Pantheistic incarnation

[saladfingers]

Is it conceivable?

An Anthropomorphic incarnation obviously makes sense. But what of a pantheistic incarnation? Or a Panentheistic incarnation?

Discurse.

Oh, and by the way, since we spoke last, I have embraced a hybrid of Zoroastrianism/ Calvinism with a hint of Buddha lovin. :pray:

[saladfingers]

OK, let me make it a little simpler for you:

Christians believe that the essense of their Anthropomorphic God was distilled into the fleshly body of Jesus Christ. And even though it's a mystery, a metaphysical enigma, as to how this divine metamorphosis took place, it still somehow "makes sense" to Christians.

This is fine and dandy with me. I have no problem with simply leaving inexplainable things alone and embracing such mysteries...it lends life more enchantment to do so.

But by the same token, why couldn't Jesus be the incarnation of a pantheistic essense?(other than "the B-I-B-L-E don't say so")

[FreezBee]

But by the same token, why couldn't Jesus be the incarnation of a pantheistic essense?(other than "the B-I-B-L-E don't say so")

A pantheistic essense? If God is everything, then everything is filled wíth the essense of God -- Jesus wouldn't be anything peculiar in a pantheistic world.

Obviously, only a transcendental God enables the mixture of the divine and the wordly.

In short: I am unsure about, what you are really asking. Please, if possible, elaborate.

Thanks in advance.


- FreezBee

[saladfingers]

A pantheistic essense? If God is everything, then everything is filled wíth the essense of God -- Jesus wouldn't be anything peculiar in a pantheistic world.

Obviously, only a transcendental God enables the mixture of the divine and the wordly.

In short: I am unsure about, what you are really asking. Please, if possible, elaborate.

Thanks in advance.


- FreezBee


Why couldn't a pantheistic universe have several parts, like Jehovah is coposed of 3 parts, yet He is One? So a Universe could be a pantheistic trinity, and a part of that trinity incarnate itself? Silly notion? Yes. But why is this idea any more outlandish than Jehovah, being an anthropomorphic trinity, incarnating?

Or a different arrangement could be "Unitarian" pantheistic universe where everything is indeed of ONE essense. An incarnation of this would indeed be peculiar by virtue of it's incarnation and it communicated to mankind with words and deeds in the flesh.

So again, why is this idea any more crazy than the incarnation of Jesus? I am not trying to refute anything here. I am just investigating the logic behind the Christian notion of incarnation. Why is it a neccesity that God be apart from creation? Why is it neccesary that He must be SUPER natural, in order for Him to complete the work that He wrought through Jesus?

Thanks for your response BTW!

[smaneck]

I
Oh, and by the way, since we spoke last, I have embraced a hybrid of Zoroastrianism/ Calvinism with a hint of Buddha lovin. :pray:

That's a hard one to pull off. Zoroastrians are pretty big on free will and do not stress God's omnipotence as Calvin does.

[Bernie]

Why couldn't a pantheistic universe have several parts, like Jehovah is coposed of 3 parts, yet He is One? So a Universe could be a pantheistic trinity, and a part of that trinity incarnate itself? Silly notion? Yes. But why is this idea any more outlandish than Jehovah, being an anthropomorphic trinity, incarnating?
This is an interesting idea, and off the top of my head I can't think of any reason why this would be any less "outlandish" [from a human point of view] than the Christian paradigm. I've often thought of fallen mankind as a sort of "loving wound" in God's essence anyway. The idea of the Trinity itself as three distinct aspects of a greater pantheism would at least explain how evil could be confined to a single God-aspect, the material world and that portion of the spiritual realm which makes it tick. as re human spirit. Keeping the infection of evil in the fleshly (Christ) realm would imo solve the problem of contaminating God--as the the purely spiritual (Father, Holy Spirit)--and keeping Him sufficienly pure, sufficiently "God".

At the same time, this seems to eliminate the Manichaean denial of the infinite perfection of God and its notion of two equal and opposite powers. As long as God (the whole) remains pure in the spiritual realm, the evil which He lovingly allows to infect Him in this reality alone can never be His equal.

So again, why is this idea any more crazy than the incarnation of Jesus?
For the same reason I always come back to the foundational principles of Christianity: because God seems imo to have revealed Himself anthropomorphically via a set of texts authored by spiritually inspired humans, and in this revelation He choose not to get into the whole pantheistic thing. I have no problem assuming His power and knowledge is sufficiently superior to mine to warrant putting my faith in the idea that the revelation He gave is for good and sundry enough reasons to hang on to it.