Have you bought some, Donna, and what did you pay with ? On Jan 10, 2:57 am, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > Owning a viewpoint - sounds unnatural to me. Would explain the need to > sell them, though. > > On 9 Jan., 18:15, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > "It can also be applied to the justification of the > > First Crusade" > > > outwardly, it may seem so, although, I think, in closer analysis, this > > will prove itself to be a rationalization. If Jesus is telling me > > anthing, Jesus and I are not One. And if this is the rationalization > > to do harm, doing harm is an action that is not founded in the One, as > > it requires the one who is harming and the intended target of harm as > > separate. This is a very good illustration of how a state of > > consciousness as the foundation of action can reveal more about the > > person than any rationalization they can offer in words. > > > Do we need to outsource the divine within? I don't think so, but we > > do need to fully own and operate from this viewpoint to honestly > > consider the divine. > > > On Jan 9, 9:50 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > "John Polkinghorne notes that any discussion of agency > > > requires the adoption of a metaphysical view of the nature of > > > reality. > > > He claims that there is no “deductive” way of going “from > > > epistemology > > > to ontology,”..." > > > > This is a point Justin and I discussed in a related fashion a little > > > while ago, towards the end of the "Purpose" thread: > > > > (http://groups.google.de/group/minds-eye/msg/07c1985e2abf6a64?hl=de). > > > > Certainly, faith can, and does inspire actions, whole courses of > > > actions, with undoubted efficacy, Molly. In this sense, faith can > > > indeed move mountains. > > > > In the sense in which we find meaning and direction for our own lives, > > > a belief in God is central for many. This does not, however, always > > > take the "upward" path your initial post seems to suggest, moving from > > > scientists' openness to ideas of God as the ground of meaning to the > > > ultimate mystical union with God as intimated by Bernard of Clairvaux > > > or Jan Ruysbroeck. It can also be applied to the justification of the > > > First Crusade, 'Deus le vult", to various modern problematic > > > justifications on the lines of "Jesus told me to do it." George W. > > > Bush believed that God wanted him to be president of the USA, and most > > > Islamicist terrorists also claim a divine mandate on the basis of > > > jihad. > > > > I know this is not what you mean, Molly, but - as you know - I have > > > problems about appeals to or grounding of actions in the "Beyond", > > > even in an "immanent Beyond." My own way is to see us on a journey > > > into the depth, complexity and wonder of what is (Neil's > > > "simplexity"), be that our cosmos or our humanity, or beyond that, our > > > humanity as part of the cosmos and our perception of/understanding of/ > > > action in the cosmos as part of our humanity. Do we really need to > > > "outsource" the deeper, richer circling of our development spiral in a > > > divine other? > > > > Francis > > > > On 8 Jan., 20:25, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Merriam-Webster defines the word “do” as ways we act, behave, get > > > > alone, fare, manage, happen, finish and serve, among others. Often > > > > our actions require our ability to rationally ascertain the context of > > > > our actions, the possible consequences of our actions and the ethics > > > > of our actions before we do anything. Or do they? Our actions, I > > > > think, like our words, are very clear indications of our state of > > > > mind. Sociopaths would act differently than saints in the same > > > > circumstances, because they bring to the moment, a different frame of > > > > reference, different viewpoint and different foundation for action. > > > > > There are psychologies to both doing and doing nothing. Yes, there > > > > are rational-emotional models of the factors that predispose humans to > > > > do nothing. And there are theories of the psychology of action, > > > > which take into account reasoning abilities, emotion, attitude and > > > > other factors. > > > > > When our belief system holds God and Divine Action, our state of mind > > > > is very different than states that do not hold that belief, and our > > > > actions may reflect these differences. To understand and bridge these > > > > differences, The Vatican Observatory (VO) and the Center for Theology > > > > and Natural Sciences (CTNS) jointly sponsor a series of conferences on > > > > divine action. The theme of each conference is an area of the natural > > > > sciences: quantum cosmology and the laws of nature (1992), chaos and > > > > complexity (1994), evolutionary and molecular biology (1996), > > > > neuroscience (1998), and quantum mechanics (2000). This brings > > > > specificity and precision to the discussions of divine action. In one > > > > of the papers from these conferences, along with summaries of many > > > > others, is posted on the CTNS website: In “The Metaphysics of Divine > > > > Action,” John Polkinghorne notes that any discussion of agency > > > > requires the adoption of a metaphysical view of the nature of reality. > > > > He claims that there is no “deductive” way of going “from epistemology > > > > to ontology,” but the strategy of critical realism is to maximize the > > > > connection. This leads most physicists, he claims, to interpret > > > > Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle as implying an actual indeterminacy > > > > in the physical world, rather than an ignorance of its detailed > > > > workings. Polkinghorne’s summary on the nature of Divine Action > > > > includes the insight that divine agency has its own special > > > > characteristics and that God’s knowledge of the world of becoming will > > > > be truly temporal in character. > > > > > In his book, Religion in late Modernity Robert C. Neville, suggests > > > > that these inquires “concerning divine action takes its rise from > > > > people who affirm as a supposition the belief that God is a personal > > > > being of some sort.” > > > > > In A Search for God In Ancient Egypt, by Jan Assmann, divine action > > > > and religious experience are part of the cosmic dimension of the > > > > mystic experience. Here, divine action is implicit in all contact > > > > with the divine once transcendence into Divine Presence has been > > > > realized. In other words, our actions become Divine Action, while in > > > > the presence of the One within. > > > > > To Bernard de Clairvaux, mysticism is the highest degree of the scale > > > > of love and “a perfect participation in the love which God has from > > > > Himself in the unity of the Spirit…to become thus is to be deified.” > > > > Our actions are naturally inspired from this unity of the Spirit that > > > > pervades our state. > > > > > This idea is similar to the mystical divine action, our own action, > > > > taken as a result of our mystical union with the God with us. The > > > > mystic Jan Ruysbroeck suggests in mystical union God “breathes us out > > > > from Himself that we may love and do good works; and again he draws us > > > > into Himself, that we may rest in fruition.” > > > > > Our efficacy and actions then, may be defined by whether or not we > > > > believe in God, and if we believe that God is external and personal, > > > > or a state of being within ourselves. What do YOU think?- Hide quoted > > > > text - > > > > - Show quoted text -
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
