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

Re: Tillich and the Demiurge

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 5 , Aug 11, 2007
    • 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      Gnostics seem not so outdated after all."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 2 of 5 , Aug 11, 2007
      • 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.