Such a predisposition does
   

not
 

exist outside of the universe itself, because it is an aspect of it.
   

My simple brain has trouble comprehending existence outside the universe,
but I have to believe that something brought about the big bang. I have no
problems with the idea that everything that has come into being as we know
it now exists in that something which is predisposing it to develop in a
particual way and I call that something God.
 

But what is the difference between "being" and "essence of being"? I have
   

this
 

image from childhood that essence is something you put into a cake recipe
   

and
 

that essence is something distilled from another thing, like flavouring.
   

What do
 

you mean by essence in this context?
   

I guess I see essence as as the motivating factor or force within all of
life (creation) that urges us 'to be'.
Metaphors can often mean different things to different people. Another
metaphor that I think Matthew Fox uses is that God is like ground water. It
mostly remains beneath the surface, occaisionaly comes to the top as a
spring but does most of its work unseen. It can also be reached by digging
deep into the earth.
Allan
 

------------------------------------------------------
- You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message
   

body 'unsubscribe insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
 

See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------
   

------------------------------------------------------
- You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe 
insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------
__________ NOD32 1.842 (20040813) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
 part000.txt - is OK
http://www.nod32.com

 

Allan & Greg,
Can I butt in here? (rhetorical?)  I am not yet getting a handle, Allan, 
on why or what difference it makes whether God is the 'ground of all 
being' or out there, up there or wherever.  That he/she/it exists, even 
if I don't know where, I feel is indisputable. So in answer to Greg 
about the big bang reversal, God would still exist because the 
singularity was his creation.  Tho I suspect he was trying to get Allan 
to say where then does God exist inside, or outside this point. Does it 
really matter where we think God is and would it change anything anyway? 
Grace and Peace

Terry



------------------------------------------------------
- You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe 
insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------