Need Pantheism Samples
Lee Deavers
I would like some examples of it so I can explain the
metaphysics in comparison/contrast of Bible. For example the movie
"Star Wars", the song "Every Thing is Beautiful In Its On Way...",
What about some cartoons that is filled with pantheistic teaching?
Deavers
Taliesin of Earthstar
Out of the depths of their immense wisdom, on Tue, 22 Sep 1998
10:18:25 -0400, Lee Deavers <dev...@carol.net> intoned:
The items you mention are not really applicable in describing
Pantheism, IMHO, though they do reflect an esthetic that Pantheists
can, perhaps, appreiate. They are commercial entertainment -- nothing
more -- even though Star Wars does tend to reflect some measure of
the (stated) pantheistic philosophy of its creator, Mr. George Lucas.
As far as actual examples of pantheistic thought, I would suggest
looking towards actual people, rather than making logically
insupportable arguments against a particular song or movie. Saying
that such-and-such a song or movie is "pantheistic" may make for good
propoganda (no offense is intended, I use the denotative definition),
but does little for actually presenting a coherent view of the New
Age "Movement."(sic)
I would suggest the Watchmen Assoc. (I am not sure if the name is
accurate: the address is http://www.equip.org or
http://www.watchman.org) for an accurate presentation of some of the
ideas and ideologies that have been called "New Age." Do please
realise that the use of the word "Movement" is rather unsupportable --
"New Age" philosophies are no more a "Movement" than Wicca is.
Taliesin of Earthstar
HP, Earthstar Coven
Website under construction
jw <UNDERSCORE> eiler <AT> bellsouth <DOT> net
WARNING: Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to the
above address enters you into the agreement that you
accept a charge of $50 U.S. for proof-reading, grammar,
and spelling correction. This agreement does not apply
to requested information.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3a
Charset: cp850
iQEVAwUBNgfAUMgPAqIFAO5RAQEdOwgAlKB1iqi4yR5dgn+tBPh+FlGvV+HunmS1
v4XchXe9PKyLX1wrKQh78GMWD4atPQzub3Xmw2oY5CRYVPFZoD7kXbHubk1De1X3
eV/jsXp4MariVETVZQoDqVylR14hJZ/M6pi9uOS5vorhRkMG4vTgzTZ9Ss86noNf
iB+Ry+La7prira0P5Q6P3hZFdqaVegY/istwy+wv2uL/baLCdynKOIOtmEPghtPi
FZOmaw+ZRoq1CoHlQR5UInjvF9FZweBXalzgFT230SSZZ+YrCFE+0ZYGoN6+21K3
qG01QkWvw3alxzVl10vU2JgMZChzAdMREupOU6SgT+VJ2fJrXk5vjA==
=v+zG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
The DataRat
To understand New Age you must first put it in
perspective. That is, in the context of post-modernism
from which it was derived.
Post-modernism stands in contrast to, well, modernism.
"Modernism" is the Age of Reason when ideas and
ideologies clash with the hope that truth would prevail.
"Post-modernism offers a revolutionary approach to the study
of society: in questioning the validity of modern science and
the notion of objective knowledge, this movement discards
history, rejects humanism, and resists any truth claims."
From:
http://aaup.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/hfs.cgi/99/princeton/4943.ctl
Post-modernism rejects competition between ideas and
doctrines. It claims that everybody's truth is "true" -at
least for them.
http://www.hewett.norfolk.sch.uk/curric/soc/postmode/postm.htm
http://www.capo.org/premise/96/april/p960408.html
http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~mckerrow/post.htm
There is no wrong in the post-modern world, then, except
to say someone else is wrong. This is one of the fundamental
principles of the New Age movement.
While moderns (and ancients, too) read Scripture literally,
post-modernists have a concept called "metanarrative".
Meta-narrative is the intuitive (read: "subjective") interpretation
of the Bible. Scripture doesn't mean what it says. It means
what you want it to mean.
This explains how New Agers can quote passages out of
context from the Bible to support their pagan beliefs.
Afterall, why is the context of Scripture (the overall message)
important when any book means only what you want it to
mean ?
We see this in the Ebonics corruption of the English
language -where words don't have any objective, standard
meaning.
http://edu-ss10.educ.queensu.ca/~qbell/update/tint/postmodernism/post.html
( See the above "Teacher's Guide to Post-Modernism" site
for more on Ebonics as a post-modern phenomenon. )
And, as long as the Holy Bible doesn't contain any objective
truth, it's just as good -and no better- than any other religious
book. Hence you'll find New Agers quoting The Book of Thoth
in the alt.bible newsgroup !
Out of post-modernism we descend to relativism.
http://www.hewett.norfolk.sch.uk/curric/soc/postmode/post4.htm
The most pernicious example of which is moral relativism.
No absolute standards exist. What is good in one situation
may be bad in another. What is bad if I do it may be good
if you do it. Moral relativism is a principle tenet of New Age
philosophy.
Of course, ~this~ is NOT the morality of the God of the
Bible. New Agers therefore established their own replacement
god ...called Gaia.
"Gaia means earth mother and, globally, people have and are
realizing that if we don't look after her well-being, we as a
species will have failed and screwed-up."
From:
http://www.gaias-web.com/concepts/gaiacon.html
But -unlike the mean old exclusive God of Scripture, Gaia
embraces everyone and everything from Gothism to
environmentalism to vampire cults to militant homosexuality.
http://vampire.tamu.edu/camarilla/apocalypse/tribes/childrenofgaia00.html
http://www.channel.org.uk/writers/goddess/gaia.htm
http://capita.wustl.edu/ME567_Informatics/concepts/gaia.html
The bottom line for the New Age devotion to Gaia is earth-
worship:
http://www.protect-earth.com/whatis.html
Satan desires we worship him. But, in lieu of THAT, worship
of anything ~except~ the Lord God is almost as satisfactory.
DataRat
David K. Miller
wrote:
>While moderns (and ancients, too) read Scripture literally,
>post-modernists have a concept called "metanarrative".
Ancients like Philo (Jewish) and Origen (Christian) did not read
Scripture literally. Moderns like Thomas Jefferson (deist) and
Sigmund Freud (atheist) did read Scripture literally. It does not
appear that the distinction between reading Scripture literally and
reading it some other way is really a modern/post-modern distinction.
>Meta-narrative is the intuitive (read: "subjective") interpretation
>of the Bible. Scripture doesn't mean what it says. It means
>what you want it to mean.
Actually, post-modernism is suspicious of the validity of
meta-narratives, not the other way around. Meta-Narrative has nothing
to do with reading something subjectively. It has to do with an
overarching (or underlying, as the case may be) structure which gives
meaning to individual narratives beyond that which the individual
narratives inherently have. An example of a meta-narrative might be
the supposed Judeo-Christian ethic.
Streams of post-modernism which speak of a meta-narrative attempt to
"deconstruct" the hierarchical elements of a particular narrative in
order to understand which it is trying to say. This means to first
disconnect the narrative from any meta-narrative context.
>This explains how New Agers can quote passages out of
>context from the Bible to support their pagan beliefs.
>Afterall, why is the context of Scripture (the overall message)
>important when any book means only what you want it to
>mean ?
This has a bit (but only a small bit) more accurate understanding of
of post-moderism and meta-narrative. Post-moderism and New Agers
aren't synonymous, and I wouldn't paint all post-modernists as New
Agers. And, more to the point of the thread, not all pantheists are
New Agers. Spinoza is a bit too old to be one, having died centuries
ago.
David K. Miller
dkmi...@one.net
http://w3.one.net/~dkmiller
Internet Pager 205...@pager.mirabilis.com