~Speaking of Seth~

Hi Sena, Hi All,

When defining God, some people use the term "transcendent", in their definition, which means something like God is above everything. For some this also means that God outside or external of everything.

Furthermore, when defining God, some people use the term "immanent", which means something like, God is within everything.


The word "monotheism" in and of itself, does not necessarily imply that God is either "transcendent" or "immanent".  This was the point that I was trying to make in my last reply, where I said that it was my belief that monotheism only stands for "a belief in one God".


Again, I do know and understand that for some people "monotheism" automatically implies that God is also "transcendent". However, I imagine that for some people "monotheism" may instead imply that God is also "immanent" instead.


-jbseth

Quote from: Sena
jbseth, the reason that the discussion about monotheism is important is because a belief in monotheism has led to war and terrorism. The problem is that if I am a monotheist, "my" God is not the same as "your" God. The 9/11 attack was because Bin Laden believed that it was only his God who was the One True God.

Hi Sena, Hi All,

I view this very differently.


jbseth, the reason that the discussion about monotheism is important is because a belief in monotheism has led to war and terrorism.

I'd say is that, in some cases "religion" (not monotheism) is the reason for war and terrorism while in others it's not.

For example, I'd say that WW2 was largely, "not" a war that had much of anything to do with religion. Hitler's Germany attacked Poland and as a result of this, both Brittan and France declared war on Germany.  That I'm aware of, all 4 of those countries were predominantly Christian.  Furthermore, when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, this also had nothing to do with "religion". It was more of an issue of Japanese military aggressiveness and their desire for expansion.


The problem is that if I am a monotheist, "my" God is not the same as "your" God.

Not necessarily, I think you've overlooking the situations that have occurred were terrorism and war have occur between peoples who have the same God.  Here I'm talking about examples like: 1) the British and the IRA, and 2) the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980's. In both cases, same God and same Religion, but very different interpretation of those religions (Protestant vs Catholic) and (Shi-ite vs Sunni).


The 9/11 attack was because Bin Laden believed that it was only his God who was the One True God.

Yes. I do agree with you here. I do believe Bin Laden's religious beliefs played into a part of this. I know that it is a common belief within Islam that there is no God but one God and this one God is "Allah".  I have no doubt that Bin Laden may have viewed the US, as perhaps, the "Great Satan". However, I believe that largely what he fostered was a religious fanaticism; not unlike some Christian Fundamentalists.

-jbseth

Quote from: Sena

Quote from: Michael Sternbach
Exactly! How is this not a form of monotheism?

Michael, if Bruno had been preaching monotheism, he would not have been burnt at the stake. Believing in a World Soul, even if it is just one soul, is not monotheism.

Sena,

Bruno was burnt for more than one reason, but yes, his peculiar view of God and the universe was certainly a  central accusation.

QuoteThe concept of "transcendence" is essential to monotheism, transcendence meaning that God is above and separate from the world.

Ah, seems like we are finally getting somewhere! 

You simply have a different understanding of what "monotheism" implies. The way I used the term in my previous posts, I did not go by any "official" definition, I simply looked at what's actually in that word. I guess this has to do with my attempt to get at the bottom of and to revise my whole terminology at an earlier stage of my life. 

However, I really appreciate that jbseth showed that my interpretation was actually "legit".

Seems like we are just debating over semantics, after all.

But hey, it's nice that we could talk about it! 

Quotehttps://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100206456

Quote from: Sena

Quote from: jbseth
But I don't know that we're both going to come to an agreement on this; I don't think we necessarily have to; and that's OK to.

jbseth, the reason that the discussion about monotheism is important is because a belief in monotheism has led to war and terrorism. The problem is that if I am a monotheist, "my" God is not the same as "your" God. The 9/11 attack was because Bin Laden believed that it was only his God who was the One True God.

Sena,

I can't imagine that anybody sophisticated enough to read Seth would be inclined to wage warefare against those who don't acknowledge their own idea of God.

The notion that only one's own culture's view of the universal spirit could be valid, let alone to believe that there was a need to make it prevail against another culture's view - as though we were members of opposing soccer teams - is incredibly narrow minded and chauvinistic to me.

One day it will be understood by mankind that all its different religions are attempts - or contributions! - to fathom that that transcends ALL times and cultures!

Quote from: Michael Sternbach
I can't imagine that anybody sophisticated enough to read Seth would be inclined to wage warefare against those who don't acknowledge their own idea of God.

Michael, I agree it is unlikely that Bin Laden was a Seth reader!

Quote from: Michael Sternbach
I can't imagine that anybody sophisticated enough to read Seth would be inclined to wage warefare against those who don't acknowledge their own idea of God.

Hi Michael, Hi All,

I would have thought the same thing too, prior to going this forum, about 2 years ago.


However, having seen what I've seen here in this forum, as surprising as this may be, I'm going to have to disagree with you here on this.

I can definitely say that I'm pretty sure there are some Seth readers who would wage war against those who didn't acknowledge and agree their ideas.

Why do I say this? 


Because, I think that some of us here, have actually met some of these people, in the past, here in this forum.



Another thing that I've witnessed here is this, there is a huge (and I mean huge) amount of variation, in the ideas and beliefs expressed by all the various "Seth" readers. 



-jbseth

I see. Seems like there are crackpots everywhere.   

Quote from: jbseth
"When you choose not to think that negative thought, and you replace it with a positive one instead, you aren't just shifting your own reality.

Thank you so much Deb for sharing this with us. Such an inspiring quote that you posted and an important reminder - that we shift the Earth reality, not just our own. I added the book to my "Read Soon" list. Looking forward to the enjoyment.

I am sure we will build the world D. Church mentions - full of trust, love and light. And during our lifetime too. I imagine there will be great changes within the next 5-10 years.

It looks very much - from what's going on - that in a lot of areas of life process went to the point of no return and beyond. I doubt any of you - who have any variety of office/corporate/working life will want to return to the same. Very limiting existence.

There have been (and still are) a lot of areas where our freedom is taken away. Where we are overregulated.