100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Pantheism | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Monotheists believe in one God. Pantheists also believe in one God. Both are right. It is the same God. The rest is just different ways to frame their beliefs and rituals. None are "better" than the other. I find it amusing to see those who have some beef with one view or another trying to criticize each other over the manner in which they observe their worship of God. The Pantheist God is obviously the same as the Abrahamic God and all other concepts of a single deity - Native Americans etc. There is only One! It's silly!  Now go forth and love one another.  Of course you are free to create the god of your choice, like everyone else. The gods that belong to individuals have minimal strength. It's the gods that are harnessed to religious dogatic organization that seem to cause some of the worlds greatest annoyances. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The religions simply state that there is One God, infinite and beyond our full comprehension. A God which is the ultimate origin of the universe and is omniscient and ubiquitous. I see no problem with visualizing this God in a pantheistic way. Nor me, s1owhand, and yet it seems that most tradtionally religious people do have a problem with it. Perhaps because it removes the identity of their personal god, it negates the need to attribute human characteristics and emotions to god (something which primitive man needed to do apparently). More importantly, perhaps, because it forces one to view God as a whole, both light and dark, good and evil, not seperate entities or characters like a God and a Devil. I'm just catching up with this thread so I'm a little late but I just wanted to comment the responce made above, I liked it - well put. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The religions simply state that there is One God, infinite and beyond our full comprehension. A God which is the ultimate origin of the universe and is omniscient and ubiquitous. I see no problem with visualizing this God in a pantheistic way. Nor me, s1owhand, and yet it seems that most tradtionally religious people do have a problem with it. Perhaps because it removes the identity of their personal god, it negates the need to attribute human characteristics and emotions to god (something which primitive man needed to do apparently). More importantly, perhaps, because it forces one to view God as a whole, both light and dark, good and evil, not seperate entities or characters like a God and a Devil. Maybe I hang around a more educated crowd but I don't think that most religious people are so narrowminded in my experience. Except Jehovah's Witness. Man are they rigid! Islam and Judaism though for example do not have a Devil opposing God as you describe it. It is more of an internal human inclination for good or bad. A more modern view is that the Devil symbolizes our evil inclinations testing us. Anyway it is pretty common for me and my college educated friends to think along the lines of a pantheistic view of God. What college? I'm in the midwest - Part of the Bible belt actually and most of my college educated friends are atheists or agnostics who simply don't consider god on any consistant basis. Of course most of them are in the sciences - maybe that makes a difference. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe I hang around a more educated crowd but I don't think that most religious people are so narrowminded in my experience. Except Jehovah's Witness. Man are they rigid! Perhaps you do, all but two of my [real life] educated friends are atheist or just not concerned, and of those two only one is ever up for discussion That's too funny. Coming in just a little late and I just commented in a similar fashion - before I got to the post above.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 10/28/11 06:11 AM
|
|
Even worse^ garbage! It has nothing to do with "race" - this is just bigotry. You obviously did not read the link I posted which explains this. Jewishness is a religion not a race. Anyone can convert and there are all races represented in Judaism as in all other religions. "Misinterpretation of Chosenness The concept of chosenness has often been misinterpreted by non-Jews as a statement of superiority or even racism. But the belief that Jews are the Chosen People actually has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. In fact, chosenness has so little to do with race that Jews believe the Messiah will be descended from Ruth, a Moabite woman who converted to Judaism and whose story is recorded in the biblical “Book of Ruth.” Jews do not believe that being a member of the Chosen People gives them any special talents or makes them better than anyone else. On the topic of chosenness, the Book of Amos even goes so far as to say: "You alone have I singled out of all the families of the earth. That is why I call you to account for all your iniquities" (Amos 3:2). In this way Jews are called to be a “light to the nations” (Isaiah 42:6) by doing good in the world through gemilut hasidim (acts of loving kindness) and tikkun olam (repairing the world). Nevertheless, many modern Jews feel uncomfortable with the term “Chosen People.” Perhaps for similar reasons, Maimonides (a medieval Jewish philosopher) did not list it in his foundational 13 Principles of the Jewish Faith." http://judaism.about.com/od/judaismbasics/a/jewsaschosenpeople.htm s1owhand, why is it that whenever someone brings up the people of the old testament you respond as if they were speaking of modern day Jews? Of course a post will look like garbage if you don't read it properly. Because these ideas originate from the OT. Has nothing to do with modern day. Of course the ridiculous assertion that "Jews" don't exist is a false statement about the OT as well as modern day. I don't interpret things only in a modern day sense. The bible was always allegorical and the comments I made are just as valid for the ancient Hebrews as modern day Christians, Jews and Muslims. The posts regarding Jews being a race instead of a religion are and always were false. There always was conversion. There always were different races who were Jews. It's transparent bigotry. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 10/28/11 06:26 AM
|
|
Monotheists believe in one God. Pantheists also believe in one God. Both are right. It is the same God. The rest is just different ways to frame their beliefs and rituals. None are "better" than the other. I find it amusing to see those who have some beef with one view or another trying to criticize each other over the manner in which they observe their worship of God. The Pantheist God is obviously the same as the Abrahamic God and all other concepts of a single deity - Native Americans etc. There is only One! It's silly! Now go forth and love one another. Of course you are free to create the god of your choice, like everyone else. The gods that belong to individuals have minimal strength. It's the gods that are harnessed to religious dogatic organization that seem to cause some of the worlds greatest annoyances. I am not creating my own God. I am pointing out that according to Pantheism and the Abrahamic religions and Taoism and many other religions that there is only One God and it is obviously the same God for everyone. Has the same attributes etc. The Abrahamic/Pantheist/Taoist God is the same God for EVERYBODY. I agree that many bad things are done in the name of various religions but that is not because of the religions themselves. The prime example today is Islamic extremism. But most Muslims abhor the Islamic fundamentalist extremists. Their views are not due to the religion but are counter to its principles. I think that atheists, pantheists and agnostics who misrepresent religious teachings of other mainstream religions are just as guilty of religious intolerance when they try to promote their views above Christians, Muslims or Jews as the Islamic fundamentalists or Christian fundamentalists who claim that their religion is the only way and try to convert everybody. Religious tolerance and understanding is the way to go. The concept of a single universal God is a beautiful, intellectually satisfying and unifying concept and this truly is divine - coming from God. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 10/28/11 11:56 AM
|
|
Well slowhand you have your own opinion. I think you are clinging to that old religion and that you just don't understand the difference between the Christian concept of a personal God and pantheism. Just because Christians and everyone else agree that there is only one God does not mean that their concept of God are the same.
Everyone seems so all fired sure there is only one God and nobody can even come close to proving that there is any such thing as God in the first place, so its all a moot point anyway, not worth an argument. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 10/28/11 01:51 PM
|
|
Well slowhand you have your own opinion. I think you are clinging to that old religion and that you just don't understand the difference between the Christian concept of a personal God and pantheism. Just because Christians and everyone else agree that there is only one God does not mean that their concept of God are the same. Everyone seems so all fired sure there is only one God and nobody can even come close to proving that there is any such thing as God in the first place, so its all a moot point anyway, not worth an argument. Well nobody can prove that there is no God either. No one's concept of God is exactly the same. But if there is only one God then it has to be the same God for everyone even if they have different views of this same God. There is no reason why a pantheistic view of God cannot also be personal. It is like the old story of the blind men each observing a different part of the elephant. The have different experiences and differing viewpoints but that does not mean any of them are wrong and also they are all just describing the same thing in different ways. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 10/28/11 03:37 PM
|
|
Well slowhand you have your own opinion. I think you are clinging to that old religion and that you just don't understand the difference between the Christian concept of a personal God and pantheism. Just because Christians and everyone else agree that there is only one God does not mean that their concept of God are the same. Everyone seems so all fired sure there is only one God and nobody can even come close to proving that there is any such thing as God in the first place, so its all a moot point anyway, not worth an argument. Well nobody can prove that there is no God either. No one's concept of God is exactly the same. But if there is only one God then it has to be the same God for everyone even if they have different views of this same God. There is no reason why a pantheistic view of God cannot also be personal. It is like the old story of the blind men each observing a different part of the elephant. The have different experiences and differing viewpoints but that does not mean any of them are wrong and also they are all just describing the same thing in different ways. The argument that there is only one of something that can't even be verified, defined or proven to exist is a waste of time. Its all just opinions. Whatever works for you. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually the pantheistic God is trivial to prove. Since there are
parts to the universe so is there a sum of all the parts of the universe. There. God is proven to exist and well defined and verified. So it is hardly merely opinion. Even though that is your opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 10/28/11 03:39 PM
|
|
Actually the pantheistic God is trivial to prove. Since there are parts to the universe so is there a sum of all the parts of the universe. There. God is proven to exist and well defined and verified. So it is hardly merely opinion. Even though that is your opinion. That the universe exists can easily be proven, I agree. Trying to convince everyone (Christians) that it is "God" is futile. You also cannot prove that this universe is the only one that exists. But for us, it's basically the only one that matters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
s1owhand
on
Fri 10/28/11 04:52 PM
|
|
Actually the pantheistic God is trivial to prove. Since there are parts to the universe so is there a sum of all the parts of the universe. There. God is proven to exist and well defined and verified. So it is hardly merely opinion. Even though that is your opinion. That the universe exists can easily be proven, I agree. Trying to convince everyone (Christians) that it is "God" is futile. You also cannot prove that this universe is the only one that exists. But for us, it's basically the only one that matters. There is only one Universe. That is the definition of Universe. It is Universal. The idea of multiple Universes has no basis and is basically hypothetical and pointless. In any case the Universe can always be considered to be the largest set of Universes. From the Wiki.... Broadest definition: reality and probability See also: Essence–Energies_distinction#Distinction between created and uncreated The broadest definition of the universe can be found in De divisione naturae by the medieval philosopher and theologian Johannes Scotus Eriugena, who defined it as simply everything: everything that is created and everything that is not created. In the path integral formulation of Richard Feynman,[16] the probability amplitudes for the various outcomes of an experiment given a perfectly defined initial state of the system are determined by summing over all possible histories (paths) by which the system could progress from the initial to final state. Definition as reality See also: Reality and Physics More customarily, the universe is defined as everything that exists, (has existed, and will exist)[citation needed]. According to our current understanding, the universe consists of three principles: spacetime, forms of energy, including momentum and matter, and the physical laws that relate them. And the Christian/Pantheist/Taoist God can be thought of as one with the Universe. Not futile and no problem at all. Nice. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just catching up with this thread so I'm a little late but I just wanted to comment the responce made above, I liked it - well put. Thank you, Redykeulous  What college? I'm in the midwest - Part of the Bible belt actually and most of my college educated friends are atheists or agnostics who simply don't consider god on any consistant basis. Of course most of them are in the sciences - maybe that makes a difference. Isn't it great to see proportions in action? Education erodes unfounded faith (or ignorance), both in the individual and in the long term, bigger picture. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ApertureScience
on
Fri 10/28/11 06:45 PM
|
|
So how and when and where and what do Pantheists turn to......to receive this Love that every human heart longs for ......since there is no " WHO" ( a PERSONAL GOD )that they believe in... When the Pantheist's heart cries out in deep gut wrenching pain and agony, because of sheer utter loneliness felt in the middle of a long and weary night... as every human heart will feel at times, where is comfort to be found...if there is no" WHO" to turn to..... when the Pantheist's heart is greatly overwhelmed with pure thanksgiving and joy,at the many blessings recieved in life....where or what is there to turn turn to ..to say thanks...since there is no belief in a "Who" ..... MorningSong, a few things, if you'll do me the honour: Firstly, far be it from me to dictate who should say what and where, but I was lead to believe (by the rules of this forum) that there were seperate forums for those of differing faiths; I cannot view or post on the Muslim forum, say, because I declared on my profile that I am not a Muslim. Now, I'm all for an open and civilised discussion between people of any and all faiths (in fact I cherish it ), I'm just confused as to why a clearly Christian person is persistantly posting in a 'general religion chat' forum, and on topics about pantheism. Are you trying to 'save' us? Please let me stress: I'm not saying 'each should stick to their own', far from it; I welcome input from anyone who has peace & love as priority one in their heart, I just don't get your angle. Most importantly: Can Love Come from an IMPERSONAL God.... Or Does Love Come from a PERSONAL God..... I, personally, don't see why Man has to impose his own personality onto God. Please, read through the bible stories and count how many times God is described as having human emotions (love, hate, regret - sheesh he even does a 180 on a lot of issues by the time of the New Testament), does this not sound like a human mind? Would not an Ultimate Intelligence be so far removed [above] from such petty feelings as to make such stories laughable? Would the Master of the Universe really care if a human being said his 'name' in vain? or if they wore a piece of cloth around their head? bowed down and praised to Allah five times a day? Such matters would be insignificant to an all-loving-overlord, I say. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well nobody can prove that there is no God either. Just as nobody can prove that I don't have an invisible unicorn in my back garden; seriously, come and see for yourself! You can't see it, you can't disprove it. S1ow, I had thought you were above the likes of Ray Comfort and his 'banana' arguments. No one's concept of God is exactly the same. But if there is only one God then it has to be the same God for everyone even if they have different views of this same God. There is no reason why a pantheistic view of God cannot also be personal. There is a reason, and a damn good one at that; that, conversely, there is zero justification in imposing simple human emotions onto an Ultimate Intelligence. Were I this Intelligence I would find it offensive (or more likely, I would be so far above such petty matters that I wouldn't even acknowledge) that a mere animal as Man claims to know my mind. It is like the old story of the blind men each observing a different part of the elephant. The have different experiences and differing viewpoints but that does not mean any of them are wrong and also they are all just describing the same thing in different ways. Now you begin to make sense! We, as petty mortals, know so little that any claim made by us about the almighty is inherently flawed. The only hope we have of coming to such an understanding is through time, discovery and experience. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is like the old story of the blind men each observing a different part of the elephant. The have different experiences and differing viewpoints but that does not mean any of them are wrong and also they are all just describing the same thing in different ways. BTW: stealth, coincidence, alternate profile or divine providence? Any which way, I am amazed! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Fri 10/28/11 07:04 PM
|
|
S1owhand said:
There is only one Universe. That is the definition of Universe. It is Universal. So how do you know that there are no other universes? The doors to those universes could be through black holes. There is no time and space beyond the event horizon of a black hole. Have you ever been through a black hole? Do you know what lies beyond one? Do you know where the big bang came from? I guess the series I just watched called "How the Universe works" where scientists speculate about mulit-universes is just science fiction? The truth of the matter is, THEY DON'T KNOW FOR SURE. That means that YOU don't know either. So why don't you stop pretending you do? The idea of multiple Universes has no basis and is basically hypothetical and pointless. It is, after all, an idea. Just as "God" is an idea. "God" too is basically hypothetical and pointless to argue about. In any case the Universe can always be considered to be the largest set of Universes. Now you are saying that there are "sets" of Universes. That translates to more than one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So how and when and where and what do Pantheists turn to......to receive this Love that every human heart longs for ......since there is no " WHO" ( a PERSONAL GOD )that they believe in... When the Pantheist's heart cries out in deep gut wrenching pain and agony, because of sheer utter loneliness felt in the middle of a long and weary night... as every human heart will feel at times, where is comfort to be found...if there is no" WHO" to turn to..... when the Pantheist's heart is greatly overwhelmed with pure thanksgiving and joy,at the many blessings recieved in life....where or what is there to turn turn to ..to say thanks...since there is no belief in a "Who" ..... MorningSong, a few things, if you'll do me the honour: Firstly, far be it from me to dictate who should say what and where, but I was lead to believe (by the rules of this forum) that there were seperate forums for those of differing faiths; I cannot view or post on the Muslim forum, say, because I declared on my profile that I am not a Muslim. Now, I'm all for an open and civilised discussion between people of any and all faiths (in fact I cherish it ), I'm just confused as to why a clearly Christian person is persistantly posting in a 'general religion chat' forum, and on topics about pantheism. Are you trying to 'save' us? Please let me stress: I'm not saying 'each should stick to their own', far from it; I welcome input from anyone who has peace & love as priority one in their heart, I just don't get your angle. Most importantly: Can Love Come from an IMPERSONAL God.... Or Does Love Come from a PERSONAL God..... I, personally, don't see why Man has to impose his own personality onto God. Please, read through the bible stories and count how many times God is described as having human emotions (love, hate, regret - sheesh he even does a 180 on a lot of issues by the time of the New Testament), does this not sound like a human mind? Would not an Ultimate Intelligence be so far removed [above] from such petty feelings as to make such stories laughable? Would the Master of the Universe really care if a human being said his 'name' in vain? or if they wore a piece of cloth around their head? bowed down and praised to Allah five times a day? Such matters would be insignificant to an all-loving-overlord, I say. ApertureScienc....I answered via email.....  Be Blessed Now.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well nobody can prove that there is no God either. Just as nobody can prove that I don't have an invisible unicorn in my back garden; seriously, come and see for yourself! You can't see it, you can't disprove it. S1ow, I had thought you were above the likes of Ray Comfort and his 'banana' arguments. No one's concept of God is exactly the same. But if there is only one God then it has to be the same God for everyone even if they have different views of this same God. There is no reason why a pantheistic view of God cannot also be personal. There is a reason, and a damn good one at that; that, conversely, there is zero justification in imposing simple human emotions onto an Ultimate Intelligence. Were I this Intelligence I would find it offensive (or more likely, I would be so far above such petty matters that I wouldn't even acknowledge) that a mere animal as Man claims to know my mind. It is like the old story of the blind men each observing a different part of the elephant. The have different experiences and differing viewpoints but that does not mean any of them are wrong and also they are all just describing the same thing in different ways. Now you begin to make sense! We, as petty mortals, know so little that any claim made by us about the almighty is inherently flawed. The only hope we have of coming to such an understanding is through time, discovery and experience. Now you will receive many blue lines of unreasearched blind faith in dogma and ritual.... To explain how wrong every one else is and that all you need is to accept what a certian group has decided is the truth. Aye time, discovery and experience. and YOUR own personal investigation of truth. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well nobody can prove that there is no God either. Just as nobody can prove that I don't have an invisible unicorn in my back garden; seriously, come and see for yourself! You can't see it, you can't disprove it. S1ow, I had thought you were above the likes of Ray Comfort and his 'banana' arguments. No one's concept of God is exactly the same. But if there is only one God then it has to be the same God for everyone even if they have different views of this same God. There is no reason why a pantheistic view of God cannot also be personal. There is a reason, and a damn good one at that; that, conversely, there is zero justification in imposing simple human emotions onto an Ultimate Intelligence. Were I this Intelligence I would find it offensive (or more likely, I would be so far above such petty matters that I wouldn't even acknowledge) that a mere animal as Man claims to know my mind. It is like the old story of the blind men each observing a different part of the elephant. The have different experiences and differing viewpoints but that does not mean any of them are wrong and also they are all just describing the same thing in different ways. Now you begin to make sense! We, as petty mortals, know so little that any claim made by us about the almighty is inherently flawed. The only hope we have of coming to such an understanding is through time, discovery and experience. Now you will receive many blue lines of unreasearched blind faith in dogma and ritual.... To explain how wrong every one else is and that all you need is to accept what a certian group has decided is the truth. Aye time, discovery and experience. and YOUR own personal investigation of truth. Now you will receive many blue lines of unreasearched blind faith in dogma and ritual How can you call it unresearched blind faith? We receive this knowledge from something that was written many years ago. It then becomes a theory if it's true or not. We practice what is written in these scriptures and they do not fail to achieve what they say. So with it no failing, it would then become a fact. That's exactly even what scientists do to find "facts". First it's a theory, and if it doesn't fail after multiple "experiments", it becomes a fact. |
|
|
|
|
