Talk:Transcendence (religion)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 WikiProject Religion This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start on the Project's quality scale. See comments
This article is supported by WikiProject Spirituality.

This project provides a central approach to spirituality-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. See comments
Socrates This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Transcendent God or Immanent G-D

<Commenting on Transcendence (religion)In religion, transcendence is the concept that God can be either close to you or very separate from you, because he is perfect and beyond all things human.>


From The Teaching Company's Tapes; "Philosophy of Religion"; by Professor James H. Hall; Lecture 26—Symmetrical and Reciprocal Relations: Immanent G-D or Transcendent God:

I. The general characteristics of relevance determine its use in everyday contexts.
A. Relevance and irrelevance are two-place, symmetrical, and reciprocal relations.
1. If X is relevant to Y, then Y is relevant to X
{If G-D is relevant to Man, then Man is relevant to G-D. Indwelling, Immanent G-D}
2. If Y is not relevant to X, then X is not relevant to Y.
{If Man is not relevant to God, then God is not relevant to Man. Anthropomorphic, Transcendent God} {See Notes 1 & 2.}


[edit] Transcendence of Otherness

<Commenting on Transcendence (religion)In religion, transcendence is the concept that God can be either close to you or very separate from you, because he is perfect and beyond all things human.>


From The Teaching Company's Tapes; "Philosophy of Religion"; by Professor James H. Hall; Lecture 27—Transcendence of Otherness

4C. Transcendence3 is the "transcendence of otherness." The only place in which this is commonly said to be exemplified is in the "great gulf(s) fixed" between humans and God or between bodies and minds.

1. Here, "transcendent" means about the same thing as having absolutely nothing in common with. On the religious front, it is clearest in the medieval notion that humans are not in a position to say anything about God because of God's total "otherness."
2. Here, the relationship is strictly symmetrical. If X is totally other to Y, then Y is totally other to X. If God is radically other to us, then we are radically other to God. The same disconnect (but between appearance and reality rather than between men and God) occurs in Plato's theory of the Forms.
3. There is strong ambivalence throughout the monotheistic community over God's transcendence and immanence.

Yesselman 02:02, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adding other religions

I'm uncertain how my changes will be taken by Yesselman. When I came across the Transcendence (religion) page I realized it needed and still needs much work. Work done by diverse wikepedians would be most beneficial to this page. I thought it was errie that in an article stating the definition of Transcendence (Religion) is "...the concept that God can be either close to you or very separate from you, because he is perfect and beyond all things human" there was no mention of religions(there are many) claming to be following a god who became human. Is it not pertinent that when discussing the transcendence of a deity that and while its transcendence by its separateness from "anything human" to mention at least a couple of these faiths?

I am well aware that my changes have not even closely perfected this article, but it appears to me that at least this article is headed in a more substantial direction.

Something else that I find disturbing: there is no discussion of this article?! I suppose if we prescribe to the Teaching Company we don't need any discussion, Yesselman?

If I'm in error, someone please let me know.

Anastacius 03:30 April 01, 2006

It is not safe assume that the state you discovered the article in, was considered acceptable by other editors. If you check the article history, you will see that there was a paragraph on Christianity that was removed by an editor last month. This sort of thing happens regularly, because anyone can freely edit an article. To guard against this, you can add the articles you are interested in to your watchlist. Then any changes will be evident to you without the need to visit the page, and if it has been vandalized, you can easily restore the previous version from the page history. --Blainster 23:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conflicting beliefs

Anastacius, adding information about the beliefs of different religions concerning transcendence is commendable. But you included information not related directly to the subject which appears to be emphasizing contrasts between religions, rather than focusing on each one's belief about transcendence. This is likely to provoke conflict rather than clarifying the subject of transcendence. --Blainster 23:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you have added what you have. I see also that you have taken my little tidbit on the Nation of Islam off, and I think I understand why, however one cannot dismiss the fact if a religion believes that God transcends anything human, yet it also believes God became a HUMAN, it is relevant to note in this article. The real problem, I believe, is that this article is way too short and is in its infancy. Another problem is that we are way too worried about offending someone. Lets not forget what this article is about: transcendence relating to RELIGION! This is not an article on transcendence (philosophy). No matter how objective we are and neutral we remain, someone's gonna get offended.

[edit] Transcendence (Religion): Transcendence (God); Transcendence (Man)

Because of a recent change to the article I am wondering (is anyone else) whether there should be seperate articles concerning transcendence relating to man and transcendence relating to deity. Does anyone think this is viable or should, in the development of this article, there be two discussions as how transcendence would relate to a religion's deity and transcendence in relation to the deity's followers? Any thoughts?

In the mean time I will begin working on an article that will contain both, however they will be seperated somehow. The reason is: in most religions, particularly monotheistic religions, there is a definate difference between the transcendence of this deity and the transcendence that the followers will achieve.

I am aware that in some faiths, such as many sects in Budhism, there is no division and this should be noted also. Any thoughts??-Anastacius

[edit] First paragraph unclear/difficult to read

"It is affirmed in some way of the divine in most major religious traditions, and is opposed to the notion of a God, or an Absolute, as existing only in the physical order and not beyond it (immanentism), or as being somehow, in the final analysis, indistinguishable from it (pantheism)."

I can't get my head round that sentence. It might just be me but it's utterly illegible and the original meaning is hard to decipher. Hopefully someone might be able to clear it up for me and others. Particularly what "some way of the divine" means. 130.88.186.123 10:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Good point. We will try to clear it up. --Blainster 11:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Sounds much better now. :-) Gouranga(UK) 14:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)