Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Tillich and the Demiurge

Expand Messages
  • Mark
    Paul Tillich (1868-1965), a liberal Christian theologian, felt that the concept of a Personal God as held by many main-line Christians was a concept that
    Message 1 of 5 , Aug 8 4:57 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Paul Tillich (1868-1965), a liberal Christian theologian, felt that the
      concept of a "Personal God" as held by many main-line Christians was a
      concept that destroyed any meaningful idea of God. Instead, he spoke
      of a "God" that was above this personal God, a "God above God," which
      he understood as the "Ground of Being." Since all language, when it
      comes to describing God, is metaphorical and reflects the culture in
      which it arose, I am wondering if Tillich--not intentionally or
      consciously--is merely restating, in the philosophical/theological
      idiom of his day, the Gnostic teaching, expressed in the
      philosophical/theological idiom of their day, of the God that is
      behind/above the creator God/Demiurge. I don't think Tillich explicitly
      called this "Personal God" evil, but he did see it as limiting and
      destructive to spirituality--a God that we had to "get beyond" to find
      the true God.

      Also, thank you Cari for your thoughtful answer to my previous post--
      the three levels of initiation and their correlation to the temple is
      very interesting.

      Thanks,
      Mark
    • Verna Leigh Johnson
      Sounds like Tillich studied the Kaballah at some point. Where did you get your info? Is there a link? blessings and peas DarkChylde ... the ... was a ...
      Message 2 of 5 , Aug 9 12:40 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        Sounds like Tillich studied the Kaballah at some point. Where did
        you get your info? Is there a link?
        blessings and peas
        DarkChylde


        --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@...> wrote:
        >
        > Paul Tillich (1868-1965), a liberal Christian theologian, felt that
        the
        > concept of a "Personal God" as held by many main-line Christians
        was a
        > concept that destroyed any meaningful idea of God. Instead, he
        spoke
        > of a "God" that was above this personal God, a "God above God,"
        which
        > he understood as the "Ground of Being." Since all language, when
        it
        > comes to describing God, is metaphorical and reflects the culture
        in
        > which it arose, I am wondering if Tillich--not intentionally or
        > consciously--is merely restating, in the philosophical/theological
        > idiom of his day, the Gnostic teaching, expressed in the
        > philosophical/theological idiom of their day, of the God that is
        > behind/above the creator God/Demiurge. I don't think Tillich
        explicitly
        > called this "Personal God" evil, but he did see it as limiting and
        > destructive to spirituality--a God that we had to "get beyond" to
        find
        > the true God.
        >
        > Also, thank you Cari for your thoughtful answer to my previous post-
        -
        > the three levels of initiation and their correlation to the temple
        is
        > very interesting.
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Mark
        >
      • Mark
        DarkChylde, I do not know if Tillich ever studied Kaballah. The information below came out Karen Armstrong s, The History of God, pp. 382-383. Mark ... that
        Message 3 of 5 , Aug 9 3:41 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          DarkChylde,

          I do not know if Tillich ever studied Kaballah. The information
          below came out Karen Armstrong's, The History of God, pp. 382-383.

          Mark

          --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Verna Leigh Johnson"
          <imdarkchylde@...> wrote:
          >
          > Sounds like Tillich studied the Kaballah at some point. Where did
          > you get your info? Is there a link?
          > blessings and peas
          > DarkChylde
          >
          >
          > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@> wrote:
          > >
          > > Paul Tillich (1868-1965), a liberal Christian theologian, felt
          that
          > the
          > > concept of a "Personal God" as held by many main-line Christians
          > was a
          > > concept that destroyed any meaningful idea of God. Instead, he
          > spoke
          > > of a "God" that was above this personal God, a "God above God,"
          > which
          > > he understood as the "Ground of Being." Since all language, when
          > it
          > > comes to describing God, is metaphorical and reflects the culture
          > in
          > > which it arose, I am wondering if Tillich--not intentionally or
          > > consciously--is merely restating, in the
          philosophical/theological
          > > idiom of his day, the Gnostic teaching, expressed in the
          > > philosophical/theological idiom of their day, of the God that is
          > > behind/above the creator God/Demiurge. I don't think Tillich
          > explicitly
          > > called this "Personal God" evil, but he did see it as limiting
          and
          > > destructive to spirituality--a God that we had to "get beyond" to
          > find
          > > the true God.
          > >
          > > Also, thank you Cari for your thoughtful answer to my previous
          post-
          > -
          > > the three levels of initiation and their correlation to the
          temple
          > is
          > > very interesting.
          > >
          > > Thanks,
          > > Mark
          > >
          >
        • Mark
          It appears that others have also made this connection between Tillich and his idea of a God beyond God with the Gnostic understanding of God. Some of the
          Message 4 of 5 , Aug 11 7:02 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            It appears that others have also made this connection between Tillich
            and his idea of "a God beyond God" with the Gnostic understanding of
            God.

            "Some of the Gnostic views of cosmology were different than both
            Jewish and Christian traditional interpretations. Like Paul Tillich,
            they asked the question is there a "God beyond God"? So in their
            attempt to define or explain evil , they said there was a more
            perfect God than the one who created and observes all the evil on
            earth. Is our God too small? Maybe as Tillich questioned there is a
            God beyond the God we create."
            http://gnosticschristians.com/wst_page4.html

            The Genesis Factor, by Stephan A. Hoeller
            "While the concept of two Gods is horrifying to the monotheistically
            conditioned mind, it is not illogical or improbable. Modem
            theologians, particularly Paul Tillich, have boldly referred to "the
            God above God." Tillich introduced the term "ground of being" as
            alternative language to express the divine. The ideas of the old
            Gnostics seem not so outdated after all."
            http://www.gnosis.org/genesis.html

            It also seems that even during Tillich's lifetime he was accused of
            being a "modern Gnostic" and did his best to refute this.

            Mark

            --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@...> wrote:
            >
            > Paul Tillich (1868-1965), a liberal Christian theologian, felt that
            the
            > concept of a "Personal God" as held by many main-line Christians
            was a
            > concept that destroyed any meaningful idea of God. Instead, he
            spoke
            > of a "God" that was above this personal God, a "God above God,"
            which
            > he understood as the "Ground of Being." Since all language, when
            it
            > comes to describing God, is metaphorical and reflects the culture
            in
            > which it arose, I am wondering if Tillich--not intentionally or
            > consciously--is merely restating, in the philosophical/theological
            > idiom of his day, the Gnostic teaching, expressed in the
            > philosophical/theological idiom of their day, of the God that is
            > behind/above the creator God/Demiurge. I don't think Tillich
            explicitly
            > called this "Personal God" evil, but he did see it as limiting and
            > destructive to spirituality--a God that we had to "get beyond" to
            find
            > the true God.
            >
            > Also, thank you Cari for your thoughtful answer to my previous post-
            -
            > the three levels of initiation and their correlation to the temple
            is
            > very interesting.
            >
            > Thanks,
            > Mark
            >
          • Verna Leigh Johnson
            This reminded me of something I saw quoted in someone s signature (can t remember where) but it said, I say there are many gods, but one God of all these gods,
            Message 5 of 5 , Aug 11 8:12 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              This reminded me of something I saw quoted in someone's signature
              (can't remember where) but it said,
              I say there are many gods, but one God of all these gods,
              incomprehensible and unknown to all, ... a Power of immeasurable and
              ineffable Light, whose greatness is held to be incomprehensible, a
              Tower which the maker of the world does not know.
              I don't know what the quote was from.
              blessings and peas
              DarkCHylde


              --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@...> wrote:
              >
              > It appears that others have also made this connection between
              Tillich
              > and his idea of "a God beyond God" with the Gnostic understanding
              of
              > God.
              >
              > "Some of the Gnostic views of cosmology were different than both
              > Jewish and Christian traditional interpretations. Like Paul
              Tillich,
              > they asked the question is there a "God beyond God"? So in their
              > attempt to define or explain evil , they said there was a more
              > perfect God than the one who created and observes all the evil on
              > earth. Is our God too small? Maybe as Tillich questioned there is
              a
              > God beyond the God we create."
              > http://gnosticschristians.com/wst_page4.html
              >
              > The Genesis Factor, by Stephan A. Hoeller
              > "While the concept of two Gods is horrifying to the
              monotheistically
              > conditioned mind, it is not illogical or improbable. Modem
              > theologians, particularly Paul Tillich, have boldly referred
              to "the
              > God above God." Tillich introduced the term "ground of being" as
              > alternative language to express the divine. The ideas of the old
              > Gnostics seem not so outdated after all."
              > http://www.gnosis.org/genesis.html
              >
              > It also seems that even during Tillich's lifetime he was accused of
              > being a "modern Gnostic" and did his best to refute this.
              >
              > Mark
              >
              > --- In gnosticism2@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <larockpitts@> wrote:
              > >
              > > Paul Tillich (1868-1965), a liberal Christian theologian, felt
              that
              > the
              > > concept of a "Personal God" as held by many main-line Christians
              > was a
              > > concept that destroyed any meaningful idea of God. Instead, he
              > spoke
              > > of a "God" that was above this personal God, a "God above God,"
              > which
              > > he understood as the "Ground of Being." Since all language, when
              > it
              > > comes to describing God, is metaphorical and reflects the culture
              > in
              > > which it arose, I am wondering if Tillich--not intentionally or
              > > consciously--is merely restating, in the
              philosophical/theological
              > > idiom of his day, the Gnostic teaching, expressed in the
              > > philosophical/theological idiom of their day, of the God that is
              > > behind/above the creator God/Demiurge. I don't think Tillich
              > explicitly
              > > called this "Personal God" evil, but he did see it as limiting
              and
              > > destructive to spirituality--a God that we had to "get beyond" to
              > find
              > > the true God.
              > >
              > > Also, thank you Cari for your thoughtful answer to my previous
              post-
              > -
              > > the three levels of initiation and their correlation to the
              temple
              > is
              > > very interesting.
              > >
              > > Thanks,
              > > Mark
              > >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.