Just a brief post to see if anyone had any questions about any of the non-monotheistic models of God that I touched on in the first class. Those alternative models were these:
- Polytheism: There are many finite gods who exist wholly within the Cosmos.
- Pantheism: Everything either is God, a part of God, or a mode or manifestation of God.
- Panentheism: All is in God. The world is God’s body. God and the Cosmos eternally exist in a symbiotic relationship.
- Neo-Platonism: There is one eternal God from whom the Cosmos and all other realities necessarily emanate like light does from the Sun.
Here’s another one that I didn’t mention in class:
- Plato’s ‘Demiurge’: The Demiurge does not create the world ex nihilo but rather fashions it out of pre-existing matter or stuff. The Demiurge, material stuff, and the Platonic Forms are three independently existing parts of reality.
Do any other models of God come to mind?
There is one other model of God that comes to mind. In Hinduism, there is the term Henotheistic. This is devotion to one God, but the acceptance or awareness of other gods. Henotheism raises the possibility of God creating the world ex nihilo, like the monotheistic belief, but also involves other gods within the cosmos.
Good point, Eric, though henotheism is technically a version of polytheism in which one of the gods in the pantheon is supreme relative to the others. I’m skeptical as to whether henotheism is compatible with creation ex nihilo. If the supreme big-G ‘God’ creates other little-g ‘gods’ then I’m inclined to say that those little-g ‘gods’ aren’t really gods and that the only genuine deity is the big-G one that does the creating. If that’s right, then what we have on this scenario is just a form of monotheism.
In sum, it seems to me that however one cashes out henotheism it’s going to reduce to either polytheism or monotheism.
Tao (pronounced dao)
Tao can be stated as the flow of the universe, or the force behind natural order. It is believed to keep everything in the universe balanced and ordered. Tao is everywhere and within everything. The Tao cannot be labeled, defined or described by any word.
Possibly off topic but I think it deserves its own concept of a higher power or force. Off topic because in my opinion cannot be labeled as theism or concepts of god. Although its a very opinionated concept and on the other spectrum it could very well fall under naturalistic pantheism.
Are there any views of God as being a necessary creator yet not having any further influence? The Cosmos having come from God, yet left to its own chaotic development outside of God. Perhaps that is just theism with a view that God “chooses” not to influence the world beyond creation.
Also, do these models of God necessarily imply a definition of death? For instance, if all is God in the Cosmos, then it need not matter if anything is living or dead to be God. Therefore death is just a transition from one mode to another.
Brad,
Your points about the Two are interesting. I think you’re right that it’s closer to pantheism than any form of (mono)theism.
Shannon,
You may be describing “deism”, a variant of monotheism that insists that God does not, as a matter of principle, get involved in creation. On this view, God may “front-load” the process to evolve more-or-less in the direction he intends, but it’s hands-off after the initial creation. That means no miracles.
Im glad you brought up the Platonic demiurge in your blog post. I meant to ask a question in class, but forgot. How does the neo-platonist view hold for the demiurge? It seems the demiurge would be a lesser god, and the forms themselves would be “god.” I may be wrong, but I think you said the neo-platonist view is that god emanates the physical world. If this is so, this would seem to be imcompatible with the demiurge constucting everything out of the homogenous receptacle, with the forms as the template. Is the platonic demiurge view of god different from the neoplatonist?
Hi Rob,
The demiurge theory that Plato expresses in the Timaeus is not the same thing as neo-Platonism. The primary source for neo-Platonism is Plotinus, who lived in the third century AD. Plato died in the fourth century BC. Neo-platonism draws a lot of its inspiration from Plato’s works, particularly his discussion of the Form of the Good and the Simile of the Sun in the Republic.
Shannon,
When you asked, “do these models of God necessarily imply a definition of death…” I was struck by two thoughts. First, the major monotheistic religions maintain that life is a good thing, and that God wants a relationship with living things– therefore it does matter that conscious life exists. On the other hand, our recent ability to observe more than we’ve ever been able to see has shed light on both the Micro- and Macro-views of our universe. One thing that is immediately apparent is that from Atoms to Galaxies, mathematically tuned forces move from state to state, ever-changing in an effort to stay balanced (Similar to the Taoist approach). So when something once “living” then “dies”, it’s essential elements, the atoms that comprise it don’t cease to interact, they simply interact differently. Therefore, if all is God in the Cosmos, it would seem that it is not important whether or not life exists… but that is assuming that life is not the natural way of the cosmos. After all, as Carl Sagan said, we are all made of star stuff.
Nathan, your thoughts are interesting. I agree. I think it does come down to one’s beliefs about what “living” and “dead” are. I think death is a transition, not a complete cease to what living is. Of course different models disagree about it. Of course.