[MD] False Messiah

[David M]

DMB

What do you understand by the word transcendental?

I would say, for example, that the world is a transcendental
concept. It is certainly not something that can be experienced as
a whole. The way it appears in experience is always partial,
the whole is largely absent but makes partial and constantly
changing appearances. It is a postulated idea, as Pirsig says,
and a good one, but nonetheless transcending experience as
does most of the cosmology we need to construct to explain
existence to ourselves. Also the vast sphere of the possible
that is not actual transcends any mere fragment we may experience.
Yet is crucial to make sense of existence, to make sense of agency,
emergence, mathematics, etc. As for supernatural, it would be pretty
easy to say DQ is supernatural and leaves the natural (SQ) in its
wake. I am not very impressed by arguments based on scare words.

DM


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "david buchanan" <dmbuchanan at hotmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 2:28 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] False Messiah


> Scott said:
> I notice the only theist you quote is Tillich. And he, of course, is a 
> good
> example of what I am trying to say, namely that theists are changing away
> from the sort of stuff that the rest of these quotes are objecting to. 
> Given
> that Tillich is probably the most influential Protestant theologian 
> (except,
> perhaps, Barth) of the 20th century, I don't think one can say this is an
> isolated sentiment. So I repeat: theism is changing, you're not.
>
> dmb says:
> Actually, the Tillich quote is critical of "theism" as I'm using the term.
> (Belief in a transcendent or supernatural creator) As I understand the 
> term,
> he's not a theist and is on the same page with Campbell and Wilber in this
> criticism of theism. In fact, Wilber was quoting Tillich and relating that
> to Campbell's definition of this problem. (That part is pasted below.)
> Notice how he is contrasting immediacy and "real religious experience" 
> with
> the "interventions of God" and "the supernaturalistic heritage".  That's 
> the
> difference between mysticism and theism, between living truth and dead
> dogma. I think that's what Tillich, Wilber, Campbell, Pirsig are saying, 
> as
> well as many others that I didn't quote but will if you like. I think
> Tillich is on my side of this argument against theism in saying that God 
> is
> not supernatural or other and that Thou Art That. The idea here is that,
> against theism, you are not supposed to be granted salvation by a
> supernatural act of divine intervention or the deeds of the unique
> historical incarnation of God, but rather to experience a realization, to 
> be
> the Christ, to commit that central heresy against theism. I don't know.
> Maybe Tillich has to call himself a theist in order to keep his job or 
> maybe
> the term means something else to him, but as I see it, he's an 
> anti-theist.
> Do you think this might be a way in? Shall I use your approval of Tillich 
> as
> wedge to crack the notion that my criticisms of theisim are unfounded? 
> Does
> Wilber's use of Tillich and Campbell to make this point make my sources 
> more
> persuasive. Did you know that Campbell translated the Upanishads and 
> edited
> the Portable Jung? Did you know Wilber was the most translated American
> thinker (something like 20 languages) and you can get a Ph.D. in his work
> from places like Harvard? My point? These guys aren't bad. They don't suck
> too much. Dismissing their perspectives outright seems a bit unreasonable.
> Anyway, here's where Tillich came together with two of my favorite
> thinkers....
>
> Paul Tillich A HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN THOUGHT p374 (as its quoted by Wilber)
>>"Things like miraculous interventions of God, special inspirations and
>>revelations are beneath the level of real religious experience. Religion
>>itself is IMMEDIACY [by which he means precisely the immediacy of basic
>>Wakefulness or pure Presence, which is Spirit IN us, as Tillich himself
>>makes very clear]. The supernaturalistic heritage about the suspension of
>>the laws of nature for the sake of miracles collapses completely."
>>
>>All these Ken Wilber quotes come from SEX, ECOLOGY, SPIRITUALITY: The
>>Spirit
>>of Evolution, and these can be found on pages 667-9:
>>"Both Tillich and I are referring to the mythic components of 
>>Christianity,
>>not to its psychic and subtle level direct realizaton, many of which
>>approached a pure nondual understanding (as we saw with Teresa and 
>>Eckhart)
>>Rather, it is the translation downward into 'mythic dissociation'
>>(precisely
>>as defined by Campbell) that I am here discussing, becasue this mythic
>>dissociation, particularly in regard to the Incarnation and Ascension, 
>>came
>>to thoroughly define essential Christianity, divorced it from other
>>religions, and set an entire tone for the culture it would subsequently
>>define. God created this world, but our final destiny can be found nowhere
>>in this world (the classical Ascending ideal of mythic dissociation)."
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now!
> http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/