La filosofía de The Big Bang Theory (Spanish Edition)

---

He is the culmination of the process of things from God, and with him, as we shall see, begins the process of return of all things to God. The divine system is thus distinguished by beginning, middle and end; but these are in essence one; the difference is only the consequence of man's temporal limitations. This eternal process is viewed with finite comprehension through the form of time, forcing the application of temporal distinctions to that which is extra- or supra-temporal.

No customer reviews

Eriugena concludes this work with another controversial argument, and one that had already been scathingly rejected by Augustine of Hippo , that "[n]ot only man, however, but everything else in nature is destined to return to God. Such theories were thus suppressed for hundreds of years thence. Giordano Bruno conceived of a God who was immanent in nature, and for this very purpose was uninterested in human affairs all such events being equally part of God.

However, it was Baruch Spinoza in the 17th century who appears to have been the earliest to use deistic reason to arrive at the conception of a pantheistic God. Spinoza's God was deistic in the sense that it could only be proved by appeal to reason, but it was also one with the universe. Unlike Eriugena, Spinoza's pantheistic focus on the universe as it already existed did not address the possible creation of the universe from the substance of God, for Spinoza rejected the very possibility of changes in the form of matter required as a premise for such a belief.

Junghuhn's book was banned for a time in Austria and parts of Germany as an attack on Christianity. In , theologian Sabine Baring-Gould would contend that Christianity itself demanded that the seemingly irreconcilable elements of pantheism and deism must be combined:. This world is either the idea or it is the workmanship of God.

If we say that it is the idea,--then we are Pantheists, if we say that it is the work, then we are Deists But how, it may be asked, can two such opposite theories as Pantheism and Deism be reconciled,--they mutually exclude one another? I may not be able to explain how they are conciliable, but I boldly affirm that each is simultaneously true, and that each must be true, for each is an inexorably logical conclusion, and each is a positive conclusion, and all positive conclusions must be true if Christ be the Ideal and the focus of all truths.

Within a decade after that, Andrew Martin Fairbairn similarly wrote that "both Deism and Pantheism err because they are partial; they are right in what they affirm, wrong in what they deny. It is as antitheses that they are false; but by synthesis they may be combined or dissolved into truth". In , Italian phrenologist Luigi Ferrarese in Memorie Riguardanti la Dottrina Frenologica "Thoughts Regarding the Doctrine of Phrenology" attacked the philosophy of Victor Cousin as a doctrine which "locates reason outside the human person, declaring man a fragment of God, introducing a sort of spiritual Pandeism, absurd for us, and injurious to the Supreme Being.

In the s, process theologian Charles Hartshorne identified pandeism as one of his many models of the possible nature of God, acknowledging that a God capable of change as Hartshorne insisted God must be is consistent with pandeism. Hartshorne preferred pandeism to pantheism, explaining that "it is not really the theos that is described".

Product details

In , Scott Adams published God's Debris: A Thought Experiment , in which a fictional character puts forth a radical form of kenosis , surmising that an omnipotent God annihilated himself in the Big Bang , because God would already know everything possible except his own lack of existence, and would have to end that existence in order to complete his knowledge.

Adams' protagonist asks about God, "would his omnipotence include knowing what happens after he loses his omnipotence, or would his knowledge of the future end at that point?

A God who knew the answer to that question would indeed know everything and have everything. For that reason he would be unmotivated to do anything or create anything. There would be no purpose to act in any way whatsoever. But a God who had one nagging question—what happens if I cease to exist? The fact that we exist is proof that God is motivated to act in some way.

And since only the challenge of self-destruction could interest an omnipotent God, it stands to reason that we Adams' God exists now as a combination of the smallest units of energy of which the universe is made many levels smaller than quarks , which Adams called "God Dust", and the law of probability , or "God's debris", hence the title. The protagonist further proposes that God is in the process of being restored not through some process such as the Big Crunch , but because humankind itself is becoming God. The Simon Raven novel, The Survivors includes an exchange between characters where one observes, "God became the universe.

Therefore the universe is God. In becoming the universe God abdicated. He destroyed himself as God. He turned what he had been, his true self, into nullity and thereby forfeited the Godlike qualities which pertained to him. The universe which he has become is also his grave. He has no control in it or over it.

God, as God, is dead. Some theologians have criticised the notion of a Creator wholly becoming the universe. It will be seen that this fact of the Immutability of REALITY, when clearly conceived, must serve to confute and refute the erroneous theories of certain schools of Pantheism which hold that "God becomes the Universe by changing into the Universe.

In such case there is no God, no Infinite, no Immutable, no Eternal; everything has become finite, temporal, separate, a mere union of diverse finite parts. In that case are we indeed adrift in the Ocean of Diversity. Then, indeed, would be true the idea of some of the old philosophies that "there is No Being; merely a Becoming.

But the reason of man, the very essence of his mental being, refuses to so think of That-which-IS. Moreover, the idea of the immutability of REALITY must, serve to confute the erroneous idea of certain schools of metaphysics which assert the existence of "an Evolving God"; that is, a God which increases in intelligence, nature, and being by reason of the change of the universe, which is an expression of Himself.

This conception is that of a Supreme Being who is growing, developing, and increasing in efficiency, wisdom, power, and character.

Shop by category

This is an attempt to combine the anthropomorphic deity and the pantheistic Nature-God. The conception is clearly anthropomorphic, as it seeks to attribute to God the qualities and characteristics of man. It is extremely unphilosophical and will not stand the test of logical examination. He claims that if God were evolving or improving, being an infinite being, it would have to be traceable back to some point of having "an infinitely undeveloped state and condition.

In Islam, a criticism is raised, wherein it is argued that "from the juristic standpoint, obliterating the distinctions between God and the universe necessarily entails that in effect there can be no Sharia , since the deontic nature of the Law presupposes the existence of someone who commands amir and others who are the recipients of the command ma'mur , namely God and his subjects. All the actions of created intelligences are not merely the actions of God.

He has created a universe of beings which are said to act freely and responsibly as the proximate causes of their own moral actions. When individuals do evil things it is not God the Creator and Preserver acting.

If God was the proximate cause of every act it would make all events to be "God in motion". That is nothing less than pantheism, or more exactly, pandeism. Burridge disagrees that such is the case, decrying that "The Creator is distinct from his creation. The reality of secondary causes is what separates Christian theism from pandeism. Stephen Hawking 's recent determination that our universe and others needed no Creator to come about inspired the response from Deepak Chopra , interviewed by Larry King , that:.

He says in the book that at least 10 to the power of universes could possibly exist in super position of possibility at this level, which to me suggests an omniscient being. The only difference I have was God did not create the universe, God became the universe.

Buy for others

Physicist Bernard Haisch has published two books expressing such a model of our universe. The first was the book entitled The God Theory , in which he writes:.

I offer a genuine insight into how you can, and should, be a rational, science-believing human being and at the same time know that you are also an immortal spiritual being, a spark of God. I propose a worldview that offers a way out of the hate and fear-driven violence engulfing the planet.

Haisch published a followup in , "The Purpose-Driven Universe. Haisch provides as proof of his views a combination of fine tuning and mystical experiences arguments. Haisch additionally points to the peculiar capabilities of persons with autism and like defects of the brain experiencing savant syndrome , and especially having the ability to perform complex mathematical calculations. Haisch contends that this is consistent with humans being fragments of a supreme power, with our minds acting as filters to reduce that power to a comprehensible experience, and with the savantic mind having a broken filter which allows access to the use of greater capacities.

Alan Dawe's book The God Franchise , likewise proposes the human experience as being a temporarily segregated sliver of the experience of God. To the Hindu, for example, God didn't create the universe, but God became the universe. Then he forgot that he became the universe. Why would God do this? You create a universe, and that in itself is very exciting. Should you sit back and watch this universe of yours having all the fun? No, you should have all the fun yourself. To accomplish this, God transformed into the whole universe.

Meyerstein, F. Walter

God is the Universe , and everything in it. This book deals with the search for the arrow of time through the works of Prigogine, an author who developed his thinking between science and philosophy. She specializes in Philosophy of Physics, specifically in quantum mechanics. She has also carried out several analyses of determinism and indeterminism in highly unstable systems studied in ergodic theory and chaos theory. At present, she is working on the development of a new interpretation of quantum mechanics, the modal-Hamiltonian one.

She has written numerous articles and several books.

The worlds of the infinitely small and the infinitely large, as far apart as they are from each other, they are in very close contact. Modern Cosmology, which deals with the origin and end of the universe can not be explained without taking into account the physics of particles. This book describes a double journey that starts from the human scale, goes to the smallest, crossing the boundaries of life, to finish in the building blocks of matter. He worked for twenty-two years at the U.

Scientific Center, where he reached the I. He has published over forty books on popular science, computing, history novel, science fiction and books for children and juveniles. The theory of evolution and Christianity]

• Timidezza e dignità (Italian Edition)
• My Best Friend’s Life
• Journey of a Lifetime
• The Uncertainty Principle
• The Order of Terror: The Concentration Camp
• Flipando en colores (Spanish Edition)
• Dites-nous, Patrick Lemoine, à quoi sert vraiment un psy ? (Hors collection) (French Edition)