inquiringmind Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 If the personal God of the Bible and the Book of Mormon isn't the cause of everything (Matter, Law, energy, Spirit, Intelligence) could there be some impersonal cause?Star Wars popularized the phrase "may The Force be with you," but could there actually be some truth to some of the ideas behind that phrase?Could there be some fundamental subconscious force (Spirit, Intelligence, or The Light of Truth?) behind matter, energy, biological life, and any conscious God/Gods ?
Senator Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 If the personal God of the Bible and the Book of Mormon isn't the cause of everything (Matter, Law, energy, Spirit, Intelligence) could there be some impersonal cause?Star Wars popularized the phrase "may The Force be with you," but could there actually be some truth to some of the ideas behind that phrase?Could there be some fundamental subconscious force (Spirit, Intelligence, or The Light of Truth?) behind matter, energy, biological life, and any conscious God/Gods ?As far as LDS theology is concerned? No
inquiringmind Posted January 17, 2012 Author Posted January 17, 2012 (edited) As far as LDS theology is concerned? NoSo ("far as LDS theology is concerned") there could be a personal God above God the Father (or even an infinite regress of such personal Gods), but no collective subconscious of the Gods?No underlying, unifying, ontological cause of existence?No ultimate reason there's something rather than nothing?Why would this be ruled out by Mormon Theology?How and where is it ruled out? Edited January 17, 2012 by inquiringmind
ERayR Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 If the personal God of the Bible and the Book of Mormon isn't the cause of everything (Matter, Law, energy, Spirit, Intelligence) could there be some impersonal cause?Star Wars popularized the phrase "may The Force be with you," but could there actually be some truth to some of the ideas behind that phrase?Could there be some fundamental subconscious force (Spirit, Intelligence, or The Light of Truth?) behind matter, energy, biological life, and any conscious God/Gods ?Not a subconscious one.
Senator Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 So ("far as LDS theology is concerned") there could be a personal God above God the Father (or even an infinite regress of such personal Gods), but no collective subconscious of the Gods?No underlying, unifying, ontological cause of existence?No ultimate reason there's something rather than nothing?Why would this be ruled out by Mormon Theology?How and where is it ruled out?LDS theology does not pin point to the cause or root of all existence. Merely that God and the intelligences and matter are co-eternal. And that God is in all things, through all things and hath power over all things.
dtorge26 Posted January 17, 2012 Posted January 17, 2012 One of the beauties of Mormon Doctrine is that it is perfectly consistent with the law of conservation of matter/energy -- matter/energy is never created nor destroyed, it just 'is'. And God is the great organizer of matter/energy. Mormon theology may place different terms like 'uncreated intelligence' or 'eternal spirit matter', but in my view they are ultimately just forms of energy. The really big question is where the energy comes from. Physics is still chasing the 'theory of everything' to help answer that question.
inquiringmind Posted January 17, 2012 Author Posted January 17, 2012 (edited) Not a subconscious one.If Man and God are the same species (and man has a subconscious), why not?Also, if Jung was right about man having a collective subconscious (and LDS Theology is right in viewing men, angels, and God as the same species), what might the collective subconscious of men, angels, and God be like?(And how might this correlate to a biocentric view of the universe?) Edited January 17, 2012 by inquiringmind
The Nehor Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Also, if Jung was right about man having a collective subconscious (and LDS Theology is right in viewing men, angels, and God as the same species), what might the collective subconscious of men, angels, and God be like?Jung's concept of the collective subconscious is mythical and ill-defined. If we can't figure out what the subconscious of our own species is we have no conception of what the subconscious of God would be like.That being said, I doubt God has a subconscious. Subconscious suggests something you are not conscious of which is incompatible with omniscience.
inquiringmind Posted January 18, 2012 Author Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) I doubt God has a subconscious. Subconscious suggests something you are not conscious of which is incompatible with omniscience.I know the times table, but I'm not thinking of it right now.It's stored in my subconscious. Edited January 18, 2012 by inquiringmind
The Nehor Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I know the times table, but I'm not thinking of it right now.It's stored in my subconscious.So the times tables are part of the collective subconscious?
inquiringmind Posted January 18, 2012 Author Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) So the times tables are part of the collective subconscious?Jung believed that in addition to our individual subconscious, we all share an external "collective subconscious."You called that concept "mythical and ill-defined," but I was replying to what you said hereI doubt God has a subconscious. Subconscious suggests something you are not conscious of which is incompatible with omniscience.Omniscience is the quality of being all-knowing, and you seem to equate being less then totally conscious of something with ignorance.I disagree..I know the times table, but I'm not thinking of it right now.I know it, but I'm not totally conscious of it at the moment.It's stored in my subconscious.That's not ignorance.It's a different kind of (subconscious) knowledge. Edited January 18, 2012 by inquiringmind
The Nehor Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 You saidOmniscience is the quality of being all-knowing, and you seem to be equating being less then totally conscious of something with ignorance.I disagree..I know the times table, but I'm not thinking of it right now.I know it, but I'm not totally conscious of it at the moment.It's stored in my subconscious.That's not ignorance.I disagree with this definition of subconscious. I do not think it is "everything you are not thinking about at the moment that you know"I disagree with this definition of the conscious mind. I do not think it is limited to "what you are thinking at this exact moment"
ERayR Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 If Man and God are the same species (and man has a subconscious), why not?Also, if Jung was right about man having a collective subconscious (and LDS Theology is right in viewing men, angels, and God as the same species), what might the collective subconscious of men, angels, and God be like?(And how might this correlate to a biocentric view of the universe?)I don't believe God has a subconscious. I believe that before him all things are present. I also believe that when we are resurected that part of our conciousness will be (unlocked,restored) and we will become one with them.
DarkScythe Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I do believe in the force and it is not limited to our religion. The Force in simple terms, is energy focused in useable form. In Eastern Traditions, Chi is the energy flow that all life produces. Western Tradition has their theories. As of the movies, Jedi and Sith blend Western and Eastern tradition in a warrior monk archtype. 1
KevinG Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I am ashamed at the clear lack of understanding about Star Wars doctrine and the nature of the universe...The Force is generated by a physical presence called Midicholorians (a microscopic symbniotic life form).
DarkScythe Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 it is not the physical presence of Midicholorians. It is more like a cell phone to the force. To DaddyG, there are plenty of Force Imbued weapons, tailsmens and amulet within the Star Wars. Also Within various Force Traditions, it is not unheard Force users using Crystals and other training aides to amp their force connections. Naga Sadow, a Well known Sith Sorcerer, was known for his love for Focusing Sith Amulets to boost his deep connection to the dark side of the force. Within the Sith Order there is a deep arcane Tradition called the Sith Sorcerer and Emperor Palpatine was consider the Ideal Sith Sorcerer. His master, Plagueis is another Sith Sorcerer as well. 1
KevinG Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 it is not the physical presence of Midicholorians. It is more like a cell phone to the force. To DaddyG, there are plenty of Force Imbued weapons, tailsmens and amulet within the Star Wars. Also Within various Force Traditions, it is not unheard Force users using Crystals and other training aides to amp their force connections. Naga Sadow, a Well known Sith Sorcerer, was known for his love for Focusing Sith Amulets to boost his deep connection to the dark side of the force. Within the Sith Order there is a deep arcane Tradition called the Sith Sorcerer and Emperor Palpatine was consider the Ideal Sith Sorcerer. His master, Plagueis is another Sith Sorcerer as well.I am outgeeked!! I surrender to your magnificent mastery of all things Star Wars. -I remain your faithful Padawan
RadioFreeDeath Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I have always wondered if there is some sort of unifying essence to the universe, but as a pragmatist I don't know if i really care. Even if such a thing exists I don't think it would be an object worthy of worship. Nor do I think it would contribute to my ability to interact with the universe or God or anything like that. I guess my question is what would be gained in our understanding.
KevinG Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 In all seriousness I have no problem finding out that some mechanism that God uses to communicate with me could be some refined physical source or mechanics of space/time.
altersteve Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I find your lack of faith disturbing....LOL I'm sorry, I had to.
inquiringmind Posted January 18, 2012 Author Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) I have always wondered if there is some sort of unifying essence to the universe, but as a pragmatist I don't know if i really care. Even if such a thing exists I don't think it would be an object worthy of worship. Nor do I think it would contribute to my ability to interact with the universe or God or anything like that. I guess my question is what would be gained in our understanding.I think only a person could be worthy of worship, so I'd have to agree that a pantheistic "Force" wouldn't be a worthy object of worship.But Mormon Theology makes much more sense to me if Theism's personal God, and Pantheism's impersonal God aren't as mutually exclusive as I always thought they were.(As it would at least suggest that there's something more than a happy accident connecting our personal God with the pre-existing material He has to work with,) Edited January 18, 2012 by inquiringmind
KevinG Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I find your lack of faith disturbing....LOL I'm sorry, I had to.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsyzRUKwgng
DarkScythe Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 there is a interesting connection between twins in which I have seen happen. Certain locations and hotel rooms have always been a certain flavor. Intense emotions and memories often leave imprints in some locations.
altersteve Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsyzRUKwgngNow I want to go all nerd on everyone and watch all six movies in chronological order.Who's with me?
mfbukowski Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 So ("far as LDS theology is concerned") there could be a personal God above God the Father (or even an infinite regress of such personal Gods), but no collective subconscious of the Gods?No underlying, unifying, ontological cause of existence?No ultimate reason there's something rather than nothing?Why would this be ruled out by Mormon Theology?How and where is it ruled out?Nothing is ruled out.We don't know everything- in fact we know very little. All that is "doctrine" is what we do know- but all these other questions/ideas, as long as they don't conflict with known doctrine/scripture - you get to be inspired and choose your own interpretation.Another way of saying this is that eveything that is doctrinal about God is a very small subset of all that could be said, imagined, or known. 1
Recommended Posts