As a Proponent of Pantheism, I ask you to Join Me

I took this off of wikipedia.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheism

Pantheism (Greek: πάν ( ‘pan’ ) = all and θεός ( ‘theos’ ) = God) literally means “God is All” and “All is God”. It is the view that everything is of an all-encompassing immanent God; or that the universe, or nature, and God are equivalent. More detailed definitions tend to emphasize the idea that natural law, existence, and the universe (the sum total of all that is, was, and shall be) is represented or personified in the theological principle of ‘God’.

An oft-cited feature of pantheism is that each individual human, being part of the universe or nature, is part of God. One issue discussed by pantheists is how, if this is so, humans can have free will. In answer, the following analogy is sometimes given (particularly by classical pantheists): “you are to God as an individual blood cell in your vein is to you.” The analogy further maintains that while a cell may be aware of its own environs, and even has some choices (free will) between right and wrong (killing a bacterium, becoming malignant, or perhaps just doing nothing, among countless others), it likely has little conception of the greater being of which it is a part. Another way to understand this relationship is the Hindu concept of Jiva, wherein the human soul is an aspect of God not yet having reached enlightenment (moksha), after which it becomes Atman.

However, it should be noted that not all pantheists accept the idea of free will, with determinism being particularly widespread among naturalistic pantheists. Although individual interpretations of pantheism may suggest certain implications for the nature and existence of free will and/or determinism, pantheism itself does not include any requirement of belief either way. However, the issue is widely discussed, as it is in many other religions and philosophies.

Some critics argue that pantheism is little more than a redefinition of the word “God” to mean “existence”, “life” or “reality”. Many pantheists reply that even if this is so, such a shift in the way we think about these ideas can serve to create both a new and a potentially far more insightful conception of both existence and God.

Perhaps the most significant debate within the pantheistic community is about the nature of God. Classical pantheism believes in a personal, conscious, and omniscient God, and sees this God as uniting all true religions. Naturalistic pantheism believes in an unconscious, non-sentient universe, which, while being holy and beautiful, is seen as being a God in a non-traditional and impersonal

Basically, I believe that everything is god. I am god. You are god. All in all is all true.

Any other pantheists at ILP ?

Well, I could be called a “pantheist” in that I believe reality and the universe have a consciousness to them.

But I don’t consider universal consciousness to be unified…

It’s appealing for humans to think that “God is one”, as it is a simple, monistic and non-competing concept… but from what I’ve seen, it’s also a non-reality, and “gods” are just beings with large amounts of power in their realm.

I believe that God is all, and all is God. And, God is good (for the heck of it).

For free will, I believe that we have as much free will as we have escaped the laws of physics (which is “none”).

I’m glad we have some agreement on our godliness.

Kevconman
Dan~
Membrain
(who else)

We’re gonna piece this god puzzle together, one by one, I can feel it.

You should have had a poll ( I love 'em).

Hey Membrain,

Is that you in the avatar picture? If so, you caught a Walloper.

Actually no, it’s a picture I took of a guy at Capitola (CA). I thought it made for a good “fish story”. :wink:

Now how do you figure that? Have you ever heard of something called entanglement?
You are undoubtly tied to everything in this universe. What makes you up at the quantum level is tied to the make up of your computer, which is tied to the make up the room you are sitting in, which is tied to the make up of this galaxy on out into the depths of infinity.
You…we are God, this is certain. We are the reason for reality as we see it, we effect the consciousness of every conscious being in infinity.
If you agree that there is collective consciousness then you must agree that the reason for such a phenomenon is entanglement.

12.08.06.1763

An interpretation of this that a Contemporary Christian may surmise is that Pantheism is a part of Christianity by the following argument:
That as we once were created by and are a part of Christ, to have a relationship with nature or each other is to have a relationship with Christ himself. Thus, not only nature, but everyone in this world is Christ; it is but a matter of finding the Christ within yourself and in others that is difficult.

Of course I don’t believe that, although it does sound interesting.

How about this though?
Pantheism was once thought to be a component of Deism as the two were and are not significantly different from each other; which leads that they are not significantly different from Atheism as the belief in an anthropomorphic deity was absent.

One guy I think who is clearly a pantheist: Alex Grey.

I think Pantheism is appealing. It seems as being away to salvage God from the wreckage done by lonely, hateful, atheists.

Yes, I feel it puts people at ease. Everyone wants to hear that they part of the colossal effort, as a whole. The fun part of this theory is that doesn’t threaten. Instead, it promotes harmony. And don’t we all love that sweet sweet music.

That is among the most hopeful, hateful, non-atheist thing I have ever heard.

Brava!

When you ‘reduce’ any category to “everything” you effectively destroy any meaningful use that distinction could have delivered. It no longer does any work. You can interject at any time “x is God!” and it would not explain or change anything.

Darn those nasty atheists. Who do they think they are anyway?

You’re right, but it still felt good to express a benificial belief, even when those same benifits are reduced at statment time.

Besides, once I say I am x, I lose what it means to that geniune x, that goes for everything (ha ha), not just godliness.

But I’m not going to stop expressing because someone has something pessimistic to say on a messageboard.

useless me.

atheists must be abolished for the common good

Hello Kevconman,
I am very green behind the ears here at Ilovephilosophy, so I do not consider myself a real member of the community. But still, I am certainly interested in pantheism and I agree with you that everything is God, or, more precisely, that through everything flows the breath of God: Atman, which means the same as breath, or spirit. To become one with this breath has been said to become God-like. But this is not like regular breathing, yet more like functioning harmony with the cosmic pulse.
I have often heard the phrase ‘go with the flow’ and I think this has something to do with it. When a man is in such a state of consciousness that he does everything that comes on his parth right, and when all the right things for him to learn and do come on his parth, I would consider it justified to call such a man God, or with God, or that Atman is in him.
This brings my mind to the question of free will.
In the case where one is one with God, there is not really a use for freedom of will, at all. There is only what has to be done, and, of course, doing it. Freedom of will is present in the choice which can be made of not doing which has to be done. Freedom of will is in this case freedom of making mistakes. If a person who was in the flow, who was synchronized with the breath of God, makes a mistake, and is taken by that action out of the flow, and in disharmony with the cosmic pulse, then I believe there is an andlessness of choices he can make. As you see, according to my theory, which is not entirely my own but my interpretation of trachings I have received, a person only has free will when Atman is not in him, or in other words, when he is not perfect. On the other hand, in harmony with the cosmic pulse, with the rhythyms of nature, a person only has one objective of will, and that is to follow through what he does and to take on every challenge which appears on his path to the best of his capabilities.

The most interesting part of this idea for me is the question of how a person who has made a mistake and is not in harmony with God, can get back in harmony. There is an endlessness of coices he can make, but he does not know which one will lead him to Atman. Is it only a matter of persistence, and keeping bravely making choices? This is what some people in my group think. I think that there is something to which a person can listen in silence, which will lead him to a decision which will, if the decision is well made and followed through, to another decision which will take him a step towards the cosmic pulse. This thing one can listen to is, I think, what is called intuition.

I have much more to say about this, and specifically much about the theory of evolution of Darwin. In short, I think that it is because nature makes mistakes that diversity and free will exist, but that it is because of the deterministic will of Atman that success exists.

Happy wishes,
abhi-pratapta.

What is the point of labeling everything God? [-o<

God :laughing:

I’m more of a panentheist than anything else.

Thus pantheism would be a bit of a step backwards for me.

So I’ll decline the invitation of this thread’s title, thanks anyway.