For the context of the following comments and to reply, please click on the DATE/TIME above them.
[Responding to the blog post by Ryan Patrick McLaughlin on The Evangelical Pulpit called “The Real Theological Challenge of Evolution”.]
If the primordial “I Am”, the self that is God, is in truth the only self. And our”sin” but the confusion that our sense of “I” is different from it’s infinite origin. Something to be owned. Then all pleasure and pain, birth and death is not what it seems.
axelbeingcivil – “So that direct line of unambiguous communication that existed didn’t get cut off by anything Adam and Eve did; nothing they did limited God’s power in any way. Assuming you take that story literally, then, the only solution is that, for some reason, God chooses not to speak to us clearly and unambiguously. The blame for this lack of communication, therefore, cannot be placed upon humanity’s shoulders.“
Consider that we have not been able to let go of the “something else” that came with eating the apple. And, that “something else”, perpetuates our confusion of identity. It would be that obstruction which prevents communication.
Lack of understanding on our part leaves God outside of creation and ourselves outside of the Creator.
The mind created abstraction of itself, bending all to it’s finite will.
axelbeingcivil – “Sounds like you’re familiar with Kabbalah. Are you suggesting a non-dualistic relationship between humanity and the divine? If so, that suggests a very non-interventionist deity, one not at all compatible with Biblical notions, since an intervening deity could ostensibly fix this problem easily.“
The non-dualistic understanding is what has been lost. Un-losing it is enlightenment.
The term relationship sums things up. Experience is relativity.
The underlying truth of Singularity though, is eternally in play. The driving force.
Without enlightenment God is experience. Cause and Effect. Intervention. Change.
With enlightenment experience is God. Being. Knowing. One Self.
[Responding to Martin Hutton]
We exist and so have been created.
The nature of that process is always worth our attention.
Saying or assuming more, is always provisional.
But life is for living, and we will fill it with meaning and understanding.
The process by which we exist compels us to do so.
axelbeingcivil – “Moreover, plenty of suggestions are possible that require only minimal divine intervention to ensure significantly improved quality of life. For example, explaining germ theory, or mathematics or the scientific method, instead of letting humans muddle about for eons without basic medicine or rigorous tools for study.“
You seem unaware of the pre-science origins of our and every other life forms, autoimmune system.
Or, of literally countless logistical, communicative, reproductive, and cognitive adaptations. All before the recent invention/discovery by humans, of mathematics, and the scientific method.
Nature is playing with a full deck while man, it is clear, is not.
Some caution against hubris is advised.
axelbeingcivil – “The immune system we have been bestowed with is far from perfect. If it were, we wouldn’t need things like antibiotics or vaccines. The 33% mortality rates for first births at some periods are testament to this, as is the in-some-cases-total mortality rates when faces with Yrsinia pestis. Likewise, what few diseases we do have a relatively good innate immunity to, we only developed by the mass death of our ancestors.
Nature’s deck is full, but she’s not playing (just) for us, and her game is ruthless and brutal.“
But your version of “perfection” is the imperfect version.
Lopsided and bounded by a relative perspective.
Without understanding Nature as a perfect entirety, and our own selves, only seemingly outside of that entirety, we live by opinions and attachments.
But what is more true? Ruthless and Brutal or, evenly invested and perfectly so?