tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post2600113099556508478..comments2024-01-01T08:18:36.278-05:00Comments on Real Physics: Making God an AlienLawrence Gagehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01242322119143922513noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-29651037936245133232008-03-07T16:19:00.000-05:002008-03-07T16:19:00.000-05:00Oh yes! That link was the first I read in regard ...Oh yes! That link was the first I read in regard to him. Thanks.<BR/><BR/>So the spelling of the P word was right...I checked dictionary.com thinking I had misspelled it and then thought you must have. :)<BR/>I haven't heard that term before...which is why I'm floating around the internet...it's like a free education in a way.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for the post links, I will read them as I have time. I'd better get back to being a mother!<BR/><BR/>(my husband often jokes about being the benevolent dictator...we understand.)<BR/><BR/>Best,<BR/>JenniferAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-62578766184483057342008-03-07T15:27:00.000-05:002008-03-07T15:27:00.000-05:00If you google "Touchstone Girard" you can look at ...If you google "Touchstone Girard" you can look at the cached document. Try <A HREF="http://209.85.207.104/search?q=cache:mjm77t7oF9gJ:www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php%3Fid%3D16-10-040-i+touchstone+girard" REL="nofollow">this</A>.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the Ellul link. I'll check it out.<BR/><BR/>It's pan<I>en</I>theism, not pantheism. (I should have highlighted the significant syllable before.) There's a BIG difference. Panentheism is an Eastern Christian notion that basically says God is in the universe without being identified with the universe or any part of it. I coulda sworn I had explicitly used the term in a post, but can't seem to find it. The idea is implied in these two posts:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://realphysics.blogspot.com/2006/11/real-darwinist-agenda.htm" REL="nofollow">The Real Darwinist Agenda</A><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://realphysics.blogspot.com/2007/06/divine-materialism.html" REL="nofollow">A Divine Materialism</A><BR/><BR/>Also see "The Reality of Non-physical Causes" among the Noteworthy Posts at left. <BR/><BR/>Thanks for asking... I am making real strides toward Total World Domination, but right now I'm just anxious to get my paycheck, which is late. Will be further expanding the empire once my neighbor silences his dog enough to let my genius work properly.... ;)<BR/><BR/>LGLawrence Gagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01242322119143922513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-67902149023874007072008-03-07T12:58:00.000-05:002008-03-07T12:58:00.000-05:00LG,You're welcome. :)I have 5 children and it woul...LG,<BR/>You're welcome. :)<BR/>I have 5 children and it would be nice to keep it at that but we'll see.<BR/><BR/>I agree with Jack about myth also. I think you'd really enjoy Girard!<BR/><BR/>Thank you for the link for <I>Touchstone</I>, but I wasn't able to open it. Is there another url? I have read several overviews and some of his writing online and plan on ordering books eventually.<BR/><BR/>A website for Jaques Ellul is full of his writings and is found <A HREF="http://world.std.com/~jchat/ellul/web.htm" REL="nofollow">here</A> if you're interested. I found out about both of them from an internet friend.<BR/><BR/>Can you point me to the posts which include pantheism? I'll find them eventually because I plan on reading through all of your posts, but it would be nice to see what you have to say about it. <BR/><BR/>For the <I>He Lives</I> discussion you can just click on the site on your sidebar and on the right hand side of his page you can click on the comments and read it. It's not anything impressive or exhaustive, just a little discussion, but it was along the lines of what you were pointing out with the passages from Romans.<BR/><BR/>How are you coming along with world domination?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-53504154795981504482008-03-07T10:41:00.000-05:002008-03-07T10:41:00.000-05:00Jennifer,Thank you for your compliment. I appreci...Jennifer,<BR/><BR/>Thank you for your compliment. I appreciate your insight on Montessori and Waldorf: well said! (If I may ask, how many children do you have?)<BR/><BR/>You are right on Steiner. His ideas on the truly sub-human world are valuable, but he errs in making the entire world sub-human—most especially when he does so with our Creator. (For all his success in reconnecting with more classical views, Steiner was unfortunately very modern in putting man at the top of <I>Everything</I>.)<BR/><BR/>As far as myth is concerned, I think I agree with your friend Jack.<BR/><BR/>I've not read René Girard or Jaques Ellul. A theologian friend of mine that I hold in high regard enthusiastically recommends Girard. Btw, there's a decent exposition of Girard's central ideas <A HREF="http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=16-10-040-i" REL="nofollow">here</A> (whenever <I>Touchstone</I> get its archives back in running order—cached on Google in meantime).<BR/><BR/>My theologian friend is the one who introduced me to the valuable concept of panenthism, on which I've written here before.<BR/><BR/>Do you have a link to the <I>He Lives</I> discussion you mention?<BR/><BR/>LGLawrence Gagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01242322119143922513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-31632734577844731482008-03-06T03:40:00.000-05:002008-03-06T03:40:00.000-05:00This is a masterpiece. On David Heddle's blog, He...This is a masterpiece. On David Heddle's blog, <I>He Lives</I> a couple of gentlemen and I were having a similar discussion.<BR/><BR/>I share your view of Steiner. I actually have built our homeschooling philosophy, in the early years especially, upon some Montessori and some Waldorf, but the weakness of both is the tendency toward self as the center.<BR/><BR/>If I remember correctly, didn't Augustine say in his <I>Confessions</I> something to the tune of God is in all, but contained by nothing?<BR/><BR/>Steiner's ideas are more of a pantheism, or so it seems to me.<BR/>I find the fault in that view to be the assumption that the Spirit must be contained by all in order influence all. It seems, ideally, that the response of creation would be welcoming to the Spirit, but we who were the caretakers of creation began to block out the free roam of the Spirit by choosing to not respond humbly and rightly. <BR/><BR/>The "groaning" of creation would seem to indicate that it is trying to respond correctly but is being held back. <BR/><BR/>I appreciate the idealism of Steiner and am enthusiastic about his farming principles. I do acknowledge the inter-connectedness of all things, but I break off where the spirit is in everything as opposed to everything responding to the Spirit.<BR/><BR/>Do you agree with Kjos's view of myth? (I have no idea who Kjos is, but have been interested in myth and archetypes.) <BR/><BR/><I>Believers who were formerly oppressed by occult forces were transformed in spite of, not because of their pagan beliefs.</I><BR/><BR/>Isn't this the point? Jesus satisfied the redemption myth. <BR/><BR/>Have you read any of Rene' Girard or Jaques Ellul? I am just my literary journey with them so I am not endorsing them as much as exploring.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-37566867661021638332008-01-10T11:17:00.000-05:002008-01-10T11:17:00.000-05:00One of the central points of this blog is that phi...One of the central points of this blog is that philosophy is knowledge and not belief. Real philosophy is provable. Science, by comparison, is uncertain. See's today's post for elaboration.<BR/><BR/>One can always choose to disbelieve anything, no matter how at odds with reality disbelief may be.<BR/><BR/>LGLawrence Gagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01242322119143922513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-44176117063429571212008-01-07T18:08:00.000-05:002008-01-07T18:08:00.000-05:00This is the myspace science section. Science by de...This is the myspace science section. Science by defenition is based on proof. Like: E=MC^2<BR/><BR/>It's okay to talk about gods etc but keep it under believe or phylosophy. The world believes have great wisdom be it taoism budhism, chritianity of muslim or whatever. Many generation before we stood here on earth people have put wise words in stories. It's up to you if you take it literaly or if you would like to proove the unprovable. Yeah unproveable...<BR/><BR/>As anyone is always free to say <BR/>"i dont believe you"<BR/>Or to think of it differently.<BR/><BR/>There are as many views to god as there are humans, so respect all humans from every believe in a good way, and then you will also respect god. Thats alittle scienc logic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-90819147404745563082008-01-07T17:41:00.000-05:002008-01-07T17:41:00.000-05:00If not a spam post, then an extremely oblivious vi...If not a spam post, then an extremely oblivious visiting promoter.... I think it's properly called spam.<BR/><BR/>LGLawrence Gagehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01242322119143922513noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10944560.post-56530436019693333772008-01-06T19:59:00.000-05:002008-01-06T19:59:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com