Personal or Impersonal, a "Person" or just "personal"........

A catholic scholar, Heinrich Dumoulin, has written.....

Whether, on its deepest ground, being is personal or impersonal, is something that humans will never be able to plumb by their rational powers. Here we face a decision which one makes according to one's own tradition and upbringing, and still more according to one's faith and experience. The Christian sees ultimate reality revealed in the personal love of God as shown on Christ, the Buddhist in the silence of the Buddha. Yet they agree on two things: that the ultimate mystery is ineffable, and that it should be manifest to human beings. The inscription on a Chinese stone figure of the Buddha, dated 746, reads......

"The Higest truth is without image.
If there were no image at all, however, there would be no way for truth to be manifested.
The highest principle is without words.
But if there were not words at all, how could principle possibly be revealed?"

To a certain extent, this is to go off at a bit of a tangent from the usual "God or no God" debate. More to consider the nature of God, or the nature of Reality-as-is.

As I see it, there is a great deal of difference between believing God to be a "person", with that of understanding God to be "personal". As "personal", one can recognise that ultimately Divinity is ineffable, yet also recognise that "He" will inevitably express "Himself" within persons, and as such "personal". (This not to say that "He" would not be expressing "Himself" in other forms than the purely human)

For me, God as a "person" can only result in God becoming an idol of the mind, a distinct entity, a "being" among other "beings" and as such, void of true Divinity, true reality, which is to be - at least in my own eyes, the ground of all reality.

Thomas Merton - in his own all inclusive way, and influenced by the Christian mystical tradition and his own meditative and contemplative experience - speaks of the movement of the spirit from an "I-Thou" relationship with the divine to one where the "self" is not clung to at all in the sense of an "I", that to cling too tenaciously to the "self" and its own fulfilment would guarantee that there would be no fulfilment at all.

Anyway, while I can well anticipate certain answers to these questions from certain quarters, I would appreciate the understanding, views and insights of many others of you. Please.

I suppose this is their way of explaining who or what God is and I agree that the perseption is personal.
I also agree that one has to let go of preconceptions concerning God and one's devotion to self in order to discover the true nature of God. Life can be paradoxical in this way.
However, God may manifest itself differently in all of us or in the same way. I do not know since I can only speak for myself on this.
There is also the possibility that we all travel on different paths to get to the same place of understanding. Some of us continue on that path, some just stop and sit down.

I guess it has to depend on how you define "person" or "personal".

Definitions taken from Dictionary.com.

person [pur-suhn] ?
noun
1. a human being, whether man, woman, or child: The table seats four persons.
2. a human being as distinguished from an animal or a thing.
3. Sociology . an individual human being, especially with reference to his or her social relationships and behavioral patterns as conditioned by the culture.
4. Philosophy . a self-conscious or rational being.
5. the actual self or individual personality of a human being: You ought not to generalize, but to consider the person you are dealing with.

per·son·al? ?[pur-suh-nl] Show IPA
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or coming as from a particular person; individual; private: a personal opinion.
2. relating to, directed to, or intended for a particular person: a personal favor; one's personal life; a letter marked “Personal.”
3. intended for use by one person: a personal car.
4. referring or directed to a particular person in a disparaging or offensive sense or manner, usually involving character, behavior, appearance, etc.: personal remarks.
5. making personal remarks or attacks: to become personal in a dispute.

comparing those two the one that very definitely applies to God is definition 4 of Person.

God is most definitely self-aware and highly rational. He has a definite personality, which He wants us to get to know. So in that sense he is very much a Person, albeit not a human one. After all, as the bible tells us, we were created in the image of God and His son, and since it cannot be a physical image it can only be a mental / emotional image.

That is one of the many reasons Jesus came to earth, to show us, in human form, what God's personality is made up of.

According to Jesus there is only one path, and that accessed by a narrow and cramped gate which few will find. Why would Christ say that if it were not true?

The verse you speak of is open to various interpretations. The verse "I am the way , the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by me" is found in St John's Gospel, and in the context of that Gospel, Christ is speaking as the "Eternal Word", though Whom ALL things are made, the Light that lights all who come into the world.

Therefore, ALL will come to the "Father" through Him.

Such an interpretation is perfectly in keeping with the theology of countless Christians.

It is narrow, of course. Many are unable to think that they can be happy with a happiness that has no price tag on it. Again, many think they must earn their own "salvation" by Bible Study, by understanding it correctly by comparing one translation with another, by searching it daily (for in it they THINK they have life, just as the Pharisees did)

The way of Grace is indeed narrow. Yet eventually, the Divine will find "His" way into each heart, each way the "narrow way" of that unique individual.

Call this "apostate" teaching if you like, so you can once again avoid confronting it and actually questioning your own beliefs. But - once again - as you have admitted you have not looked at the links I offered regarding the very nature of apostasy within the Christian Tradition, you are not really the one to know, are you?

There is no reason to believe Christ said that. But if he did, isn't it true that many people are struggling with the issue of finding the right path. Including yourself.
Some think they have found the right path, and maybe they have, but that doesn't mean their journey has ended.

Thank you Biker, an intelligent contribution.

And yet, in most ways you disagree with that assessment, or you have said you do. That contribution is based on everything I believe and goes very much against what Merton and co teach, and yes I know more about that than you would ever give me credit for.

Biker, I said it was intelligent, and more in the sense that more often than not you only choose to seek to undermine anything I may have said. Agreeing is another matter.

And really, I try to make no assessment of what you may or may not know.

Yet as far as Merton as a human being is concerned, having read far more than one biography of his life, all of his five volumes of letters, over half of his daily journals (Published in seven volumes), and many of his books, as well as very many essays.......I doubt you know his life and faith as well as I do. Your constant condemnation of him does little - in fact nothing - to commend your own faith to me, when it leads you to condemn a human being you know very little of, a human being whose love of, and reliance upon, God, is evident in virtually every page of his published works.

Aye, but which god? the true one or the one who appears as an angel of light and makes ones such as Merton appear the same? If he didn't vary from Christ's teachings I may agree with you, but he does and that in itself makes him Apostate and condemned.

I have wondered if this was the case, but now I know, you are letting your heart rule your heard,` and as Jeremiah says "The heart is treacherous, who can know it" a warning from the bible you have ignored at your peril.

That is why the bible talks of wisdom being needed and wisdom resides in the head, not the heart. It is also why it talks of knowledge being vital, and that too is a matter of the head and not the heart.

Jesus spoke of needing to know the scriptures as well as the power of God which is only revealed to us through the bible, at first anyway.

Matthew 22:29 But Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.
Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as angels in heaven.
Matthew 22:31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
Matthew 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not [the God] of the dead, but of the living

Oh look, the NKJV has added [the God] in brackets, are they trying to prove something? After all you say that is why the JW's do things like that.

Anyone who does not know the scriptures and their power is making the same mistake the Sadducees made. I guess that is why they were so sad you see.

If Merton and his cronies knew scripture they could not support the pagan trinity teaching.

I thought you said you were going to take a break, lol, not keeping to your word again tariki?

Biker, as far as taking a break, really, have you no sense of humour? In saying this I do not deny any indecision in the past - I admit to it, it is a failing of mine - but since admitting such I have in effect been a little facetious in mentioning "breaks" or whatever. I will continue to post as and when, as the mood takes me, with whatever breaks in between seem appropriate.

Really Biker, using such phrases as "Merton and his cronies" merely demeans you, and the faith you claim as your own.

I have no longer the will to argue with you point by point, but will only draw a broad picture.

You state - again and again - that the Bible is the sole arbiter of spiritual truth. You are not satisfied with saying that such is your own faith, you instead imply that all other Faiths are wrong, and what's more, that it is proven, that this is conclusive, that such is the definitive view.

From such you then claim that only your own understanding of "inspiration" is the correct one, all others erroneous. Then, that only your own take on the Bible is correct, and claim explicitly that this you have "proven", that it is "irrefutable." So you are 7,000,000 others are the sole possessors of God's Truth in our world.

Yet more than this, you claim that no one has any excuse not to see this - this you have claimed explicitly. No excuse! That all it needs to recognise such truth as you proclaim is a loving heart, an open heart, an honest heart.............thereby implying that all others in this world have no such heart themselves.

I do not think I have misrepresented you in any way. Others here can judge for themselves, if they have any interest.

Biker, in fact you have proven nothing. The actual core of your argument seems always the same.......I am right, another says something different, therefore they must be wrong. So be it.

I believe in a Reality that reveals Himself/Herself/Itself in all places at all times, that the heart of such Reality is Love/Mercy/Grace. My own heart is gladdened when I see that such a reality is in fact at the heart of every faith, and gladdened again when I see evidence of such love and mercy and grace in the most unlikely of places. I would never dare to equate the parameters set by my own understanding with the extent of Mercy in our world. I see it as extending to you.

You resist the reality of Grace, a love and mercy that accepts you just as you are, irrespective of being "right" about anything. Why you prefer and seek to justify yourself in the way you do seems tragic to me, and is far from the "easy yoke" of Christ; and your advice to us all to begin pouring over multiple translations of a book, comparing one with another, is - in my eyes - void of any genuine spirituality, and void again of the childlike heart that Christ called for us to have.

But, your choice.

We each have to walk our path and speak accordingly.

And just a further word, regarding "heart" and "mind", and which may or may not rule...............there is much and I mean much - in the Buddhist texts - both Theravada and Mahayana - related to this, and often Buddhist teachings relate to the mind/heart, a totality. I am always seeking to learn about myself, and find much in Buddhism is a good guide, especially when grounded in contemplation and meditation.

Of course I have a sense of humour, but I have enough consideration for other people's feelings to let them know when I am joking by marking it with a "lol". Of course I also use it when I am lightheartedly serious but I hope my wording makes that plain. Evidently you do not, so much for love of fellow man.

Lol you keep on trying to make this personal to me don'pt you. It is not MY faith, it is the faith of Jesus and the Apostles, I just happen to share it. Again, I do not claim the faith as my own, and I am more than happy to share it with it's progenitor.

My faith is very much the easy yoke, however Jesus never said it would be one that was easy to carry. An easy yoke in those days was one that fitted well and made the act of carrying milk pails etc. a lot easier. If that were not the true understanding why then does Jesus spend so much of his time warning his followers how difficult it would be to try to follow his path? That would make him a liar, and or very uncaring.

No it was only fair to warn us of how difficult others would make it for us despite the assistance he give us in carrying that yoke. Why does he not protect us from the problems completely? Well to use his own words, "the slave [ and any true follower of Christ is also his slave] is not greater the the master". If Jesus suffered so shall we also. Maybe not to the same degree, but to the degree which God feels that with support we can manage. Anything else, anything easy, is the "broad and spacious road" of Jesus illustration, which many will walk, thanks to people like Merton, and of course you, and which "leads off into destruction".

The trouble is that people like Merton, and you, only take the pleasant side and ignore the problems, you cannot do that because as the saying goes, one has to take the rough with the smooth, anyone who is in it just for the smooth bits won't last 5 minutes under any form of persecution.

You insist on ignoring scripture when it doesn't suit your ideas. You cannot pick and choose, you either take it in it's entirety, or not at all. If you are going to keep denying bits of it then don't insult God and Christ by taking only the bits you like, as Merton and his ilk do (is that any less demeaning, lol).

I resist the "reality" of grace simply because4 I know it's origin, and it is not God, it is a Satanic lure.

You really do need to understand the bible better. Why did God provide us with so many examples of the harm brought by following other religions? Did He waste his time entirely making sure we could be well aware of such pitfalls? Why did His son warn us, through his condemnation of the Pharisees and their ilk, of the dangers of searching the scriptures with the wrong motivation, looking for the wrong things? Apparently in your case he did, and in the case of Merton and his followers.

As you are so fond of saying to me tariki wake up and face reality, God's reality not Satan's.

Biker, really, how much longer can you keep this up? I have said innumerable times that I have a sense of humour, that it is often dry......sorry, mate, if you have to dip so low as to make my not putting a "lol" a sign that I have "no love of my fellow man", what hope is there that any judgement you make of another has any particular validity?

The rest of your post is the usual mixture, not worth responding to. Again you make the claim that your own faith is that of "Jesus and the Apostles", a claim that can be refuted by countless arguments, many simple, many complex, but all made by human beings who are as devout as yourself, and choose to call themselves lovers of Christ. Anyone who doubts this can "google" relevant phrases and glean the results, or read any substantial history of Christian doctrine by various experts. The difference is that though many of them would seek to embrace you as a brother in Christ, you choose to demean yourself and YOUR own version of "truth" by calling them "morons", "wicked", "cronies"......with the claim that your "God" will destroy them at Armageddon. Use whatever words you like. You judge them and condemn them. That is the accusation against you, not the particular words you use.

Response to tariki post #1

Dumoulin: “Whether being is personal or impersonal, is something that humans will never be able to understand by their rational powers.”

E: (paraphrase) Whether being is personal or impersonal cannot be understood by reason.

E: (question) Do you think that the term ‘being’ refers to existence in general, a living entity, essential nature, or something else?

E: (question) Does the term ‘Personal’ refer to a specific conscious individual entity with human characteristics and personality?