Thanks, Bryan. Was not aware of Ziporyn, and now will read him. Wonder if he's aware of Shaftesbury's near-athiest conception of God as being better left out of imagination than imagined as in any way petty, wrathful, cruel, or otherwise imperfect -- perhaps a third way on the God/Not-God question.
Thanks Whit! Would love to hear what you think if you listen. I wasn't aware of Shaftesbury'view, but I like that take. I've been meaning to respond to another of your comments, which I thought about for a long time! Thanks for responding and looking forward to continuing the discussion.
The initial version of Shaftebury's first essay, published anonymously in Amsterdam while he was part of the aristocracy-in-exile there, makes this case most clearly. (I was lucky to find a reproduction of that original version in the Brooklyn Library; haven't found it in current publication.) A later revision appears as the first section of Characteristicks, where in several subsequent sections he defends against the charge of atheism the initial version encouraged from some. His identification there of God with Nature resembles Taoism -- at least to my eye. Yet he claimed to remain a Christian, with apparent sincerity.
If only the "Christians" worshiping Trump in America were not fascinated by the image of a God of Vengeance, who would rather societies disregard Nature, or worse, as if Creation were a mistake. At the Realisation Festival I was relieved, even mildly suprised to meet Christians of the mystical sort for whom Nature and God are a unity, not unlike the Taoist's Tian, or "Heaven" in its unity with Di, Earth.
Thanks, Bryan. Was not aware of Ziporyn, and now will read him. Wonder if he's aware of Shaftesbury's near-athiest conception of God as being better left out of imagination than imagined as in any way petty, wrathful, cruel, or otherwise imperfect -- perhaps a third way on the God/Not-God question.
Thanks Whit! Would love to hear what you think if you listen. I wasn't aware of Shaftesbury'view, but I like that take. I've been meaning to respond to another of your comments, which I thought about for a long time! Thanks for responding and looking forward to continuing the discussion.
The initial version of Shaftebury's first essay, published anonymously in Amsterdam while he was part of the aristocracy-in-exile there, makes this case most clearly. (I was lucky to find a reproduction of that original version in the Brooklyn Library; haven't found it in current publication.) A later revision appears as the first section of Characteristicks, where in several subsequent sections he defends against the charge of atheism the initial version encouraged from some. His identification there of God with Nature resembles Taoism -- at least to my eye. Yet he claimed to remain a Christian, with apparent sincerity.
If only the "Christians" worshiping Trump in America were not fascinated by the image of a God of Vengeance, who would rather societies disregard Nature, or worse, as if Creation were a mistake. At the Realisation Festival I was relieved, even mildly suprised to meet Christians of the mystical sort for whom Nature and God are a unity, not unlike the Taoist's Tian, or "Heaven" in its unity with Di, Earth.