I look for GØD in all that IS, in community and in individuals. In my humble opinion the following site mentioned by another poster is a must read.

http://www.thymos.com/science/qc.html
===============================
Here is how it begins:




NOTE:"....something that is not purely material or purely extra-material."

This comment fits what comes to my mind when I think of the concept GOD. in individuals--that which spiritually interpenetrates that which I am physically and mentally. G?D , in toto, that which needs nature, including individual and conscious human beings to express collectively, and personally. But only if we choose to accept the gift. It will not be imposed.

And this fits with what John 1 says: "And the Word ( GOD ) became flesh and dwells among us..." Emmanuel ( GOD ) with us, partners for eternity. Again, only if we choose to accept the gift. As per Pascal's wager--we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.
--------------------
GØD is the One in all that is; The One with cosmos, earth, sky, sea; the One with time, the eternal now, And all pervasive gravity. The One with faith and hope and love; One with knowledge, wisdom, power; around, within, beneath above, and present at this very hour. TheRevLGKing.
http://www.flfcanada.com http://www.unitheist.org/whatis.html

Quantum Theory is not the answer to the mind/brain problem. It may be part of the answer, but the other part must come from a due consideration of the complexity of brain interactions. Quantum Theory has only been successfully applied to simple systems. The brain is the antithesis of simple. Thus, Quantum Theory will probably not be successfully applied to understanding the complexity of brain interactions. That being said, we should probably be looking outside of Quantum Theory.

LD: LD, thanks for your comment: Notice that I frequently use the acronym IMHO (in my humble opinion). Also, I used G-D to symbolize ALL that is outside. BTW, where outside quantum theory should we look?

Are you familiar with the process philosophy and theology of Alfred North Whitehead?

Lgking, my post was not a response to what you posted, but to what you quoted. Where outside Quantum Theory should we look? I offer no false pretenses. I do believe, however, that we must better understand the brain in biological and biochemical terms. Quantum theory is of no use here.

I"m somewhat familiar with some Whitehead.

If you are familiar with Whitehead, are you aware of?

http://ctr4process.org/relationality/index...f52ebb5c55523d3

LETS TURN OUT CHURCHES, MOSQUES, TEMPLES, AND SYNAGOGUES INTO CENTRES FOR HEALING OF THE MIND, SOUL OR SPIRIT

Check out what I wrote in the thread on hypnois
http://www.richardmackenzie.co.uk/history.htm

Especially what I said about Dr. Milton H. Erickson
http://www.erickson-foundation.org/early.htm

As I said in the thread on hypnosis: If I were in charge of training clergy, today, I would insist that all students receive a thorough grounding in Ericksonian hypnotherapy--what I call pneumatherapy. After all, in the Gospels (the good news) we read that Jesus, who obvioulsy practiced pneumatherapy, told his disciples to go, not just to preach, but to teach and heal--bodies, minds and spirits. See Luke 9, and 2 Thessalonians 5:23.

A heart-felt prayer has a profound healing and exalting effect on the heart, mind, and soul.
Divine consciousness heals all.

Teaching Ericksonian Hypnosis to clergy goes against the very nature of Miltons major belief, that hypnosis was to powerful in the hands of the layman and should only be taught to Psychiatrists, Doctors and Psychologists. Not that I nessesarily agree with him on that, however if your a true follower of Miltons methods then you know that teaching hypnosis to the average person is not what he wanted.

Max, I may have missed it, but I don't remember reading, anywhere, that MHE specifically stated that knowledge about and the practice of the art of hypnosis--and, IMO, this is what it is; hypnosis is more of an art than a science-- should be an art confined to and practiced only by the medical and psychological professions.

Are you aware of anything that MHE wrote on this issue?

I know from reading his papers that MHE, certainly, did not hide any of his techniques from anyone capable of reading. On pages 473, and following, of his collected papers, Dr. Erickson gives us the details of his verbal technique, with a rationale of what is at work, as to how to help even resistent patients get into the trance state.

THE TRANCE STATE AND THE HUMAN SPIRIT--See Acts 10:10; 11:05 and 22:17
In his papers, he also writes a lot about respecting the individuality--in other words, the supremacy of the person, or the human spirit, of patients.

In his view, they were not to be looked on as the hypnotic subjects of hypnotic masters. He also spoke of how important it is for the hypnotist--I prefer 'pneumatherapist'--to help people come alive, wake up, to the power they already have in their conscious and unconscious minds, which can help them have a strong, personal and healing-kind faith. IMO, pneumatherapy is more about "waking up" than it is about falling asleep--what usually comes to mind when one thinks of hypnosis.

Meanwhile, Max, I am glad to see that you are against any move which would confine the use of hypnosis to the medical few, to a certain few medical experts. Sure, there is value in having medical experts, but surely understanding how such a wonderful method of easing a lot of human suffering works, should not be confined to the medical, or even the psychological, model.

THE PNEUMATOLOGICAL MODEL
I believe that there is, also, a pneumatological (a spiritual) model. Furthermore, I believe that all three models can work together.

As one with a basic degree in psychology and theology, the future challenge, it seems to me, is to find enough clergy with the interest, courage and skill to take their place with somatologists and psychologists, and to do the kind of healing of the whole person mentioned so often in the Gospels.

BTW, I know that one of Dr. Erickson's patients was the Rev. Anton Boisen--a severe manic-depressive. He went on to found
The Association for Clinical Pastoral Education, Inc.
Boisen must have been aware of the kind of work that MHE did. Check out
http://www.acpe.edu/cpehistory.htm